Fatigue strength analysis of a welded railway vehicle structure by different methods
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract The endurance limit approach with maximum amplitude loading (constant loading amplitude) and the cumulative damage approach with variable amplitude loading are both established methods for the fatigue assessment of the bogie frame of a rolling stock. These methods are presented for the vertical main loading of a bogie frame for a light rail vehicle. Assessments are carried out for the normative load requirements according to the relevant standard EN 13749 [1] and also for a vertical force range spectrum deriving from a multiple body system simulation of this railway vehicle. The multiple body system simulation supplies more realistic loads depending on the actual railway application conditions. These different fatigue assessments allow a comparison of the normative load requirements with realistic load assumptions. In general the stress analysis is based on the nominal stress approach. Additionally, for the area subject to the maximum stress, a notch stress analysis is carried out. The comparison of stress analyses for some selected stress points shows the potential and the advantages of the fatigue assessment with the real loading assumptions and with different evaluation methods.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Engineering Applied Research · Fatigue and fracture mechanics · Mechanical Engineering and Vibrations Research
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (10)
Show source-provided references
1. EN 13749: railway applications – methods of specifying structural requirements of bogie frames. CEN Brussels; 2005.
2. UIC 615-4: powered vehicles – bogies and running gear – strength tests of bogie frames. Paris; 1994.
3. Hobbacher A, editor. Recommendations for fatigue design of welded joints and components. IIW document XIII-2151-07/XV-1254-07. Welding Research Council New York, WRC-Bulletin 520; 2009.
4. Hänel B et al. FKM-Richtlinie – Rechnerischer Festigkeitsnachweis für Maschinenbauteile. (FKM-guideline – calculated strength assessment of mechanical engineering parts). VDMA Verlag, Frankfurt/M; 2002.
5. Kassner M. Bericht über Festigkeitsberechnungen zum Triebdrehgestellrahmen der RegioTram Kassel (report of strength calculation for motor bogie frame of RegioTram). Unpublished report of ALSTOM Transport Deutschland GmbH, Salzgitter; 2004.
6. DVS-Richtlinie 1612: Gestaltung und Dauerfestigkeitsbewertung von Schweißverbindungen mit Stählen im Schienenfahrzeugbau (DVS-guidance 1612: design and endurance strength evaluation of welded joints of steel for railway vehicle). DVS-Verlag Düsseldorf; April 2009.
7. Hänel B. Festigkeitsnachweis Drehgestellrahmen und Wagenkästen von Schienenfahrzeugen (strength evaluation of bogie frame and car body of railway vehicles). Unpublished Guideline Draft, Dresden; 2007.
8. Stiepel M, Rühland M. Multiple body system simulation and determination of loading spectrum by Simpack. Unpublished report of ALSTOM Transport Deutschland GmbH, Salzgitter; 2005.
9. Radaj · 2006
10. Fricke W. Guideline for the fatigue assessment by notch stress analysis for welded structures IIW-document XIII-WG3-03r7-08. March 2008. International Institute of Welding, Paris, France; 2008.