See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273695181

Contact Behavior between Slab Track And its

Subgrade under High-Speed Train Loading and
Water-Soil Interaction

Article in Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering · January 2015

CITATION READS

1 92

5 authors, including:

Xinbiao Xiao Jian Han

Southwest Jiaotong University Southwest Jiaotong University
98 PUBLICATIONS 438 CITATIONS 12 PUBLICATIONS 11 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Zefeng Wen Xuesong Jin

Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Chi… Southwest Jiaotong University
50 PUBLICATIONS 503 CITATIONS 240 PUBLICATIONS 1,385 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Vibration and Sound View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Xinbiao Xiao on 23 April 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 Contact Behavior between Slab Track
And its Subgrade under High-Speed
Train Loading and Water-Soil
Interaction

Jian Han
Doctor, State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest Jiaotong University,
Chengdu, 610031, China
e-mail: super_han@126.com

Guotang Zhao, Xinbiao Xiao, Zefeng Wen, Xuesong Jin

State Key Laboratory of Traction Power, Southwest Jiaotong University,
Chengdu, 610031, China
e-mail: xsjin@home.swjtu.edu.cn

ABSTRACT
It is important to study the contact behaviour between slab track and its subgrade of high-speed
railway in consideration of water-soil coupling dynamic interaction, especially when high-speed
trains operate in curved tracks in rainy regions. This study develops a 3D nonlinear water-soil
interaction dynamic model of slab track coupling with its subgrade under high-speed train loading
at a curved track based on vehicle-track coupling dynamics. By using this model, the excess pore
pressure, contact stress, interface failure between the track and its subgrade, contact parameters,
and size effect of track are investigated.
KEYWORDS: Contact behaviour, track/subgrade, water-soil interaction, curved track,
high-speed train loading.

INTRODUCTION
Along with the rapid development of high-speed railways, research on the dynamics of high-
speed railway is becoming increasingly complicated. Originally independent vehicle system
dynamics and track system dynamics were replaced by vehicle-track coupling dynamics. Since
Winkler proposed the elastic foundation beam theory in developing railway subgrade dynamics
model, railway subgrade modelling considered a semi-infinite elastic foundation [1] and layered
elastic foundation [2, 3]. However, the layered elastic body used to model the subgrade in
previous studies did not fully characterize real track-subgrade interaction. Bian conducted a full-
scale model test on slab track-subgrade interaction and load transfer in track system without
water-soil interaction. Nowadays, fluid-solid coupling seepage mechanics is widely used in
solving engineering problems, especially in tunnel engineering, highway subgrade construction,
underground gas storage engineering, environmental engineering, chemical engineering, etc. [4].
For high-speed railway, it is very important to consider the fluid-solid coupling in the subgrade in
a water-rich area. Chen [5] investigated the deformation characteristics of slab track subgrade
- 709 -
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 710

with water level change through a model test, the results of which showed that water has very
obvious influence on the track-subgrade dynamic response. Han et al. [6] developed the 2D
track/subgrade coupling model with water-soil interaction. He calculated the subgrade
deformation under high-speed train loading and water-soil interaction and investigated its
influence relevant parameters systematically. Fig. 1 shows the interface damage between track
and its subgrade due to interaction of water and high-speed train loading. Therefore, more
attention should be paid to the contact behavior between track and subgrade under high-speed
train loading and water-soil interaction.

Figure 1: Interface damage between track and subgrade

In this study, to analyze the effect of water-soil coupling together with high-speed train
loading at a high-speed curved track on the contact behaviour between slab track and subgrade, a
coupling dynamic model consisting of a high-speed vehicle and a CRTS-I slab track is developed
to determine rail-supporting forces. The rail-supporting forces are used as the boundary loading
for the coupling model of the slab track and subgrade considering water-soil interaction. By using
this model, this study investigates the excess pore pressure, contact stress, interface failure
between track and its subgrade, and the effect of the contact parameters and track size on them.

3D TRACK/SUBGRADE COUPLING MODEL

WITH WATER-SOIL INTERACTION
Finite difference model of slab track and its subgrade
This study develops a calculation code based on the fast Lagrangian method of continuum
(FLAC 3D) numerical method and is written by using the FISH language in order to conduct
nonlinear coupling dynamic analysis. Fig. 2 shows the 3D finite difference model of the CRTS-I
slab track system and its subgrade. The slab track includes three layers: slab, CA mortar, and
concrete base. The subgrade includes three layers: the surface layer of the subgrade bed, the
bottom layer of the subgrade bed, and the remaining part under subgrade bed. Table 1 shows the
material parameters of the CRTS-I slab track components. The constitutive relation of the
subgrade is the Mohr-Coulomb elastic-plastic model [6]. Tables 2 and 3 respectively show the
solid parameters and the fluid parameters of the subgrade components.
A viscoelastic artificial boundary [7] is applied to the bottom and sides along longitudinal
direction of the subgrade. This boundary can characterize the real behaviour of the subgrade
bottom support and avoid wave reflection on the boundary, and the model considers infinite size
of the track in the longitudinal direction. The boundary is simulated using a normal and tangential
spring and damping. One end of the spring-damper is connected to the subgrade bottom, and the
other end is fixed. Fig. 2 shows the springs and the dampers and Eq. (1) describes their stiffness
and damping. The subgrade slope is free. The surface of the subgrade is considered a permeable
boundary.
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 711

Fig. 2 shows three slabs. The middle slab track-subgrade is chosen for the analysis.

Slab
CAM layer
Concrete base
Surface layer of
subgrade bed

Bottom layer of
subgrade bed

Rest part under

subgrade bed

Figure 2: 3D model of CRTS-I slab track and subgrade

Table 1: Material parameters of CRTS-I slab track components

Young’s modulus Density
Components Poisson’s ratio
(MPa) (kg/m3)
Slab 0.2 36000 2400
CA mortar 0.3 150 2100
Concrete base 0.2 32500 2400

Table 2: Solid material parameters of subgrade components

Internal friction
Poisson’s Young’s modulus Density Cohesion
Components angle
ratio (MPa) (kg/m3) (kPa)
(°)
Surface layer of
0.25 150 1900 30 10
subgrade bed
Bottom layer of
0.25 110 1950 20 15
subgrade bed
Rest part under
0.3 70 1950 15 20
subgrade bed
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 712

Table 3: Fluid material parameters of subgrade components

Permeability
Components Fluid modulus Fluid density
Porosity coefficient
(MPa) (kg/m3)
(cm/s)
Surface layer of
0.15 1e-2 2000 1000
subgrade bed
Bottom layer of
0.25 5e-3 2000 1000
subgrade bed
Rest part under
0.25 8e-3 2000 1000
subgrade bed

=K t 0.5G / ( R∆l ) 
=K n G / ( R∆l ) 
 (1)
Ct ρ Cs ∆l
= 
Cn ρ C p ∆l
= 


where Kt and Kn are respectively the tangent and normal stiffness coefficients, Ct and Cn are
respectively the tangent and normal damping coefficients, G is the shear stiffness. R is the
equivalent length from the source to the bottom (5.7m), Δl is the smallest mesh size (0.15m). Cs is
the shear wave velocity, and Cp is the press wave velocity. Cs and Cp are calculated by using Eq.
(2) as

G 
Cs = 
ρ 
 (2)
(4 / 3G + K ) 
Cp = 
ρ 

where G, K and ρ are respectively shear modulus, bulk modulus, and density of the remaining
part under the subgrade bed. These parameters can be seen or calculated from Table 1.

Contact model between track and its subgrade

The contact between the track and its subgrade is simulated by using zero thickness elements.
The constitutive relation is the Coulomb shear model. In the model, the interface modelling needs
to consider the properties of friction, cohesion, normal stiffness and shear stiffness. The interface
is represented as collections of triangular elements (interface elements), each of which is defined
by three nodes (interface nodes). Two triangular interface elements are defined for every
quadrilateral zone face. Interface nodes are then created automatically at every interface element
vertex. When another grid surface comes into contact with an interface element, the contact is
detected at the interface node, and is characterized by normal and shear stiffnesses, and sliding
properties. Each interface element distributes its area to its nodes in a weighted way. Each
interface node has an associated representative area. The entire interface is thus divided into
active interface nodes representing the total area of the interface. Fig. 3 illustrates the relation
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 713

between interface elements and interface nodes, and the representative area associated with an
individual node.

Interface node Interface element

Node’s
representative area

Figure 3: Distribution of representative areas to interface nodes

The normal and shear forces that describe the elastic interface response are determined at
calculation time (t+Δt) using the following relations:

F=
n
( t +∆t )
k n un A + s n A 
 (3)
Fsi(t +∆t )= Fsi(t ) + ks ∆usi(t + (1/2) ∆t ) A + s si A
where Fn( t +∆t )is the normal force at time (t+Δt), Fsi( t +∆t ) is the shear force vector at time (t+Δt),
un is the absolute normal penetration of the interface node into the target face, Δusi is the
incremental relative shear displacement vector, sn is the additional normal stress added due to
interface stress initialization, kn is the normal stiffness, ks is the shear stiffness, ssi is the additional
shear stress vector due to interface stress, and A is the representative area associated with the
interface node initialization.
The Coulomb shear-strength criterion limits the shear force by the following relation:
cA + tan φ ( Fn − pA)
Fs max = (4)
where c is the cohesion on the interface, ϕ is the friction angle of the interface surface, and p is
pore pressure of the interface surface. If the criterion is satisfied (if |Fs| ≥ Fsmax), then sliding is
assumed to occur.

Table 4: Parameters of contact model

Cohesion Friction angle Normal stiffness Shear stiffness
(kPa) (°) (GN/m) (GN/m)
8 24 400 400

Load condition
Fig. 4 shows the coupling dynamic model of a high-speed vehicle and a CRTS-I slab track. It
is used to calculate the discrete rail-supporting forces when a vehicle passes over the slab track.
According to the vehicle dynamic theory [8], a high-speed railway vehicle is considered a rigid
multi-body model, in which the car body is supported on two double-axle bogies with a primary
and a secondary suspension system. The dynamic model of the slab track subsystem includes the
rail, fastener system, slab, CA mortar, and concrete base. The rail is treated as a continuous
Timoshenko beam resting on rail pads, and the lateral, vertical, and torsional motions of the rail
are considered simultaneously. When calculating the dynamic response of the vehicle-track, the
tracing-curve-method [9] is adopted to locate the wheel-rail contact geometry. The non-linear
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 714

Hertzian elastic contact theory is used to calculate the wheel-rail normal contact forces. The
tangential wheel-rail creep forces are first calculated using Kalker’s linear creep theory and then
modified using the Shen-Hedrick-Elkins nonlinear theory [10]. Moving rail-supporting is adopted
as a new vehicle-track coupling interface excitation model (called as “tracking window”) [11,
12]. This excitation model well simulates the moving real vehicle under the excitation of discrete
sleepers, and it can save a lot of computation time. The system equations of the coupling vehicle-
track are solved using a new explicit integration method [13].

X Car body

Z Bogie

Wheelset
Rail
Fasteners
Slab
CA mortar
Concrete base
Subgrade

(a) elevation

Z
Car body

Bogie

Wheelset

Axle-box
Rail

Fasteners
Slab
CA mortar
Concrete base
Subgrade

(b) end view

Figure 4: Coupling dynamic model of a vehicle and a CRTS-I slab track
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 715

The rail-supporting forces at fastener i can be calculated using Eq. (5) by using the coupling
dynamic model of the vehicle and CRTS-I slab track shown above.
Fsup,i (t ) ksup Z sup,i (t ) + csup Zsup,i (t )
= (5)

where Fsup is the discrete rail-supporting force, and csup are respectively the supporting
ksup
stiffness and damping, and and Zsup Z sup are respectively the displacement and the velocity. The
rail-supporting forces are applied to the fasteners on the slab of the 3D track-subgrade coupling
model in Fig. 2.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

Contact behaviour of slab track and its subgrade under high-
speed train loading and water-soil interaction
In the present analysis, the vehicle runs on a curved track at 300 km/h. The left rail is the high
rail and the right rail is the low rail. The considered curved track has a radius of 7000 m and the
superelevation of 150 mm. Taking a set of fasteners as an example, Fig. 5 shows the time
histories of the rail-supporting forces when the vehicle passes over the curved slab track. The
action of the four wheels produces the four peaks in the figure. Fig. 5 shows that the supporting
force of high rail is larger than that of the low rail.
-5 2
0
Vertical rail-supporting force (kN)

0
5 High rail
Lateral rail-supporting force (kN)

Low rail High rail

10 -2 Low rail
15
-4
20

25 -6
30
-8
35

40 -10
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Time (s) Time (s)

(a) vertical rail-supporting force (b) lateral rail-supporting force

Figure 5: Rail-supporting forces calculated by vehicle-track coupling dynamic model

Excess pore pressure

As the subgrade modelling considers water-soil interaction, the external pressure induced by
the train load is supported by both soil and the pore water. The component supported by the soil
causes the effective stress of the soil and the component supported by the water induces the
excess pore pressure. Fig. 6 shows the distribution of excess pore pressure when the vehicle runs
near the middle of the track. With the dissipation of the excess pore pressure the soil effective
stress increases. The uneven distribution of excess pore pressure may lead to uneven soil effective
stress, and then lead to uneven settlement. This uneven settlement can lead to the local separation
between of concrete base and subgrade.
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 716

Travelling direction

X
O

(a) elevation

Travelling direction
Y

High rail X
O

Low rail

(b) vertical view

Figure 6: Excess pore pressure when vehicle passes

Interface failure

After a vehicle passes over the curved track at 300km/h, due to water-soil interaction in the
subgrade, the interface shear failure between concrete base and subgrade happened, as is shown
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 717

in Fig. 7. The shear failure occurs on the both sides of the subgrade. As the number of vehicle
passes is small, the interface separation does not appear.

Figure 7: Interface shear failure

Contract stress

During the development of interface shear failure, the distribution of the contract stress
between the concrete base and its subgrade is shown as Fig, 8. Fig.8 (b) shows that the maximum
shear stress occurs on the both sides of the concrete base corresponding to the interface shear
failure.

Y
High rail
X
O

Low rail

(a) Normal stress

 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 718

Y
High rail X
O

Low rail

(b) Shear stress

Figure 8: Contact stress between track and its subgrade when vehicle passes

Influence of related factors on contact behaviour

between slab track and its subgrade
In this section, the influence of contact cohesion and friction angle on the interface shear
failure and corresponding shear stress are investigated. The size effect of contact area is also
analyzed.
Contact cohesion

Fig. 9 shows the interface shear failure percent and the maximum shear stress. The failure
process is influenced by the contact cohesion. With the increase of cohesion, the interface shear
failure (red curve) decrease slowly when the cohesion is smaller than 4 kPa or larger than 40 kPa,
and it decrease quickly when the cohesion is between 4 kPa and 40 kPa. The relationship between
interface shear failure and the contact cohesion can be fitted with Gauss Amp Formula. The
whole fitted curve is similar to a reverse S-shaped curve. When the interface shear failure
decreases, the shear stress increases. Fig. 10 shows the interface shear failure distribution
corresponding to Fig. 9. The smaller the contact cohesion, the more easily relative sliding
between two contact surfaces occurs and the smaller is the shear stress, and therefore, the larger is
the interface shear failure percent.
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 719

135 100
130
80

Interface shear failure (%)

125
Shear stress (kPa)

120 Shear stress 60

Interface shear failure
115
40
110

105
20
100

95 0
0 0.08 0.8 4 8 40 80 800 8000
Cohesion (kPa)
Figure 9: Shear stress and interface shear failure influenced by cohesion

0/0.08 kPa 0.8 kPa 4 kPa

8 kPa 40 kPa 80 kPa

Figure 10: Interface shear failure distribution vs. different cohesion

Contact friction angle

Fig. 11 shows the interface shear failure and the maximum shear stress influenced by the
contact friction angle. With the increase of friction angle, the interface shear failure decreases.
When the interface shear failure decreases, the shear stress increases, which obeys the logarithmic
growth. Fig. 12 shows the interface shear failure distribution corresponding to Fig. 11. The
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 720

smaller the contact friction angle, the more easily relative sliding between two contact surfaces,
and the smaller is the shear stress, and therefore, the larger is the interface shear failure percent.

140 100
Shear stress
120 Interface shear failure
80

Interface shear failure (%)

100
Shear stress (kPa)

60
80

60
40

40
20
20

0 0
0 12 24 36 48
Friction angle (°)

Figure 11: Shear stress and interface shear failure influenced by friction angle

0° 12° 24°

36° 48°

Figure 12: Interface shear failure distribution vs. different friction angle
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 721

Contact area size effect

In order to analysis the contact area size effect on the contact behaviour, the length of the
track is selected as 5 m (long size) and 2.5 m (short size), respectively. Fig. 13 shows the
comparison of shear stress, interface shear failure, and excess pore pressure between the long size
and the short size. As the track of long size has the stronger integrity, it is not easy to slide. Thus,
the long contact size leads to higher shear stress and smaller interface shear failure percent.
However, the long contact size can lead to larger range of excess pore pressure in the subgrade
surface layer. The stronger effect of generation and dissipation of excess pore pressure may lead
to larger soil effective stress generation, and larger subgrade settlement occurrence. According to
the analysis of Fig. 6, the uneven distribution of excess pore pressure leads to uneven subgrade
settlement, which may lead to local separation occurring between the concrete base and its
subgrade under long-term cycled loading of high-speed train and water-soil interaction.

113 kPa
Long size
97 kPa
Short size 6.1 kPa
5.7 kPa

55%

33%

-1.9 kPa -1.7 kPa

Shear stress Interface shear failure Excess pore pressure

Figure 13: Contact area size effect

CONCLUSIONS
A 3D finite difference model of the slab track coupled with the subgrade considering the
water-soil interaction is developed. The rail-supporting forces obtained by the vehicle-track
coupling dynamic model are used as the inputs to the coupling track/subgrade model.
The excess pore pressure, contact stress and interface shear failure are analyzed in the
coupling track/subgrade system. Contact cohesion and friction angle have obvious influences on
the contact behaviour of the track-subgrade. Longer contact size leads to smaller interface shear
failure percent, and is easier to lead to local separation occurring under long-term cycled loading
of high-speed train and water-soil interaction.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The present work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China
(U1134202), National Basic Research Program of China (2011CB711103), Program for
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 2 722

Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (IRT1178, SWJTU12ZT01),

and 2015 Doctoral Innovation Funds of Southwest Jiaotong University.

REFERENCES
1. Hung, H.H., Yang, Y.B. (2001) “Elastic waves in visco-elastic half-space generated by
various vehicle loads,” Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol.21, No.1, pp.1-17.
2. Chen, S.S. (1987) “The Response of Multilayered System to Dynamic Surface Loads,”
Doctoral Dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
3. Maffeis, A., Seandella, L., Stupazzin, M., et al. (2003) “Numerical prediction of low-
frequency ground vibrations induced by high-speed trains at Ledsgaard, Sweden,” Soil
Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Vol.23, No.6, pp.425-433.
4. Kong, X.Y. (2010) “Higher Seepage Mechanics (Second edition),” Press of University of
Science and Technology of China, Hefei, pp.661-704 (in Chinese).
5. Chen, R.P., Zhao, X., Jiang H.G., et al. (2014) “Model test on deformation characteristics of
slab track-subgrade under changes of water level,” Journal of The China Railway Society,
Vol.36, No.3, pp.87-93.
6. Han Jian, Du Xing, Zhao Guotang, Jin Xuesong. (2015) “Investigation of subgrade
deformation under high-speed train loading and water-soil interaction,” Journal of Zhejiang
University SCIENCE A (Applied Physics & Engineering), in press.
7. Liu, J.B., Gu, Y., Du, Y.X. (2006). “Consistent viscous-spring artificial boundaries and
viscous-spring boundary elements,” Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, Vol.28,
No.9, pp.1070-1075.
8. Zhai, W.M. (2007). “Vehicle-track Coupling Dynamics (Third edition),” Science Press,
Beijing, pp.12-84.
9. Chen, G., Zhai, W.M. (2004). “A new wheel/rail spatially dynamic coupling model and its
verification,” Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.41, No.4, pp.301–322.
10. Shen, Z.Y., Hedrick, J.K., Elkins, J.A. (1983). “A comparison of alternative creep-force
models for rail vehicle dynamic analysis,” Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.12, No.1-3, pp.79–
83.
11. Xiao, X.B., Jin, X.S., Wen, Z.F. (2007). “Effect of disabled fastening systems and ballast on
vehicle derailment,” Journal of Vibration and Acoustics-Transactions of the ASME, Vol.129,
pp.217-229.
12. Jin, X.S., Wen, Z.F. (2007). “Effect of discrete track support by sleepers on rail corrugation at
a curved track,” Journal of Sound and Vibration, Vol.315, pp.279-300.
13. Zhai, W.M. (1996) “Two simple fast integration methods for large-scale dynamic problems in
engineering,” International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, Vol.39, No.24,
pp.4199-4214.

© 2015 ejge

View publication stats