Methodology to characterize the Von Misses stress in the

contact between wheel and rail (Test-Rig)

Juan Carlos García-Prada1, Cristina Castejón1, Higinio Rubio1, Alejandro Bustos1
1
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid, Leganés, Spain
jcgprada@ing.uc3m.es

Abstract: The aim of this work is to carry out a study about wheel-rail and wheel-roller interaction. The final objec-
tives are the determination of the hertzian contact ellipse, the maximum contact pressure and the pressure distribu-
tion in the contact zone, as well as the von Mises stress in the wheel for their application in the design of bogie test
rigs. In order to accomplish this task, two models have been developed: an analytical one based on the Hertz contact
theory, and a numerical one using finite elements method. Analytical model is implemented over MATLAB. By this
way, it is fast and easy to test and analyze the wheel-rail, wheel-roller and wheel-2 rollers interaction: different roller
radii and two loading cases: 50 and 100 kN per wheel. For the numerical model, it has been designed in CREO Par-
ametric the same elements tested in the analytical model. Then these components have been simulated by means of
finite elements in CREO Simulate, refining the mesh in the contact zone. Contact analyses have been performed in
the same conditions as the previous model, and contact areas, pressures and stresses are obtained.

Keywords: contact, wheel, rail, roller, test-rig.

1 Introduction
Contact models for wheel–rail interaction are essential
for the study of the dynamic behaviour of a railway vehi-
cle. Assessment of the contact forces and contact geome-
try provide a fundamental foundation for such tasks as
design of traction and braking control systems, prediction
of wheel/rail wear, the assessment of running safety or
evaluation of comfort [1].
Roller test rigs are an essential tool for the study of is-
sues in railway vehicle running [2–7]. These testing
equipment have been designed according to several con-
figurations depending on their applications. In [6] the
advantages and disadvantages of using different types of
Figure 1. Full scale test rig at Lucchini (Italy) [8].
roller rigs in railway engineering are discussed. The full
scale test rigs are composed of two traction systems:
wheel-roller (Fig. 1) or wheel-2 rollers (Fig. 2).
Rollers are critical elements in dynamic bogie test rigs.
The incorrect design of these elements could result in an
excessive wear of the wheel, the roller or both. The accu-
rate design of these rollers determines the validity of tests
carried out on the test rigs.
Currently, due to their simplicity and they are very fast,
emphasis is placed on analytical models and computer
based numerical models of the contact problem [9-10],
covered in Kalker’s programs FASTSIM [11] (linear and
simplified theory of rolling contact) and CONTACT [12],
(based on the boundary element method) or the wheel-rail
forces calculation computer code of Polach [13]. Figure 2. DTR Dynamic train Bogie Test Rig (DANOBAT).
It also uses the experimental characterization [14], elas-
toplastic FEM models [15], complex nonlinear analytical In this paper the Hertz’s contact and elastic FE method
models or combination of several [16]. The interaction of contact theories for solving the wheel–rail and wheel–
different wheel rail contact zones completes this analysis roller contact problem for rolling stock are compared and
[17]. discussed. Specifically, analytical and mathematical con-
978-1-4673-9238-9/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE

34
Authorized licensed use limited to: Pontificia Universidad Catolica Del Peru. Downloaded on August 30,2020 at 17:02:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 tact models of wheel-rail, wheel-roller and wheel-2 rollers • Angle between contact normal force and applied
are implemented over MATLAB and PTC CREO for two load (vertical direction), case wheel-2 rollers:
loading cases: 50 and 100 kN per wheel.
§ 2⋅r + d ·
2 Description of models α = sin −1 ¨ ¸ (4)
© 2 ⋅ (R + r) ¹
Three contact models will be detailed: wheel-rail,
wheel-roller and wheel-2 rollers. Input data for analytical
model are the following ones (Fig. 3 and 4):
R
• Wheel main rolling radius, at contact point, RW1 =
0.457 m and wheel transverse rolling radius, at FNi FT
FNi FNi α
contact point, RW2 = ҄. 2
• Rail main rolling radius, at contact point, RR1 = α
҄ and rail transverse rolling radius, at contact FT
FT
point (UIC-54 profile), RR2 = 0.300 m. r r
FNi FNi
• Roller main rolling radius at contact point r =
0.175 m and roller transverse rolling radius, at d
contact point (UIC-54 profile), ρ = 0.300 m.
L
• Poisson’s ratio for wheel, rail and roller materials,
ν = 0.3. Figure 4. Wheel-2 rollers model.
• Young’s Modulus for wheel, rail and roller mate-
rials, E = 210 GPa.
• Applied load at wheel center, vertical direction, Q 3 Hertz’s contact model
= 100 kN (and 50 kN). Hertz’s contact model [18] is widely used in the field of
• Contact normal force, cases wheel-rail and wheel- railway simulation due to its simplicity and it is a very
roller (Fig. 3): fast way to estimate the normal force in a contact. No
FT = Q ⋅ cos γ ( γ = 2.5º ) (1) plastic deformation in the contact patch is assumed, and
the radii of curvature in the contact patch are assumed to
be constant. The geometry of the bodies near of the con-
tact must be second degree polynomials. As a conse-
quence, the contact area is an ellipse with semi-axes a and
R b in the rolling (longitudinal) and tangential directions,
R
respectively. The values of a and b depend on the local
curvatures of the bodies in the point of contact and the
load applied.
For the Hertz’s contact model, implemented in
FT MATLAB according to the proposed method in [19], the
contact area, the contact aspect ratio and the maximum
FT
FN contact pressure are listed in Table 1.
r

FN Table 1. Contact area, contact aspect ratio and maximum

contact pressure.
Contact Contact Max. contact
Load
Interaction area aspect ratio pressure
(kN)
Figure 3. Wheel-roller and wheel-rail models. (mm2) g = a/b pmax (MPa)
Wheel-rail 79 1.42 952
• It is assumed that the yaw angle is null, ij = 0º. 50 Wheel-roller 51 0.52 1461
• Contact normal force, case wheel-2 rollers, two Wheel-2 rollers 36 0.52 1221
contacts (Fig. 4): Wheel-rail 125 1.42 1199
100 Wheel-roller 81 0.52 1841
FT
FNi = (2) Wheel-2 rollers 57 0.52 1538
2 ⋅ cos α

• Center rollers length, case wheel-2 rollers: The calculated contact areas and the pressure distribu-
tion, with load Q = 100 kN, are plotted in Fig. 5. The x-
L = 2 ⋅ (R + r) ⋅ sin α = 2 ⋅ r + d (3) axis is parallel to the longitudinal direction (direction of

35
Authorized licensed use limited to: Pontificia Universidad Catolica Del Peru. Downloaded on August 30,2020 at 17:02:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 travel) and the y-axis is parallel to the tangential direction. If the roller radius is varied, considering the conditions
The contact pressure distribution calculated using Hertz’s set out in the description of the models, one could see the
theory is shown in Fig. 6. evolution of the contact aspect ratio (see Fig. 7), the con-
tact ellipse area (see Fig. 8) and the maximum pressure
Contact ellipses (mm.)
Wheel center load = 100 kN. Wheel-rail pressure distribution
(see Fig. 9).
12
Wheel-rail Maximum pressure = 1198.79 MPa
10 8
Wheel-roller
1000 Contact ellipse area evolution
Rail tangential direction

Wheel-2 rollers 6

Rail tangential direction

8
Wheel center load = 100 kN.
6 4 800
4 2
2 600
0
0 200
-2 400
-2

Contact ellipse area (mm2)

-4
-4 200
-6
-6
150
-8 0
-8 -5 0 5
-5 0 5
Rail longitudinal direction Rail longitudinal direction

Wheel-roller pressure distribution Wheel-2 rollers pressure distribution

100
Maximum pressure = 1840.89 MPa Maximum pressure = 1537.85 MPa
8 1800 8 1400
Roller tangential direction

Roller tangential direction

6 1600 6 1200
4 1400 4
1000 50
2
1200
2
Wheel-rail
1000 800 Wheel-roller
0 0
800 600
Wheel-2 rollers
-2
600
-2 2 x Wheel-2 rollers
400 0
-4 -4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
400
-6 200 -6 200 Roller radius (m)
-8 0 -8 0
-5 0 5 -5 0 5 Figure 8. The contact ellipse area evolution.
Roller longitudinal direction Roller longitudinal direction

Figure 5. Contact ellipses and the pressure distribution. Maximum pressure evolution
Wheel center load = 100 kN.
3000
Contact pressure distribution Contact pressure distribution Wheel-rail
Wheel center load = 100 kN. Wheel center load = 100 kN. 2800 Wheel-roller
Wheel-2 rollers
Wheel-rail Wheel-rail
Wheel-roller Wheel-roller 2600
2000 Wheel-2 rollers 2000 Wheel-2 rollers
Maximum pressure (MPa)

2400
Pressure (MPa.)
Pressure (MPa.)

1500 1500 2200

2000
1000 1000
1800

500 500 1600

1400
0 0
-10 -5 0 5 10 -10 -5 0 5 10
1200
Rail longitudinal direction (mm.) Rail tangential direction (mm.)
1000
Figure 6. Longitudinal and tangential pressure distribution. 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Roller radius (m)

Evolution of contact aspect ratio Figure 9. The maximum pressure evolution.

Wheel center load = 100 kN.
1.6

1.4 4 FEM contact model

1.2
The contact between the standard rail UIC-54 and the
standard wheel will be studied. The analyzed zone is in
Contact aspect ratio

1 the transverse contact position where the contact is de-

fined by an ellipse area.
0.8 Complete wheelset, UIC-54 profile rail and rollers are
designed in PTC CREO Parametric and assembled ac-
0.6
cording to the study cases. These assemblies assure the
0.4 Wheel-rail contact is at only one point (radius 300mm). Material
Wheel-roller properties and geometry are the same used in the analyti-
Wheel-2 rollers
0.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
cal model and according to [20-21]. For example, the
Roller radius (m) wheelset with 2 rollers assembled is shown in Fig. 10.
Figure 7. The contact aspect ratio evolution. The models are displayed following the predetermined

36
Authorized licensed use limited to: Pontificia Universidad Catolica Del Peru. Downloaded on August 30,2020 at 17:02:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 PTC CREO Parametric axis: z is the travel direction, x is among others, can be displayed. Fig. 11 shows a cut in the
the tangential direction and y is the vertical direction. Von Mises stress results.
Then, finite element analysis is carried out over PTC
CREO Simulate. Wheelset vertical loads are applied at
both axle journals and displacement is only allowed in
vertical direction. Rail bases and roller holes displace-
ments are fully restricted.
Contacts have been applied through the interface utili-
ty, defining the components in contact (wheel and
rail/rollers) and the required parameters.
Concerning the meshing, total number of elements is
200.000. Wheels and rollers are modelled with a very fine
mesh in the contact zone.

Figure 11. FEM model of wheelset-roller assembly.

The calculated contact areas and the pressure distribu-

tion, with load Q = 100 kN, are plotted in Fig. 12. The z-
axis is parallel to the longitudinal direction (direction of
travel), the x-axis is parallel to the tangential direction and
the y-axis is the vertical direction (load direction). Von
Mises stress distribution at the contact points is shown in
Fig. 13.

ĂͿ ďͿ ĐͿ
Figure 10. Wheelset-2 rollers assembly.
Figure 12. Contact area and pressure distribution (case Q =
For the FEM contact model, implemented in PTC 100 kN): a) wheel-rail; b) wheel-roller; c) wheel-2 rollers.
CREO Simulate, the contact area, the maximum contact
pressure, the maximum Von Mises stress and stress-
pressure ratio are listed in Table 2.

Table 2. Contact area, maximum contact pressure,

maximum Von Mises stress and stress-pressure ratio.
Max. Max. Stress
Contact
Load contact Von Mises pressure
Interaction area
(kN) pressure stress ratio
(mm2)
pmax (MPa) σmax (MPa) σmax/pmax
Wheel-rail 79 975 614 0.63
ĂͿ ďͿ ĐͿ
50 Wheel-roller 51 1582 933 0.59
Wheel-2 rollers 38 1318 747 0.57 Figure 13. Von Mises stress distribution (case Q = 100 kN):
Wheel-rail 127 1230 780 0.63 a) wheel-rail; b) wheel-roller; c) wheel-2 rollers.
100 Wheel-roller 83 1912 1161 0.61
Wheel-2 rollers 60 1548 989 0.64
5 Conclusions
The results user interface of PTC CREO Simulate is In this paper, two contact models are presented: an ana-
shown in Fig. 11. From this window, the users can display lytical model, based in Hertz’s theory and implemented in
several results according to the type of analysis executed. MATLAB; and a mathematical model, using FEM and
In the case of the static contact analysis, magnitudes as implemented in PTC CREO. Each model addresses three
contact areas, contact pressures or Von Mises stress, cases: wheel-rail, wheel-roller and wheel-2 rollers.

37
Authorized licensed use limited to: Pontificia Universidad Catolica Del Peru. Downloaded on August 30,2020 at 17:02:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 The results of Hertz and the elastic FE method models [16] A. Rovira, A. Roda, M.B. Marshall, H. Brunskill and R. Lewis,
“Experimental and numerical modelling of wheel-rail contact and
are very similar both with respect to the shape of the con- wear”. Wear, vol. 271, pp. 911–924, 2011.
tact area and the pressure distribution, especially in the [17] C.-I. Barbintaa, C. Ulianovb, F. Franklinb and S. Cretu, “Wheel-
case of load Q = 100 kN. rail contact modelling and analysis, considering profiles types and
Applying the analytical contact model of Hertz and lateral displacement”. Transport Research Arena 2014, Paris.
[18] K.L. Johnson, Contact Mechanics, Cambridge University Press,
modifying the roller radius, they are developed curves to UK, 1985.
see the evolution of parameters such as: contact aspect [19] A. A. Shabana, M. Berzeri and J. R. Sany. “Numerical Procedure
ratio (Fig. 7), the contact ellipse area (Fig. 8) and the for the Simulation of Wheel/Rail Contact Dynamics”. Journal of
maximum pressure (Fig. 9), which can be very helpful in Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, Volume 123, Issue
2, pp. 168-178, 2001.
making considerations of bogie test-rig design.
[20] EN 13262:2004+A2:2011. Railway application. Wheelsets and
bogies. Wheels. Product requirements.
Acknowledgment [21] EN 13260:2009+A1:2010. Railway application. Wheelsets and
bogies. Wheelsets. Product requirements.
The authors would like to thank the support provided
by the Spanish Government for financing through the
project MAQ-STATUS DPI2015-69325-C2-1-R. Author information
References First (Main) author: Juan Carlos García-Prada
Title: Chair Professor
[1] S.Z. Meymand, A. Keylin and M. Ahmadian, “A survey of
Degree: PHD in Mechanical Engineering
wheel–rail contact models for rail vehicles”. Vehicle System
Dynamics, Vol. 54, No. 3, pp. 386–428, 2016. Research Field: Mechanical Engineering
[2] B. Liu and S. Bruni “A method for testing railway wheel sets on a applied to rail industry (maintenance &
full-scale roller rig”, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 53, No. 9, defectology)
pp. 1331–1348, 2015. Contact Address: Universidad Carlos III de
[3] A. Jaschinski, H. Chollet, S. Iwnicki, A.H. Wickens, and J.V. Madrid, Avda. de la universidad, 30. 28911
Würzen. “The application of the roller rigs to railway vehicle Leganés - Madrid, Spain
dynamics”. Vehicle System Dynamics, 31 (1999), pp. 345–392.
[4] W. Zhang, H.Y. Dai, Z.Y. Shen and J. Zeng. Roller rigs. In S.
Iwnicki, editor. Handbook of railway vehicle dynamics. Taylor &
Francis Group; Chapter 14, 2006. pp. 458–504.
[5] P.D. Allen. Scaling testing. In S. Iwnicki, editor. Handbook of
railway vehicle dynamics. Taylor&Francis Group, Chapter 15,
2006. pp. 507–525.
[6] S.Z. Meymand, M.J. Craft AND M. Ahmadian. “On the
application of roller rigs for studying rail vehicle systems”.
Proceedings of the ASME 2013 Rail Transportation Division Fall
Technical Conference; Altoona, Pennsylvania, USA; 2013.
[7] A. Facchinetti, S. Bruni and W. Zhang. “Rolling stock dynamic
evaluation by means of laboratory tests”. Int J RailwayTechnol.
2013; 2 (4): pp. 99–123.
[8] J. Rudlin, A. Muhammed and C. Schneider, “Investigation of
inspection performance on cracked railway axles”. 9th ECNDT,
Berlin, September 25-29, 2006.
[9] T. Telliskvi and U. Olofsson, “Contact Mechanics Analysis of
Measured Wheel-Rail Profiles using the Finite Element Method”.
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Eng., F J.
Rail Rapid Transit, 215, pp. 65–72, 2001.
[10] W. Yan and F.D. Fischer, “Applicability of the Hertz contact
theory to rail-wheel contact problems”. Applied Mechanics, 70,
2000, pp. 255-268.
[11] J.J. Kalker, “A Fast Algorithm for the Simplified Theory of
Rolling Contact”. Vehicle System Dynamics, vol. 11, pp. 1-13,
1982.
[12] J.J. Kalker, “Three-dimensional Elastic Bodies in Rolling
Contact”. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, 1990.
[13] O. Polach, “A fast wheel-rail forces calculation computer code”.
Proc. of the 16lh IAVSD Symposium. Pretoria, August 1999,
Vehicle System Dynamics Supplement, 33, pp. 728–739, 1999.
[14] M. B. Marshall, R. Lewis, R. S. Dwyer-Joyce, U. Olofsson and S.
Björklund, “Experimental Characterization of Wheel-Rail Contact
Patch Evolution”. Journal of Tribology, Vol. 128, pp. 493-504,
2006.
[15] M. Wiest, E. Kassac, W. Daves, J.C.O. Nielsen and H. Ossberger,
“Assessment of methods for calculating contact pressure in
wheel-rail/switch contact”. Wear, vol. 265, pp. 1439–1445, 2008.

38
Authorized licensed use limited to: Pontificia Universidad Catolica Del Peru. Downloaded on August 30,2020 at 17:02:09 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.