High-speed multi-train excitation for railway bridges. PT60 model (Project InBridge4EU / passenger trains selection)

Description

This dataset contains a train model named PT60, which comprises a total of 60 different passenger trains among conventional (CB), articulated (AB) and regular types (SA). These three main train types are organised into a set of subtypes (including a variety of loco-hauled cases), where axle spacing patterns, car lengths (D) and total train lengths cover a range as wide as possible. The 10 HSLM-A trains have also been included. Among similar trains, those with stronger dynamic signature have been retained. The organisation of PT60 ensemble begins with the most regular trains as regards their axle distances, and gradually incorporates vehicles where the patterns of distances are more irregular, ending with loco-hauled trains and trains with intermediate power cars. Therefore, the PT60 trains are intended to deliver a bridge response which is increasingly more irregular at certain speed ranges, where non-perfectly repetitive axle distances may originate partial couplings, and thus produce relevant transient effects on those structures. In summary, PT60 model is designed to gather a varied dynamic excitation for the analysis of railway bridges, where resonant response is still predominant at higher speeds, but other determinant effects arise at lower speeds. The initial trains of the PT60 set are more regular and almost ideally periodic in their axle distances; for those vehicles, transients effects do appear on bridges, yet less frequently. Gradually, the load patterns of the PT60 trains require more geometric information to be fully defined. In an anonymous manner, an outline of the PT60 modelarranged in the same order adopted in ERJU Project InBridge4EUfollows below. In this outline, abbreviations of the various subtypes are used (RP, ART, CMU-2-RP, CART-2-ART, MU, CMU, CART, ALH, and loco-hauled variants), which are described further in the accompanying file “Characteristics_HS_multi_train_for_railway_bridges_PT60_model.pdf”: • Ten (10) RPs of CB, AB and SA type, with 13.31 ≤ D ≤ 28.8 m (in ascending order of D). • One (1) ART train with D = 15.8 m. • Two (2) CMU-2-RP trains with D = 26.2 m and with D = 27.2 m (in ascending order of D). • One (1) CART-2-ART train with D = 17.5 m. • Four (4) MU trains, with 23.8 ≤ D ≤ 25.9 m (in ascending order of D). • Four (4) CMU trains, with 25.6 ≤ D ≤ 26.4 m (in ascending order of D). • Five (5) CART trains, with either D = 10.0 m or D = 18.5 m (in ascending order of D). • One (1) ALH train with D = 19.0 m. • Ten (10) additional ALH trains with 18.0 ≤ D ≤ 27.0 m (HSLM-A model). • Twenty-two (22) trains with various loco-hauled configurations, including the following subtypes in order: CALH-2-ALH, ALH-fLL, LH-fHL, RLH-2fL, LH-rHL, RLH-3rL, RLH-bL, RLH-sCbL, RLH-2fLrL, LH-fHLrLL, ALH-bHL, LH-bHL, CLH-bHL, CRLH-mL, CLH-mHL, Irregular (some subtypes are represented by more than one train, of significantly different D, or total length).

Steps to reproduce

To be reproduced, this dataset requires access to particular information from the InBridge4EU Project train database, throught suitable granted permission from the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking (ERJU). Such information is presented here in an anonymous manner with due ERJU consent. The strategy to select sixty trains from the InBridge4EU database, with axle patterns that evolve from more to less regular, simple or periodic, is described in the accompanying file “Characteristics_HS_multi_train_for_railway_bridges_PT60_model.pdf”. Institutions: Universitat Politecnica de Valencia Acknowledgement: This research was funded by the European Union. Views and opinion expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them. The project InBridge4EU (Grant Agreement No. 101121765; HORIZON-ERJU-2022-ExplR-02) is supported by the Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking and its members. The authors gratefully acknowledge this financial support.

Categories

Funders

• Europe’s Rail Joint Undertaking

  Grant ID: 101121765

Licence