Abstract
A Poisson’s ratio of 0.3 has usually been used for all grades of steel to estimate shakedown limits; however, high-strength steel, heat-treated pearlitic steel, work-hardened (strain-hardened) steel, and the newly developed bainitic steel show better response to deformation than standard carbon steel. The characteristics of these steels are to be considered. Elastic and plastic shakedown limits are expressed in terms of tensile and yield strength using the von Mises yield criterion and Hertz contact theory. Hence, shakedown limits can be computed and a diagram created for each steel. Different steels may thus be compared to facilitate selection of the appropriate steel grade. In this study, elastic and plastic shakedown limits were computed for three grades of American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) steel. The shakedown process was analyzed quantitatively for AREMA steels. Shakedown limits were related by the coefficient of friction, for which a desirable range was determined. The desirable minimum contact area from the wheel load and the tensile strength of the rail was formulated so the wheel-rail profile could be optimized. Finally, AREMA high-strength steel and DOBAIN steel were compared.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
AREMA (American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association). 2018. Manual for railway engineering. Lanham, MD: AREMA.
Bannantine, J., J. Corner, and J. Handrock. 1990. Fundamentals of metal fatigue analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bower, A. F., and K. L. Johnson. 1991. “Plastic flow and shakedown of the rail surface in repeated wheel-rail contact.” Wear 144 (1–2): 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0043-1648(91)90003-D.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2009. Extended applications of results for fire resistance tests, beams. BS EN 15080-8. London: BSI.
BSI (British Standards Institution). 2011. Railway applications-track-rail. Part 1: Vignole, railway rails 46 kg/m and above. London: BSI.
Courtney, T. H. 1997. “Fundamental structure-property relationships in engineering materials in ASM Handbook.” In Vol. 20 of Material selection and design. Geauga County, OH: ASM International.
Eadie, D. T., D. Elvidge, K. Oldknow, R. Stock, P. Pointner, J. Kalousek, and P. Klauser. 2006. “The effects of top of rail friction modifier on wear and rolling contact fatigue: Full scale rail-wheel test rig evaluation, analysis and modelling.” In Proc., 7th Int. Conf. on Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems (CM 2006). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Esveld, C. 2001. Modern railway technology. Zaltbommel, Netherlands: MRT-Productions.
Frohling, R., et al. 2009. “Rail lubrication and its impact on the wheel/rail system.” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F: J. Rail Rapid Trans. 223 (2) 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1243/09544097JRRT218.
Iwnicki, S. 2006. Handbook of railway vehicle dynamics. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.
Johnson, K. L. 1962. “A shakedown limit in rolling contact.” In Proc., 4th National Congress of Applied Mechanics. New York: ASME.
Johnson, K. L. 2000. “Plastic deformation in rolling contact.” In Rolling contact phenomenon, edited by B. Jacobson and J. Kalker, New York: Springer.
Judge, T., and W. C. Vantuono. 2009. “Wheel/rail interface contact.” Railway Age, March 10, 2019.
Kalousek, J. 2001. Rolling radius difference, do we appreciate its significance?. Ottawa: National Research Council of Canada.
Kalousek, J. 2005. Wheel-rail adhesion for traction and braking on Richmond Airport. Vancouver, Canada: National Research Council of Canada for SNC-Lavalin.
Kerr, A. D. 2004. Fundamental of railway track engineering. Omaha, NE: Simmons-Boardman Books.
Lichtberger, B. 2005. Track compendium–formation, permanent way, maintenance, economics. Hamburg, Germany: Eurail Press.
Pointner, P. 2008. “Impact of wear and rolling contact fatigue on rails—A pragmatic approach.” ZEVrail Glasers Annalen 2: 1–7.
Shigley, J. E., C. R. Mischke, and R. G. Budyas. 2001. Mechanical engineering design. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Stock, R., and G. Girsch. 2013. “Towards a maintenance free rail.” In Proc., AusRail Plus 2013, 26–28. Canberra, Australia: Australasian Railway Association.
Sunley, V. K. 1983. “The rolling out of rails in track.” In Proc., Seminar Organized by British Rail Research and Development Division and American Association of Railroads. Nottingham, UK: Technical Print Services.
Titus Steel. 2019. “Titus manganese steel.” Accessed March 15, 2019. https://titussteel.com/our-products/wear-and-impact-steel/titus-manganese/)(2019/03/15.
Zarembski, A. M. 2005. The art and science of rail grinding. Omaha, NE: Simmons-Boardman Books.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering
Volume 31 • Issue 11 • November 2019
Copyright
©2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Dec 18, 2018
Accepted: May 29, 2019
Published online: Sep 9, 2019
Published in print: Nov 1, 2019
Discussion open until: Feb 9, 2020
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.