Speed, Fatigue Test, and Load Limit: Fatigue Strength of Railroad Rail
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering, Part A: Systems
Volume 146, Issue 1
Abstract
The allowable bending fatigue stress in a rail will determine the maximum allowable speed, which is then checked against the current operating speed. Therefore, some sensible value of allowable bending fatigue stress must be agreed upon. This paper establishes a relationship between reliability and bending fatigue stress. According to the American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA), the recommended allowable bending fatigue stress is (18,000 psi). However, this recommendation is associated with low reliability and does not match the AREMA-recommended fatigue test load, which implies a stress of (14,042 psi). AREMA should review its recommended value of the allowable bending fatigue stress and fatigue test load. This paper explores the basis of the fatigue test span and formulates a fatigue test load. Additionally, the author suggests the upper limit of load in this paper. The concerns associated with the heavy haul operation are discussed with suggestive measures to reduce rail/weld fracture failure rate. Therefore, this paper could be helpful to compute allowable speed, to assess reliability of rail traffic against fatigue failure of rail/weld, to compute fatigue test load and to limit the load.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
AAR (Association of American Railroads). 2003. Field manual of the AAR interchange rules. Washington, DC: AAR.
Ahlbeck, D. R. 1980. An investigation of impact loads due to wheel flats and rail joints. New York: ASME.
AREMA (American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association). 2019a. Vol. 1 of Manual for railway engineering. Lanham, MD: AREMA.
AREMA (American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association). 2019b. Vol. 4 of Manual for railway engineering. Lanham, MD: AREMA.
eFatigue. 2006. “Constant amplitude stress-life technical background.” Accessed February 10, 2006. https://www.efatigue.com/constantamplitude/background/stresslife.html.
Esveld, C. 2001. Modern railway track. 2nd ed. Zaltbommel, Netherlands: MRT Productions.
FRA (Federal Railroad Administration). 2008. “Title 49.” In Code of federal regulations. Omaha, NE: Railway Educational Bureau.
Grossoni, I., S. Iwnicki, Y. Bezin, and C. Gong. 2015. “Dynamics of a vehicle-track coupling system at a rail joint.” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit 229 (4): 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954409714552698.
Hasan, N. 2015. “Allowable bending fatigue stress of rails.” Pract. Period. Struct. Des. Constr. 20 (2): 04014033. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)SC.1943-5576.0000228.
Hay, W. 1953. Railroad engineering. New York: Wiley.
Keefe, K. 2006. “Track classifications: Classifying and inspecting railroad track.” Accessed May 1, 2006. http://trn.trains.com/railroads/abcs-of-railroading/2006/05/track-classifications.
Lichtberger, B. 2005. Track compendium: Formation, permanent way, maintenance, economics, Hamburg, Germany: Eurail Press.
Shigley, J. E., C. R. Mischke, and R. G. Budyas. 2001. Mechanical engineering design. 8th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Steenbergen, M. J. M. M., and C. Esveld. 2006. “Relation between the geometry of rail welds and the dynamic wheel–rail response: Numerical simulations for measured welds.” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit 220 (4): 409–423. https://doi.org/10.1243/0954409JRRT87.
Sun, Y., C. Cole, and M. Spiryagin. 2013. “Study on track dynamic forces due to rail short-wavelength dip defects using rail vehicle-track dynamics simulations.” J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 27 (3): 629–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-013-0117-8.
Taylor, H. P. J. 1993. “The railway sleeper: 50 years of pretensioned, prestressed concrete.” Struct. Eng. 71 (16): 17.
Van Dyk, B. J., M. S. Dersch, C. J. Ruppert, and C. P. L. Barkan. 2014. “Evaluation of dynamic and impact wheel load factors and their application for design.” In Proc., 93rd Annual Meeting on Transportation Research Board. Washington, DC: Transportation research Board.
Zarembski, A. 2005. The art and science of rail grinding. Omaha, NE: Simmons-Boardman Books.
Zarembski, A., R. Resor, and P. Patel. 2001. Limiting high speed dynamic forces on the track structure: The Amtrak Accela case. State College, PA: Pennsylvania State Univ.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Copyright
©2019 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Nov 8, 2018
Accepted: May 20, 2019
Published online: Nov 15, 2019
Published in print: Jan 1, 2020
Discussion open until: Apr 15, 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.