Vehicle System Dynamics

ISSN: 0042-3114 (Print) 1744-5159 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nvsd20

A simplified model of wheel/rail contact

mechanics for non-Hertzian problems and its
application in rail vehicle dynamic simulations

J. Piotrowski & W. Kik

To cite this article: J. Piotrowski & W. Kik (2008) A simplified model of wheel/rail contact
mechanics for non-Hertzian problems and its application in rail vehicle dynamic simulations, Vehicle
System Dynamics, 46:1-2, 27-48, DOI: 10.1080/00423110701586444

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00423110701586444

Published online: 29 Jan 2009.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 740

View related articles

Citing articles: 29 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=nvsd20

Download by: [Politechnika Warszawska] Date: 11 April 2017, At: 03:58

Vehicle System Dynamics
Vol. 46, Nos. 1–2, January–February 2008, 27–48

A simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics for

non-Hertzian problems and its application in rail vehicle
dynamic simulations
J. PIOTROWSKI*† and W. KIK‡
†Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Vehicles, Poland
‡Ingenieur Büro Kik- Arge Care, Germany

The presented model assumes semi-elliptical normal pressure distribution in the direction of rolling.
The contact area is found by virtual penetration of wheel and rail. The normal pressure is calculated by
satisfying contact conditions at the geometrical point of contact. The calculation is non-iterative, fast
and completely reliable. It may be carried out on-line in MultiBody Systems (MBS) computer codes.
The tests using the programme CONTACT by Kalker and experience from application in MBS codes
show that the model is suitable for technical applications. The creep forces have been calculated with
the FASTSIM algorithm, adapted for a non-elliptical contact area. Some applications in rail vehicle
dynamics and wear simulation have been outlined.

Keywords: Rail; Wheel; Contact problems; Dynamics; Wear; Simulation

1. Introduction

Reading the book Three-Dimensional Elastic Bodies in Rolling Contact [1] by the late
Professor Kalker, one should not miss the importance of the remark on page 40 on how
to obtain in special cases a smaller potential contact area Ac than given by expression (1.66)
on that page. It reads: in case of ‘the railway wheel–rail contact use 0.65 h instead of h in
(1.66)’, where h is the undeformed distance. When one follows this he infers that a smaller
potential contact area is obtained by penetrating undeformed surfaces of wheel and rail if the
prescribed penetration δ is reduced to say, δ0 = 0.65δ. The next sentence on the same page
indicates a case when the potential contact area ‘Ac as calculated in (1.66) actually coincides
with the contact area, see Ch. 3’.
This guided us to a presumption that by manipulating δ0 it might be possible to estimate
the contact area in case of railway wheel and rail with a very simple calculation method [2].
The idea that arose was to make such a choice of the virtual penetration δ0 that the potential
contact area resulting from penetrating undeformed surfaces becomes close enough to the
actual contact area that it can be taken as an approximate solution. Next, the normal pressure

*Corresponding author. Email: jpt@simr.pw.edu.pl

Vehicle System Dynamics

ISSN 0042-3114 print/ISSN 1744-5159 online © 2008 Taylor & Francis
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/00423110701586444
28 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

distribution may be calculated using appropriate assumptions. We hoped that such a solution
would be sufficient for technical applications. To verify the feasibility of this rather bold idea
a comparison with a higher level, reliable method for normal contact problem was performed
in a number of tests. The only tool available for such testing was the program CONTACT
[3, 4, 1] also by Kalker. Without that possibility we would not embark on the project.
The motivation was to provide models of rail vehicle dynamics with fast and reliable method
for contact calculations, taking into account actual geometry of wheel and rail, leading usually
to non-elliptical, frequently multiple contact areas. It is well known that procedures involved
in dynamic simulation must be completely reliable, otherwise the process may be spoiled by
incidental failure. It is also known that the normal contact problem for arbitrary geometry
must be solved by iterative calculations. The only method for solution of the normal contact
problem, whose convergence in a finite number of steps had been proved is one by Kalker,
that had been implemented in program CONTACT. As such the Kalker method is completely
reliable and satisfies the requirement for MBS dynamic codes. Unfortunately, CONTACT is
not fast enough and therefore cannot realistically be used on-line in dynamic simulations. Here
comes the reason for application of a simplified method on the condition that it is also reliable.
The complete reliability of the proposed method has been assured at the cost of accuracy by
excluding iterative calculations through weakening the contact conditions.
This paper presents a fast, approximate method for solving the normal contact problem
for railway wheel and rail, where the penetration is prescribed. This is compatible with the
so-called flexible contact approach to contact calculations used in MBS codes.
The method allows calculating the area of contact practically using formulae. As such it
may be used on-line in dynamic simulation. The method has been supplemented with Kalker’s
algorithm FASTSIM adapted for non-elliptical contact area and a local determination of the
rigid slip.
A refinement of the shape of the contact area [5] has been outlined. As the model has been
used in MBS codes for some years now, there is already some experience gained, which has
been outlined in this paper.

2. The normal contact problem

2.1 Introductory remarks

We begin with the classical formulation of the normal contact problem, when the approach δ
of bodies is prescribed. To solve the contact problem means finding the contact region and the
normal pressure distribution.
We assume that the wheel is a body of revolution with radius R and the rolling surface of the
rail is cylindrical. For calculation of deflections real shapes of bodies are neglected and replaced
locally with elastic half-spaces. This allows using the influence function of Boussinesq [1, 6]
for calculation of deflections.
When the wheel and rail touch without transmitting any load the common point is called the
geometrical point of contact. The origins of two orthogonal co-ordinate systems 0xyz1 , 0xyz2
are set in this point, see figure 1. The cross-section z1 (y) of the wheel rolling surface by x = 0
plane is called a profile. Similarly, the rail profile is z2 (y). The distance f (y) = z1 (y) + z2 (y)
between points of the two profiles is a separation of profiles. The separation of points of
undeformed surfaces with the same x, y co-ordinates is

x2
z(x, y) = f (y) + (1)
2R
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 29

Figure 1. The interpenetration region and the contact zone.

Let us assume tentatively that the wheel and rail touch at point 0 and are just surfaces. When
one surface is shifted towards the other by a distance δ along the normal direction 0z1 , (0z2 ),
it penetrates and intersects the other surface along some line. The projection of this line on
0xy plane is called an interpenetration region, see figure 1. Here δ is called the penetration. In
reality wheel and rail cannot interpenetrate, deflections occur and a contact area (patch, zone)
comes into being. It has been shown by Paul [6], that the interpenetration region encloses real
contact area if the influence function is unidirectional. This is the case for our assumptions as
the Boussinesq influence function is indeed unidirectional.
The separation of points of wheel and rail at the deformed state is

s(x, y) = z(x, y) − δ + w1 (x, y) + w2 (x, y) ≥ 0, (2)

where w1 , w2 are displacements of points on surfaces of bodies in Oz1 (Oz2 ) direction due to
deflections. Here δ is called the approach. As for half-spaces w1 (x, y) = w2 (x, y) = w(x, y)
hence
s(x, y) = z(x, y) − δ + 2w(x, y) ≥ 0 (3)

For any point on the contact area C and its boundary s(x, y) = 0, so δ = z(x, y) + 2w(x, y).
As z(0, 0) = 0,

δ = 2w(0, 0) = 2w0 (4)

The displacement w(x, y) depends on the normal pressure p(x, y) acting at the contact area
along Oz1 (Oz2 ) axes. If the normal pressure were known it would be possible to determine
displacement w(x, y) by integration, making use of Boussinesq’s influence function.

1 − σ2 p(x  , y  )
w(x, y) =  dx  dy  (5)
πE C (x − x  )2 + (y − y  )2

where δ is the Poisson ratio, E– Young’s modulus.

30 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

The adhesion in the contact area is neglected so, p(x, y) ≥ 0 inside the contact region and
on its edge. The contact conditions may be written in the form

p(x, y) ≥ 0
(6)
p(x, y) · s(x, y) = 0

To solve the normal contact problem means finding such a contact area C and normal
pressure p(x, y) that satisfy conditions (6). To obtain the solution for arbitrary profiles an
iterative computation is necessary.

2.2 An approximate method to solve the normal contact problem

The method has been written for a situation when the approach δ of bodies is prescribed. As
mentioned before, the idea of the method is to take such a value of the virtual penetration δ0
that the virtual interpenetration region becomes close enough to the real contact region. Next,
the normal pressure distribution is calculated using appropriate assumptions. When this has
been done it is possible to calculate the normal load by integration of the normal pressure.
The first step is determination of the virtual interpenetration region by penetrating surfaces
of wheel and rail to the depth δ0 . The resulting interpenetration region is taken as the area of
contact. To this end the interpenetration function g(y) of profiles is defined by the formula

δ0 − f (y) if f (y) ≤ δ0
g(y) = (7)
0, if f (y) > δ0

The x co-ordinate of the front/rear (leading/trailing) edges of the interpenetration region,

determining the contact area, is

xl (y) = −xt (y) ≈ 2Rg(y) (8)

As the wheel is a body of revolution it has been assumed that considered contact possesses
some properties of Hertzian contact. Following the Hertz solution it has been assumed that
the distribution of normal pressure is semi-elliptical in the direction of rolling. A similar
assumption is made in other approximate methods for solving the normal contact problem for
wheel and rail by Ayasse and Chollet [7], Knothe and Le The [8] and Linder [9]. The assumed
pressure distribution has the form:

p0
p(x, y) = x 2 (y) − x 2 , (9)
xl (0) l

where p0 is the maximum pressure.

Suppose that the maximum pressure p0 is known. Then the normal load can be calculated
by integration of the contact pressure.
 yl xl 
p0
N= xl2 (y) − x 2 dx dy (10)
xl (0) yr −xl

In order to estimate the maximum pressure and to ensure complete reliability of the method
it is proposed to satisfy contact conditions in only one point of the contact area, namely at the
geometrical point of contact (0, 0).
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 31

Making use of Boussinesq’s function the normal displacement at the point (0, 0) is described
by the integral

 yl xl x 2 (y) − x 2
1 − σ 2 p0 l
w(0, 0) = w0 =  dxdy (11)
πE xl (0) yr −xl x2 + y2

According to (4), 2w0 = δ so, from (10) and (11) one obtains
⎛  ⎞−1
 yl xl xl2 (y) − x2  yl xl 
π Eδ ⎜ ⎟
N= ⎝  dxdy ⎠ xl2 (y) − x 2 dxdy (12)
2(1 − σ 2 ) yr −xl x2 + y2 yr −xl

  yl xl  −1
p0 = N 2Rδ0 xl2 (y) − x 2 dxdy (13)
yr −xl

For measured profiles of wheels and rails, the integrals appearing in above formulae are
evaluated numerically.
In such a manner the solution of the normal contact problem is obtained using formulae
(12), (13). As such, the method of solution is completely reliable and fast.
The value of the virtual penetration δ0 has been determined on the basis of numerous
tests carried out using program CONTACT. After the tests the virtual penetration has been
determined as δ0 = 0.55δ. Linder [9] uses our δ0 = 0.55δ but a different method of integration.

2.3 Comparison with the program CONTACT

For comparison with CONTACT two examples Case 1 and Case 2 are presented. The data for
these examples come from measurements of profiles. The normal loads were calculated for
the approach δ varying from 1 · 10−6 mm to 0.12 mm and for a number of rolling radii of the
range 0.15 m to 2.0 m.
In figure 2 plots of total normal load according to CONTACT and the present method are
shown. The upper plot is for Case 1. The contact patches for Case 1 calculated by the present
method are drawn in the first column of patches in figure 2. For some values of the penetration
a two-point contact takes place. The contact patches for Case 2 are drawn in the right column
of patches in figure 2. When there are a few separate zones, the present method determines
normal load transmitted by each zone, as shown in figure 3. The diagram is for Case 1 and
R = 0.55 m. The contact patches resulting from program CONTACT and the present method
are compared in figure 4. The upper drawing is for Case 1, R = 0.55 m, δ = 0.1 mm. The
lower drawing is for Case 2, R = 1.0 m, δ = 0.1 mm.

2.4 The correction of shape of the contact area

The approximation of the contact area by the virtual interpenetration region never gives the
correct shape, except when the contact area is circular.
It is possible to refine the shape of the contact area by referring to the theory of Hertz.
Suppose that length and width of the virtual interpenetration region are L and W respectively.
The Hertzian curvatures at the geometrical point of contact are

1 4δ0 1 4δ0
A= = 2, B= = 2.
2Rx L 2Ry W
32 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 2. Comparison of normal loads calculated by the present method and program CONTACT (left). Contact
patches according to the present method (right).

Figure 3. Distribution of normal load between contact zones.

 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 33

Figure 4. Contact patches according to present method (thick lines) and program CONTACT (thin lines).

In case of Hertzian geometry the A/B ratio is used to find coefficients na , nb determining the
semi-axes of the contact ellipse. To make use of the Hertz table the A/B ratio needs redefining
in a following manner:

A (W/L)2 if (W/L) ≤ 1
=
B (L/W )2 if (W/L) > 1

The coefficients na , nb will be used to correct the length and width of the virtual
interpenetration region. Let β0 = na /nb , and

β0 if (W/L) ≤ 1
β= (14)
1/β0 if (W/L) > 1

Using the data from the Hertz table of [10], β0 has been described by the empirical formula

β0 = [0.5837 · (A/B) − 0.1053 · (A/B)2 + 0.5184 · (A/B)]−1

where 0 < (A/B) ≤ 1.

The following equations are proposed for correction of the contact area:

Lc /Wc = β, Lc Wc = LW (15)

where Lc , Wc are corrected length and width of the area.

34 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

From equation (15) one obtains

 
Wc = LW/β and Lc = βLW (16)

To correct the width of the contact patch a ‘stretching’/‘contracting’ of the separation

function g(y) across rail is introduced. This is done in such a manner that the geometrical
point of contact stays at its place.
Suppose that W = Wc − W ; when narrowing is required W is negative.
The correction of the function g(y) by stretching/contracting across rail results in the
situation shown in figure 5. The corrected separation function gc and corrected separation of
profiles fc are described by formulae:
W
fc (y  ) = f (y), gc (y  ) = g(y), y = y − (y0 − y) (17)
ye − y s
The value of a corrected function at y  co-ordinate is the same as the original one at the
co-ordinate y, but y  corresponding to y is shifted, depending on values of y and W .
The correction of length of the contact patch is done by modification of the radius R.

L2c
Rc = (18)
8δ0
The corrected function gc and radius Rc now replace g and R in formula (8).
A different method of the shape correction was applied by Ayasse and Chollet [7].
As an example consider the separation of profiles as plotted in figure 6. Let the Hertzian
radius of curvature along the rail be R = 300 mm. The corrected separation function is plotted

Figure 5. Correction of the separation function by stretching/contracting along y-axis.

Figure 6. Separation of profiles.

 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 35

Figure 7. Contact area, tangential traction and regions of adhesion and slip for uncorrected (left) and corrected
solution (right).

Table 1. Main quantities of calculated solutions.

Quantity Uncorrected Corrected

R 300 mm 235.5 mm
Length L 11.5 mm 10.2 mm
Width W 24.4 mm 27.6 mm
L/W 0.47 0.369
Area 208.5 mm2 208.5 mm2
N load 134.3 kN 136.6 kN
pn max 1045 MPa 1063 MPa
Fx 18.3 kN 19.7 kN
Fy −13.9 kN −11.0 kN

in figure 6. As the shape correction influences creep forces, both normal and tangential contact
problems have been solved, the latter according to the description in Chapter 3, for δ =
0.1 mm, υx = 0.002, υy = 0, ϕ = 0.001 mm−1 , f = 0.4. The solutions of contact problems
are presented in figure 7 and table 1. The contact patch is determined by quadratic elements of
discretisation. In empty elements there is adhesion and in filled elements sliding. Tangential
stress is represented by arrows.

3. Calculation of creep forces

To calculate creep forces during rolling we apply the FASTSIM algorithm by Kalker to the
contact area determined by the virtual penetration δ0 . The FASTSIM algorithm is general in
the sense that it is not restricted to the elliptical contact area. The difficulty is that the elasticity
parameter L is not easily available for non-elliptical contact area. The FASTSIM algorithm
stems from the simplified theory of rolling contact by Kalker, in its linear version. From the
main assumption of the linear theory, which neglects slip in the contact area, the tangential
stress distribution is derived in the form

1
px (x, y) = (x − xl )(νx − yϕ) (19)
L
 
1 1
py (x, y) = (x − xl )νy + (x 2 − xl2 )ϕ (20)
L 2

where νx , νy , ϕ-creepages.
36 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Let us calculate creep forces resulting from these stresses. The contact area may consist of
one or a few separate zones. We integrate stresses over each zone allowing different values of
elasticity parameter in each zone.
 yli xli  yli  yli
1 4R 4R
Fxi = px (x, y)dxdy = − νx g(y)dy + ϕ yg(y)dy (21)
Li yri −xli Li yri 3Li yri
 yli xli  yli √  y
1 4R 4 2 li
Fyi = py (x, y)dxdy = − νy g(y)dy − ϕ [Rg(y)]3/2 dy (22)
Li yri −xli Li yri 3Li yri

(i = 1, 2, . . . , K), K is the number of separate zones.

According to the second term of (21) the spin creepage generates longitudinal creep force if
a zone is not symmetric relative to 0x axis. A similar effect appears for finite spin. This effect
is lost when in rail vehicle dynamics the area of contact is assumed elliptical as calculated
with the theory of Hertz.
A usual way to determine the elasticity parameter in case of elliptical contact area is to refer
to the complete, linear theory of Kalker. The creep force/creepage law of this theory reads:

Fx = −Gabcx νx (23)
Fy = −Gabcy νy − G(ab)3/2 cz ϕ (24)

cx , cy , cz are Kalker’s creep coefficients, functions of a/b ratio of semi-axes a, b.

Equalisation ‘term-by-term’ of creep forces from simplified and complete linear theories
leads to three elasticity parameters Lx , Ly , Lz which are then used to work out a single
parameter L, see Kalker [11, 1]; or the three L’s are used as in the Rollen version of FASTSIM
by Kalker. The second term in expression (21) does not have its counterpart in equation (23).
A similar approach has been applied to non-elliptical contact region. To this end we calculate
equivalent ellipses. Each separate region fits to a rectangle with the length li and width Wi .
The length to width ratio is λi = li /Wi .
The semi-axes aei , bei of the equivalent ellipse are calculated from two requirements:
−1
aei bei = λi , π aei bei = Ai , where Ai is the area of given zone.
Now we define three elasticity parameters for each zone equalising (21), (22) with (23), (24)
 yli  yli
4πR 4π R
Lxi = g(y)dy, Lyi = g(y)dy,
GAi cxi yri GAi cyi yri
√ 
4 2π 3 R 3 yli
Lzi = 3/2
[g(y)]3/2 dy
Gczi Ai yri

3.1 Comparison with the program CONTACT

Calculated creep forces have been compared with solutions obtained from CONTACT for
Case 1 and Case 2 already used as examples in section 2.3.
The pure spin solutions are presented in figure 8 and figure 9. Due to asymmetry of the
contact area, pure spin generates longitudinal creep force Fx . As for calculation of elasticity
parameter we refer to the elliptical (symmetric) area, large discrepancies between FASTSIM
and CONTACT give us no surprise.
The distribution of tangential traction for one case resulting from CONTACT is shown in
figure 10. The longitudinal force is generated mainly in a separate, smaller zone. Next we
calculate creep forces for longitudinal creepage and spin for νx = ϕ · l (l = 10 mm).
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 37

Figure 8. Pure spin solutions by the present model and CONTACT. Case 1, R = 0.55 m, δ = 0.09 mm.

Figure 9. Pure spin solutions by the present model and CONTACT. Case 2, R = 1 m, δ = 0.09 mm.

Figure 10. Distribution of tangential traction for pure spin 0.0005 1/mm according to CONTACT. Case 1,
R = 0.55 m, δ = 0.09 mm.
38 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 11. Solutions for νx = ϕ · l, (l = 10 mm) by the present model and CONTACT. Case 1, R = 0.55 m,
δ = 0.09 mm.

Figure 12. Solutions for νx = ϕ · l, (l = 10 mm) by the present model and CONTACT. Case 2, R = 1 m,
δ = 0.09 mm.

Results are shown in figure 11 and figure 12. Now the agreement with CONTACT is better
as the discrepancies are of the same order of magnitude as for simplified theory for Hertzian
rolling, see Kalker [1] section 3.7. The reason for better performance is that the asymmetry of
the area now plays a smaller role.
A thorough testing of the departure of the results from CONTACT is a difficult task, as
theoretically, there are an infinite number of cases to calculate with the two methods. A
more practical way of testing is to implement the method in multi-body codes and judge the
performance of the method in various tasks.

4. Determination of ‘the rigid slip’ within curved area of contact

The normal contact problem has been calculated assuming that the contact area is flat. In
reality this is not the case. The contact area is usually curved and this may be taken into
account during calculation of creep forces. We propose an approximate method of calculation
of rigid slip that is valid for a slightly curved contact area.
When the contact area is curved the rigid slip velocities differ at each point within the area of
contact. The rigid slip velocities have been determined under the assumption that the contact
area is spread over the undeformed surface of the wheel, but only the curvature in the lateral
direction is accounted for.
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 39

Figure 13. Velocities within curved area of contact.

Drawing in figure 13 shows the geometrical situation and velocities of the rolling wheel.
The wheel rotates with velocity  and its centre moves with velocity V . Any rolling circle of
the wheel is denoted by R(η) and the contact angle by γ (η). A point D on the rolling circle
circulates with the velocity . Vertical and longitudinal components of velocity VD within
the contact patch are VDς = −x and VDx ≈ −R(η). The rolling circle projects on the
tangent plane inclined by the angle γ (η) as an ellipse with semi-axes R(η) sin γ (η), R(η).
The projection D  of the point D moves along the ellipse with the following longitudinal and
lateral velocities:
VDx ≈= −R(η), VDy = −x sin γ (η)
Suppose that the velocity of the wheel in lateral direction is Vη . The sliding velocity in
lateral, tangent direction is
Vsy = Vη / cos γ (η) + VDy = Vη / cos γ (η) − x sin γ (η)
and in longitudinal direction
Vsx = V + VDx = V − R(η)
To obtain the non-dimensional rigid slip these velocities are scaled with forward velocity V .
wx = 1 − R(η)/V
Vη x sin γ (η)
wy = =
V cos γ (η) V
In figure 14 and 15 solutions of the tangential contact problems for flat and curved contact
patches are presented for global creepages νx = νy = 0 and coefficient of friction f = 0.4.
The creep forces and maximum tangential tractions and normal pressures are given below.

4.1 Flat contact area

Fx = −8.57 kN, Fy = 7.282 kN, p0 = 863.4 MPa, pmax = 262.3 MPa

4.2 Curved contact area

Fx = −6.42 kN, Fy = 7.877 kN, p0 = 863.4 MPa, pmax = 345.1 MPa

40 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 14. Solution of the tangential contact problem for flat contact patch.

Figure 15. Solution of the tangential contact problem for curved contact patch.

5. Application of the simplified contact model in simulation tools

A wheel–rail element is a segment of a simulation code that calculates contact forces

between wheel and rail depending on relative displacements and velocities of wheel and
rail surfaces.
The presented contact model has been implemented, for example, in the so-called element
21 of MEDYNA program [12]. The element was developed in 1982 as one with constraints
and flexibility [13] but converted after 1991 into an element with elasticity only [14].
The element is general in the sense that switches, resilient wheels, non-round wheels with
flats and so on can be modelled.
The element takes into account three-dimensional rolling surfaces of wheel and rail. In each
time step the so-called contact lines of rail and wheel are computed. The latter is the visible
profile of yawed wheel as seen along the rail [15], see figure 16. The contact line on rail
coincides with the rail profile.
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 41

Figure 16. Wheel profile and wheel contact line for angle of attack of 3 and 6 degree.

To determine contact patches the geometrical ‘contact points’ are calculated. These are
points where the local minima of separation of the contact lines occur. If contact lines of
wheel and rail penetrate at the contact point a contact patch comes into being.
The number of the contact points and thus the number of contact patches is not restricted
in the element. Restriction to one contact on the tread and one on the flange, imposed in some
codes, is not realistic as can be seen in figure 17. Depending on the vertical force the contact
patches can join together or split up.
Contact to a wheel is not restricted to one rail only. To model switches contact of the wheel
with two rails must be possible. Figure 18 shows contact of the wheel to a guiding rail flanging
at the inner side and contact to the main rail on the tread. In figure 19 the wheel contacts with
the rail of straight track and the tongue of a switch. Both guiding rail and tongue should always
be modelled as separate bodies.
The FASTSIM algorithm used to compute tangential (creep) forces includes calculation of
equivalent elliptical contact patches for the purpose of determining the elasticity parameters.
The creepages for non-elliptical contact patches are then determined either globally, under the
assumption of flatness of the patch, or locally, taking into account the curvature of the patch.
To show the influence of the two approaches on simulation of motion, we analyse motion
of a freely rolling wheelset on straight track. The wheel and rail are modelled with different
types of profiles to form different contact patches (figure 20).

Figure 17. Unlimited number of contact patches between wheel and rail.

Figure 18. Contact to a second rail – guiding rail – in a switch.

42 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 19. Two rails in contact to one wheel – main rail and tongue in a switch.

Figure 20. Wheelset model 1 (conical-circular), wheelset model 2 (circular-circular) and wheelset model 3 (general
profiles).

Simulation results are shown for the following cases:

1. so-called kinematic rolling where only longitudinal creep forces due to rolling radius
difference are modelled,
2. flat contact area,
3. slightly curved contact area.

The mass of the wheelset is assumed very small (equal to 10 kg) and its central, main
moments of inertia are {5, 1, 5} kgm2 in order to practically exclude the influence of the
inertia forces. The wheel load is 15 kN. The equivalent conicity is the same for cases with
conical wheel profile on circular rail profile and circular wheel profile on circular rail profile.
For the case with profile combination S1002 wheel on UIC60 rail, the equivalent conicity is
the same as for the other two combinations but only for very small amplitudes of the lateral
displacement.
Forward velocity is 15 m/s. Motion of the wheelset is disturbed by rolling over a 5 mm
lateral ramp of 1m length.
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 43

Figure 21. Motion with conical/circular profiles for the three contact descriptions.

As expected, for conical wheel profile there is nearly no difference between ‘flat’ and
‘curved’ contact model, see figure 21. The kinematic rolling is slightly damped because of
rolling resistance.
For circular wheel and rail profiles the lateral displacement is more strongly damped for
the ‘curved’contact than for the ‘flat’ one. This means that the energy dissipation is higher for
‘curved’ contact, see figure 22.
For S1002/UIC60 profile combination there is nearly no difference between rolling case
1 and flat description of contact patches. Motion resulting from curved contact description
differs quite a lot. The wavelength is much longer and the energy dissipation higher, see
figure 23.
For realistic inertial parameters of the wheelset and 15 m/s speed the wheelset motion would
be unstable ending in a limit cycle with lateral amplitudes leading to flanging for both the
‘flat’ and ‘curved’ approaches to the description of creepages.

Figure 22. Motion with circular/circular profiles for the three contact descriptions.
44 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 23. Motion with S1002/UIC60 profiles for the three contact descriptions.

6. Application of the simplified contact model to wear simulation

The present simplified contact model gives the possibility to organise the simulation without
the problem of ‘digging holes’ when trying to accelerate the simulated wear process relative to
real world process. But before explaining this, we present a few comments on wheel/rail wear
in general. The wear process combines the short-term dynamics due to which the transport of
material occurs and the long-term dynamics where the transport of material is going on. Two
different approaches or solutions exist:

1. sequential or off-line treatment of short-and long-term dynamics and,

2. parallel or on-line treatment of the two processes.

The tools based on sequential treatment of wear are presented among others by Zobory
[16], Linder [9], Chudzikiewicz [17] and Jendel [18]. To get measurable wear of wheels, the
mileage of vehicle has to be of the order of hundred thousand kilometres rather than a few
kilometres, which are mostly done in the dynamic simulation. For rail wear, a sum of load
having passed the site has to be of the order of millions of tonnes (Mt) rather than the load of
a few axles having passed the site in dynamic simulation. This means that for the sequential
treatment of wear the simulation has to be rerun quite often. This will take days of computation
time rather than hours.
A parallel treatment, to our knowledge, was published first by Frischmuth [19]. He described
the wear process by a differential equation included in the model of the vehicle dynamics. But
it appeared that the process was numerically unstable.
Our parallel wear module uses a discrete approach to the wear process. In each time step of
the integration procedure the material transport is computed and summed up. At each output
step of the integration procedure the summed up material transport is used to compute a worn
profile [20].
The advantage of the parallel wear algorithm is shown on a simple example. The wear
project has two load cases both included in one simulation model. Load case 1 is a wheelset
flanging on left rail with an angle of attack of 25 mrad. In load case 2 the wheelset is running on
the straight track with periodic oscillatory motion similar to the hunting mode. The wheelset
is driven in both load cases by a moment of 6 kNm.
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 45

Figure 24. Initial contact situation for wear example.

It is required to determine wear for rails and wheels. The initial configurations of the two
load cases on the two different track sites are shown in figure 24.
The simulation was running for 10 s with the output step size of 0.01 s. Generating worn
profiles at each output step, 1000 profiling steps or wear steps were done. Compared to a
simulation process without generating worn profiles during simulation, the actual simulation
is about nine times slower. Sampling wear and computing worn profiles at the end of each
simulation run would mean getting worn profiles nine times for the same CPU-time. Dividing
the 1000 profiling steps of the parallel method by 9 means that the parallel method is approx-
imately 111 times faster. In 10 s simulation time a load of 1.8 Mt have passed the site and the
wheels have done a mileage of 253 Tkm. Figure 25 shows configuration at the end of wear
simulation.
Whatever kind of wear theory is used e.g. frictional work, wear is computed in the contact
area. When profiles are not directly changed as in reality, wear is summed up. Time integration
in simulation is a discrete process. The contact area is not moving along a coherent path from
time step to time step, but as some kind of irregular pattern on the profile. Summing up wear
at each time step we are digging holes into the profiles. To avoid a wavy profile it must be
somehow smoothed.
We are distributing wear in the contact region of the profile proportionally to the interpenetra-
tion function. If in the contact region summed-up wear exists the worn area is subtracted from
the interpenetration function. Using an iterative procedure a new interpenetration function is
computed looking for a constant area under the function.

Figure 25. Contact configuration after simulation time 10 s, track load Q = 1.8 MT and mileage of wheelset
L = 253 Tkm.
46 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

Figure 26. Contact patches on corrugated rail, tangential traction and regions of adhesion and slip. R = 500 mm,
N = 50 kN, f = 0.4, wave length= 33 mm, ampl= 0.06 mm, spin= 0.0002 mm−1 .

This procedure ensures a much smoother wear simulation even for quite a number of wear
steps without computing a new worn profile. To check the quality of the approximation,
output step size can be reduced and simulation repeated. The algorithm has been verified by
comparison with measured results of DBAG [20].

7. Application of the simplified model for contact of wheel and corrugated rail

Non-linear models of rail corrugation require fast solution of contact problems with a method
taking into account the actual geometry of corrugated rail that leads to non-elliptical contact
patches. The present method is suitable for application in such models [21].
 Simplified model of wheel/rail contact mechanics 47

Figure 27. Lateral creep force for pure constant spin= 0.0002 mm−1 . Amplitude of corrugation: 1 : 0.06 mm,
2 : 0.04 mm, 3 : 0.02 mm.

As an example, we present solutions of contact problems on sinusoidal corrugation. The

wheel of 500 mm radius is quasi-statically rolling over the rail. The normal load is 50 kN. The
contact angle of wheel and rail results in spin 0.0002 mm−1 .
Due to changing contact geometry along the rail the shape and size of the contact patch vary
as shown in figure 26 for an amplitude of corrugation equal to 0.06 mm. This leads to lateral
creep force of a substantial variation, as shown in figure 27. It is evident that the variable
contact patch is a source of a strong lateral excitation even if spin is constant.
In this example, for illustrative purposes, the normal load has been assumed constant. This
requires iteration of the penetration during solving the normal contact problem.

8. Final remarks

The approximate, non-iterative method for solving the normal contact together with Kalker’s
FASTSIM algorithm adapted for non-elliptical contact area constitute a simplified model of
wheel/rail contact mechanics for non-Hertzian problems.
The tests comparing some results of the present model with those from program CONTACT
showed that the model is suitable for typical applications. Because the computation is fast and
completely reliable the model is used on-line in simulation codes oriented for rail vehicle
dynamics. The experience using the model in rail vehicle simulations confirms the usefulness
of the model.
The model was also applied in wear simulations making it possible to speed up the computa-
tion and to ensure stability of the process by parallel treatment of the short- and the long-term
dynamics. Verification using measured results showed good agreement of simulation and
measured results.

References
[1] Kalker, J.J., 1990, Three-Dimensional Elastic Bodies in Rolling Contact. Solid Mechanics and its Applications.
(Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers).
[2] Kik, W. and Piotrowski, J., 1996, A fast, approximate method to calculate normal load at contact between wheel
and rail and creep forces during rolling. I. Zobory (Ed.), Proceedings of 2nd Mini-conference on contact mech.
and wear of rail/wheel systems. Budapest.
[3] Kalker, J.J., 1979, The computation of three-dimensional rolling contact with dry friction. International Journal
for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 14, 1293–1307.
[4] Kalker, J.J., 1986, Users Manual of the Fortran Program CONTACT (Delft: Delft University of Technology,
Department of Math. and Computer Science).
48 J. Piotrowski and W. Kik

[5] Piotrowski, J. and Chollet, H., 2005, Wheel-rail contact models for vehicle system dynamics including multi-
point contact. Vehicle System Dynamics, 43(6), 455–483.
[6] Hashemi, J. and Paul, B., 1979, Contact Stresses on Bodies with Arbitrary Geometry. Application to Wheels
and Rails Report FRA-ORD 79/23. Washington DC.
[7] Ayasse, J.B. and Chollet, H., 2005, Determination of the wheel rail contact patch for semi-Hertzian conditions.
Vehicle System Dynamics, 43(3), 159–170.
[8] Knothe, K. and Le The, H., 1984, A contribution to calculation of contact stress distribution between elastic
bodies of revolution with non-elliptical contact area. Computers and Structures 18(6), 1025–1033.
[9] Linder, Ch., 1997, Verschleiss von Eisenbahnradern mit Unrundheiten. Dissertation ETH Nr. 12342.
[10] Birger, I.A. and Panovko, J.G., 1968, Procnost’, ustojcivost’, kolebanya. Handbook in 3 volumes (Publishing
House ‘Mashinostroienye’) (in Russian).
[11] Kalker, J.J., 1973, Simplified theory of rolling contact. Delft Progress Report Series C1, 1, 1–10.
[12] Verfahren und Auslegungsprogramm zur Vorausberechnung optimaler Konstruktionen von Schienenfahrzeugen
(ZFFII), Abschlussbericht zum R/S-Forschungsprojekt TV 7992, BMFT, Okt. 1985.
[13] Kik, W. and Steinborn, H., 1982, Quasistationärer Bogenlauf – Mathematisches Rad-Schiene Modell. TU-Berlin,
Institut für Luft- und Raumfahrt, ILR-Mitteilung 112.
[14] Kik, W., 1992, Comparison of the behaviour of different wheelset–track models. The Dynamics of Vehi-
cles on roads and on tracks. Proceedings 12th IAVSD-Symposium, Lyon, August 26–30, 1991 (Amsterdam:
Swets&Zeitlinger).
[15] Schmied, P., 2001, Der Bogenlauf der Schienefahrzeuge (Wien, Österreich: Selbstverlag).
[16] Szabo, A., Sostarics, G., Zobory, I. and Zabori, Z., 1989, Dynamic analysis of a vehicle with bogie moving on a
straight track with the aim of reducing wheel wear. Proceedings of the I. International Conference on Railway
Bogies, Budapest,138–149.
[17] Chudzikiewicz, A. and Kalker, J.J.,1989, Wheel-rail wear calculations with the FASTSIM routine. The Archives
of Transport, 1(1–2), Warsaw.
[18] Jendel, T., 2000, Prediction of wheel profile wear – methodology and erification. KTH Doctoral Thesis TRITA
FKT 2000:49. Stockholm.
[19] Frischmuth, K. and Langemann, D.,1997, Numerical analysis of long-term wear models. 5th Polish-German
workshop on dynamical problems in mechanical systems, August 31st – September 7th 1997, Zakopane, Poland.
[20] Kik, W., and Moelle, D., 2002, Verschleiß von Rad und Schiene. Wendeschleife S-Bahn Stuttgart, ArgeCare-
Bericht.
[21] Piotrowski, J. and Kik, W., 1999, On fast calculation of contact problems for wheel and corrugated rail.
Proceedings of 14th International Conference Current problems in rail vehicles, vol. I, 219–226. University
of Zilina, Slovakia.
[22] Kalker, J.J. and Piotrowski, J., 1989, Some new results in rolling contact. Vehicle System Dynamics, 18, 223–242.