Evaluating Grid Frame-Type Railroad Derailment Containment Provisions with Drop Weight Impact Testing
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract This study evaluates the structural performance of newly designed and fabricated grid frame-type railroad DCPs (derailment containment provisions) classified as DCP type I, compatible with rapid assembly construction and maintenance on gravel tracks in railway service lines. Previous research only reviewed the durability of the structure under static loading conditions. However, this study proposed an evaluation method considering the importance of assessing the impact performance of the DCPs assembly structure subjected to dynamic impact loads from continuously colliding train wheels; this involved a drop weight test to analyze the behavior of the DCP assembly structure under accumulated impact energy applied to different collision positions. To this end, drop-impact weight tests were conducted to verify the structural performance of the derailment protection system connected to concrete sleepers using post-installed anchors. A test specimen and jig were fabricated to evaluate the structural performance and impact resistance of the anchoring connections. 15 drop weight impact tests were performed, and the resulting behavior under impact energy was analyzed. The results indicated that when a derailed train wheel collides with the DCP frame section, dominant loads act on the base plate anchor, resisting through shear and bearing strength of the anchor bolts. The DCP assembly structure demonstrated sufficient derailment containment performance, even under significant accumulated energy (21.0 kJ; six repeated impacts), with collision loads and displacement levels within acceptable limits. For repeated impact loads (3.5∼7.0 kJ; 1∼2 occurrences), the impact load absorbed by the DCP connection anchor averaged 241.22 kN, and the vertical displacement at the collision point averaged 14.23 mm. This value is 2.62 times (162%) greater compared to the case of a collision on the DCP frame and approximately 13% lower than the impact load that the DCP frame can absorb. Additionally, when a derailed wheel collided directly with the side of the base plate, the embedded anchors in the sleeper were identified as a relatively weak point. Therefore, reducing the base plate width (from 500 mm to 480 mm) to guide collisions toward the DCP frame section, which could absorb greater impact loads, was a more effective design. The test results demonstrated that the newly developed steel grid frame-type DCP combination structure sufficiently resists the impact loads from derailed wheels of high-speed trains traveling at 300 km/h. It effectively restricts excessive lateral movement of derailed trains and provides guiding capability. Furthermore, the drop weight test for the newly proposed DCP combination structure, which also considers impact energy, is deemed more suitable for analysis than conventional testing methods.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Railway Engineering and Dynamics · Transportation Safety and Impact Analysis · Infrastructure Maintenance and Monitoring
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. ACI Committee 318. (2014). Building code requirements for reinforced concrete (ACI 318–14) and commentary (ACI 318R-14). American Concrete Institute.
2. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. "AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications". SI Units 4th Edition Vol.2, Section 13: Railings, 2007.
3. Aviation and Railway Accident Investigation Board. (2023). Casebook of Aviation and Railway Accidents
4. Bae, H.U. (2015). Advanced design concept of derailment containment provisions using collision simulation after train derailment. Ph.D. dissertation, Chungnam National University. https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T13851809
5. Bae, H. U., Kim, K. J., Park, S. Y., Han, J. J., Park, J. C., & Lim, N. H. (2022). Functionality analysis of derailment containment provisions through full-scale testing-I: collision load and change in the center of gravity. Applied Sciences, 12(21), 11297. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12211129710.3390/app122111297 ↗
6. Bae, H. U., & Lim, J. H. (2024). Application effectiveness and priority of installation of derailment containment provisions. The Magazine 2024, Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation, 24(2), 17–22. in Korean.
7. Bae, H. U., Moon, J. H., Lim, S. J., Park, J. C., & Lim, N. H. (2019). Full-scale train derailment testing and analysis of post-derailment behavior of casting bogie. Applied Sciences, 10(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1001005910.3390/app10010059 ↗
8. Bae, H. U., Yun, K. M., & Lim, N. H. (2018a). Containment capacity and estimation of crashworthiness of derailment containment walls against high-speed train. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part f: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit., 232(3), 680–696. https://doi.org/10.1177/095440971668466310.1177/0954409716684663 ↗
9. Bae, H. U., Yun, K. M., Moon, J., & Lim, N. H. (2018b). Impact force evaluation of the derailment containment wall for high-speed train through a collision simulation. Advances in Civil Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/262690510.1155/2018/2626905 ↗
10. Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. (2004). Report on the Findings of: Current Practice and Effectiveness of Derailment Containment Provisions on High-Speed Lines. Issue 1, Ref: R00673, HSL-Zuid Organisation, Zoetermeer, Netherlands.
11. FRA. (2011). FRA guide for preparing accident/incident reports. U.S. Department of Transportation.
12. International Organization for Standardization. (2000). Road vehicles: Measurement techniques in impact tests—Instrumentation. ISO 6487, International Standard.
13. Iwnicki, S., Wu, H., & Wilson, N. (2006). Handbook of railway vehicle dynamics: railway vehicle derailment and prevention. Taylor and Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.1201/978142000489210.1201/9781420004892 ↗
14. Kim, J. H., Bae, H. U., Kim, J. W., Song, I. H., Lee, C. O., & Lim, N. H. (2018). Post-derailment behavior of casting bogie by full -scale test. Journal of the Korean Society for Railway., 21(8), 815–829. https://doi.org/10.7782/JKSR.2018.21.8.815. in Korean.10.7782/JKSR.2018.21.8.815 ↗
15. Kim, N. H., Kang, Y. S., Bae, H. U., Kim, K. J., & Lim, N. H. (2020). Evaluation of impact resistance for derailment containment provision using drop weight test. Journal of the Korean Society of Hazard Mitigation., 20(5), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.9798/KOSHAM.2020.20.5.185. in Korean.10.9798/KOSHAM.2020.20.5.185 ↗
16. Kim, T. H., Kang, Y. S., & Bang, C. S. (2024). Structural performance assessment of derailment containment provision for railway using a grid steel frame. International Journal of Concrete Structures and Materials, 18(5), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40069-023-00640-110.1186/s40069-023-00640-1 ↗
17. Kim, Y. D., Lim, S. J., Bae, H. U., Kim, K. J., Lee, C. O., & Lim, N. H. (2019). Some thought on the estimating of the impact force by an experiment. Journal of Korean Society for Urban Railway., 7(2), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.24284/JKOSUR.2019.6.7.2.205. in Korean.10.24284/JKOSUR.2019.6.7.2.205 ↗
18. Korea Agency for Infrastructure Technology Advancement (KAIA). (2020). Research for Development and Design Criteria of Derailment Containment Provisions for Railway Vehicle. Project No. 19RTRP-B122273-04, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport.
19. Korea Railroad Research Institute. (2024). Steel frame-type falling impact protection facility performance testing service. Technical Report, 5–9. (in Korean)
20. Liu, X., Saat, M. R., & Barkan, C. P. L. (2012). Analysis of causes of major train derailment and their effect on accident rates. Transportation Research Record. https://doi.org/10.3141/2289-2010.3141/2289-20 ↗
21. Liu, X., Saat, M. R., & Barkan, C. P. L. (2017). Freight-train derailment rates for railroad safety and risk analysis. Accident Analysis & Prevention. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.09.01210.1016/j.aap.2016.09.012 ↗
22. Massachusetts Board of Railroad Commissioners (1888). “Report of the board of railroad commissioners in relation to the accident on the Boston and Maine railroad (western division)”, Near Bradford, January 10, 1888.
23. Network Rail (NR), Design of bridges (design loading for accommodation and occupation overbridges), NR/L3/CIV/020, Network Rail Kings Place, London, UK, 2011.
24. Railtrack PLC (Safety & Standards Directorate), Recommendations for the Design of bridges, railtrack approved code of practice, GC/RC5110, Railtrack PLC, London, UK, 2000.
25. Society of automotive engineers. (2003). SAE J211: Instrumentation for impact tests.
26. Song, I. H., Kim, J. W., Koo, J. S., Bae, H. U., & Lim, N. H. (2019a). Simplified vehicle modeling technique for design of derailment containment provisions (DCP). Journal of the Korean Society for Railway, 22(7), 527–537. https://doi.org/10.7782/JKSR.2019.22.7.527. in Korean.10.7782/JKSR.2019.22.7.527 ↗
27. Song, I. H., Kim, J. W., Koo, J. S., & Lim, N. H. (2019b). Modeling and simulation of collision-causing derailment to design the derailment containment provision using a simplified vehicle model. Applied Sciences, 10(1), 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1001011810.3390/app10010118 ↗
28. Song, I. H., Koo, J. S., Shim, J. S., Bae, H. U., & Lim, N. H. (2023). Theoretical prediction of impact force acting on derailment containment provisions (DCPs). Applied Sciences, 13(6), 3899. https://doi.org/10.3390/app1306389910.3390/app13063899 ↗
29. Wu, X., Chi, M., & Gao, H. (2014). The study of post-derailment dynamic behavior of railway vehicle based on running tests. Engineering Failure Analysis, 44, 382–399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.05.02110.1016/j.engfailanal.2014.05.021 ↗