2019-1-1 Test-Report ARB M7 Rev00 en

BTC-Testlaboratory
Test report no. 2019-1-1
M7 - Anti-roll bar
Fatigue Test
Responsible unit: Dcument-Type: Confidentiality status:
BTC-Testlaboratory Technical Document Extern

Prepared: Title: Document status :
21.10.2022 E.Zenuni Test report free

Tester
M7 - Anti-roll bar
Checked: Test report No..:
21.10.2022 N.Werthebach
Fatigue test
Vice-Head of BTC-Testlab
2019-1-1
Approved: File-Name: Revision: Languag: Page:
24.10.2022 G.Bieker 2019-1-1_Test-Report_ARB_M7_Rev00_En 00 en 2 of 36

Head of BTC-Testlab
Substitute for:
Test report
M7 - Anti-roll bar
Fatigue test
The entire publication or the publication of extracts of the test report needs the written approval of BTC Testlaboratory.
The current revision (last line in the revision table) substitutes the previous edition.
Revision Description of revision Date Prepared Checked Verified
00 First issue
This document and its contents are the property of Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. This document contains confidential proprietary
information. The reproduction, distribution, utilization or the communication of this document or any part thereof, without express authorization is
strictly prohibited. Offenders will be held liable for the payment of damages.
© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.
Printed this document counts as uncontrolled and serves only as reference; except a local control
procedure is established
Test report no.: Language: Revision: Page:
2019-1-1 en 00 3 von 36
34
Subject of test: Anti-roll bar M7

Torsion bar SN 0047
Lever SN 0030, SN 0031
Date of delivery: May 09, 2019
Elaboration time: July 2019 until April 2020
Customer: Bombardier Transportation

Mr. Jan-Philipp Jensen
Structural Engineering
RoQ – Rolling Stock Equipment
Siegstraße 27
D-57250 Netphen
Bombardier Transportation
Mr. Nicolas Maillard
Mechanical Engineering
RoQ – Rolling Stock Equipment
Place des Ateliers – BP1
FR - 59154 Crespin, France
Test Laboratory: Bombardier Transportation

BTC-Testlaboratory
Siegstraße 27
D-57250 Netphen
Authorized test specialist: Dipl. Ing. H.-D. Dörner

Dipl. Ing. N. Werthebach
Test specialist: Dipl. Ing. E. Zenuni

Printed this document counts as uncontrolled and serves only as reference; except a local
control procedure is established
2019-1-1 en 00 4 von 36
34
Contents
1 ORDER AND SCOPE 6
2 STANDARDS, DOCUMENTS, DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT 6

2.1 Standards 6
2.2 Documents 6
2.3 Drawings 6
2.4 Software 6
2.5 Hardware 6
2.6 Inspection equipment 7
3 TEST OBJECT AND TEST SETUP 8

3.1 Test object 8
3.2 Test setup 8
3.3 Measurement equipment 10
4 TESTING PROCEDURE 13
4.1 Static test – Exceptional loads 13
4.2 Static test – Dynamic loads 13
4.3 Fatigue test 14
4.4 Measurement uncertainty 15
5 RESULTS 15
5.1 Static tests – Exceptional loads 15
5.2 Static test – Dynamic loads 16
5.3 Fatigue test 17
5.4 Summary 22
6 ATTACHMENT 23
6.1 Attachment 1: Test object 23
6.2 Attachment 2: Check in list 24
6.3 Attachment 3: Measurement points 25
6.4 Attachment 4: Working plan 26
6.5 Attachment 5: Protocols for magnetic particle inspection 27

2019-1-1 en 00 5 von 36
34
Glossary
ARB Anti-roll bar

Displ. Displacement
DMS Strain gauge
FKM Forschungskuratorium Maschinenbau
NDT Non-destructive test
E E-Modulus
εA Strain in direction of gauge a
εB Strain in direction of gauge b
εC Strain in direction of gauge c
σ1 Main normal stress 1
σ2 Main normal stress 2
σv Stress von Mises
ν Poissons ratio

2019-1-1 en 00 6 von 36
34
1 Order and Scope
On the anti-roll bar (ARB) unit of the M7 bogie should be performed static tests followed by a
fatigue test with increased loads based on track test data.
2 Standards, Documents, Devices and Equipment

For the test application and test procedure are used standards, documents and drawings listed
in the subchapters below. All documents provided by the customer are marked as ‘’customer
document’’.
2.1 Standards
[N1] DIN EN 13749:2011-06, Railway applications - Wheelsets and bogies - Method of
specifying the structural requirements of bogie frames
2.2 Documents
[B1] 100377029_en, Test specification, Bombardier, First issue, 23.01.2019, (customer
document)
[B2] Fatigue test up to 2 Mio., Bombardier, E-Mail from Mr. Nicolas Maillard, 14.01.2020,
(customer document)
[B3] BTC QS-2015-013 Rev.02, Bogie Test Centre – Quality management – Strain gauge
application and measurement uncertainly, Revision 2, 20.09.2016
[B4] BTC QS-2015-014.2 Rev.03, Bogie Test Centre – Quality management – Procedure
of measurement of bogie parts, First issue, 21.01.2021
2.3 Drawings
[Z1] 100299129 – Anti-roll bar installation, Bombardier, Rev_B 01.06.2017, Attachment 1,
Figure 19 (customer document)
2.4 Software
The operation of the test rig, the data logging and post processing were carried out with the
following software:
Name Manufacturer Version Use
RS LabSite modulogic Instron Structural Testing Systems 2.2 Rig control
Catman Easy-AP Hottinger Baldwin Messtechnik 5.2.1 Data acquisition
Table 1: Software list
The sampling rate was 50 to 100Hz.
2.5 Hardware
The test rig and the measuring equipment is listed in the following table:
Last
Name Manufacturer Type Use ID calibration
Bogie rig Instron Dynamic test of bogie components 1000006560

Control console Instron 8800ml Control console -

2019-1-1 en 00 7 von 36
34
Force
Force transducer GTM PM250L SN: 59575 08.2018
Fz2_Zyl1
Displacement PL250K / Displacement SN: 0481 /
Instron 08.2018
transducer WLC100 sz2_Zyl1 32132
Force
Force transducer GTM PM250L SN: 59576 08.2018
Fz2_Zyl1
Displacement PL250K / Displacement SN: 0482 /
Instron 08.2018
transducer WLC100 sz1_Zyl2 32133
Amplifier HBM MX 1615B Data acquisition ID: 9E5006164 07.2019
Amplifier HBM MX 1615B Data acquisition ID: 9E5006167 10.2018
Amplifier HBM MX 840A Data acquisition ID: 9E5002143 10.2019
Amplifier HBM MX 840A Data acquisition ID: 9E5002147 09.2019
Displacement Manufacturer
ASM-500, WS10 500mm Displacement sz3 1337403790
sensor calibration
sensor calibration
sensor calibration
sensor calibration
6/120 DMS01; DMS02; k-Factor
Strain gauge HBM -
CLY41 DMS05; 2,05
R3(A, B, C), k-Factor
Strain gauge 6/120
HBM R4(A, B, C), a=2,00; -
rosette RY91
R6(A, B, C) b=2,04; c=2,05
Table 2: Test equipment and hardware
All measurement points for strain and displacement, except strain gauge DMS 6 which was
replaced with a strain gauge rosette R06, were installed according to test specification [B1]
and plans of measurement points (Attachment 3). All strain gauges were applied according to
document [B3].
The entire measuring chain of the strain gauges was checked with a shunt resistor.
2.6 Inspection equipment

For the construction of the test rig and the application of strain gauges the following inspection
equipment was used:
Name Manufacturer Use Serial number Calibration

Stainless steel ruler Hahn&Kolb Entrance check in - -
Calliper Hahn&Kolb Entrance check in - -
Tape measure Würth Check in, construction of test rig - -
Shunt resistor Self-made Strain gauge application 7790500.010 03.2019
Multimeter Benning Strain gauge application 7790500.009 03.2019
Table 3: Inspection tools

2019-1-1 en 00 8 von 36
34
3 Test object and test setup
3.1 Test object
The static tests and the dynamic tests were performed on one anti-roll bar unit with already
shrunk levers [Z1]. The serial numbers of all components were noted at the entrance check
(Attachment 2).
Equipped
anti-roll bar unit
Figure 1: Test object
In Attachment 1 is the drawing [Z1] of the ARB unit listed.
3.2 Test setup

For the test setup, the anti-roll bar equipped with levers and links, was mounted on two
supports bolted to the clamping field. On the top of this supports the bearing housings were
fixed. The load application was realized through an I-beam. At one side were adapter plates
for the actuators and at the other side were adapter plates for the links of the ARB unit.
To guide the lateral movement of the anti-roll bar an adjustable rod with bolted joints at each
side was mounted. The longitudinal guidance of the I-beam was realized by 4 adjustable rods
with bolted joints at each side of the rods. This rods also prevented the pitching of the I-beam.
The following figures show the test setup and the coordinate system.

2019-1-1 en 00 9 von 36
34
sz1 sz2
Fz1 Fz2
X Y
Figure 2: Test setup and coordinate system
Lateral
guidance
Longitudinal
guidance
Figure 3: Lateral guidance

2019-1-1 en 00 10 von 36
34
Support
Bearing housing
Figure 4: Fixation of torsion bar
3.3 Measurement equipment

For the static measurement were installed four Displacement sensors for verifying that the
displacement of the actuator is equal to the displacement of the link at each side of the anti-
roll bar. The same verification was performed also for the displacement between the upper and
the lower head of the link.
In Figure 5 and 6 are shown the location of position sensors.
sz4 sz6
sz3
sz5
Figure 5: Displacement sensors sz3 and sz4 Figure 6: Displacement sensors sz5 and sz6

2019-1-1 en 00 11 von 36
34
According to the test specification [B1] three strain gauge rosettes and three strain gauges
were applied. With exception mentioned for strain gauge rosette R06 as replacement for strain
gauge DMS6. In the following figures their positions and their orientations are shown.
Figure 7: Strain gauge rosette R3

2019-1-1 en 00 12 von 36
34
DMS1 DMS2
Figure 10: Strain gauges DMS1 and DMS2
Figure 11: Strain gauge DMS5

2019-1-1 en 00 13 von 36
34
4 Testing Procedure
All measurements were performed according to test specification [B1] and the customer
requests [B2]. In the following chapters the tests are described.
During all tests, the environment temperature was 20-22°C.
4.1 Static test – Exceptional loads

According to customer recommendation and test specification [B1], the load cases 1.1 until 1.6
were performed in increasing load steps as shown in table 4. The execution of the following
step with increased load was performed only after extrapolation of the load stress from the
previous performed step to the increasing target load. That means that the excepted calculated
load stress is below the yield limit and the test specimen is safe.
Fz1 Fz2
Load case Percentage
[kN] [kN]
1.1 25% 11,3 -11,3
1.2 25% -11,3 11,3
1.1 50% 22,5 -22,5
1.2 50% -22,5 22,5
1.1 75% 33,8 -33,8
1.2 75% -33,8 33,8
1.1 100% 45,0 -45,0
1.2 100% -45,0 45,0
1.3 75% 67,5 -67,5
1.4 75% -67,5 67,5
1.3 100% 90,0 -90,0
1.4 100% -90,0 90,0
1.5 100% 100,0 -100,0
1.6 100% -100,0 100,0
Table 4: Exceptional loads
4.2 Static test – Dynamic loads

Before the start of the fatigue test, another static test (with dynamic loads) was performed with
load cases 2.1-2.4. The load cases are shown in table 5.
Fz1 Fz2
Load case
[kN] [kN]
2.1 52,5 -52,5
2.2 -52,5 52,5
2.3 70,9 -70,9
2.4 -70,9 70,9
Table 5: Dynamic loads

2019-1-1 en 00 14 von 36
34
4.3 Fatigue test
A preliminary test with amplitude of fatigue test, Stage N1, was performed with frequency of
0,5Hz and 1Hz for comparison with the static ones. The load cases are shown in table 6.
Frequency Fz1 Fz2

Load case
[Hz] [kN] [kN]
70,9 -70,9
N1 0,5
70,9 -70,9
70,9 -70,9
N1 1
-70,9 70,9
Table 6: Load cases for comparison
The fatigue test was started with a frequency of 1Hz but after a few load cycles, in the upper
ball joint of one link occurred an increase of temperature. Therefore, the test frequency was
reduced to 0,5Hz.
The rig control for static and dynamic tests was performed in displacement mode for servo
cylinder 1 (Fz2) and in force control mode for servo cylinder 2 (Fz1). This type of control was
necessary because if both servo cylinders are in force control mode, the zero-position shifts.
The fatigue test consisted of 1 Mio. load cycles for each stage N1, N2 and N3 shown in table
7. Due to problems with the links, the fatigue test of load factor 1 (stage N1) was extended up
to 2. Mio. load cycles and the stages N2 and N3 were not tested. Even the stage N1 should
be a factor 1,35 compared to design load (FKM rule because only one tested sample). This
was done in accordance with the customer.
Stage Scale factor Fz [kN] N° of cycles

1.000.000 /
N1 1 ±70,9
2.000.000
N2 1,2 ±85,1 1.000.000
N3 1,4 ±99,3 1.000.000
Table 7: Load stages for the fatigue test
The data was continuously recorded and hourly stored.
The magnetic particle inspection was performed in accordance with the customer at the
beginning and after every 200.000 load cycles till 1.200.000 load cycles, as well as at the end
of the test. The inspections were performed by the Bombardier specialist department without
accreditation. The protocols are listed in Attachment 5.
An extract of the time response of the cylinder forces in stage N1 is shown in figure 12.

2019-1-1 en 00 15 von 36
34
Figure 12: Time response of cylinder forces
4.4 Measurement uncertainty

According to document [B4] for the static and the dynamic tests the conservative overall
uncertainty is 2,6% including E-Modulus and ± 1,7% without including the E-Modulus. This is
the sum from all single uncertainties of cylinder, tester, measurement equipment, cable, strain
gauge and material.
Under consideration of coverage factor k=2 (confidence range approx. 95%) the result is an
overall uncertainty from 2*2,6%=5,2% and 2*1,7% =3,4% without including the E-Modulus.
5 Results
The test results presented here refer only to the items tested here.
5.1 Static tests – Exceptional loads

The results of the exceptional load cases 1.1 until 1.6 are shown in table 8. Thereby, the
measured strain of the single gauges was converted in stress and of the rosettes in stress von
Mises.
For the single gauges it was done with the formula for the uniaxial stress state and for the
rosettes with the formulas on the following pages. This was performed by the software Catman
Easy-AP with the E-Modulus of 210000[N/mm2] and Poisson’s ratio of 0,3.

2019-1-1 en 00 16 von 36
34
Fz1 Fz2 σvR03 σvR04 σvR06 DMS01 DMS02 DMS05

Load case Percentage
[kN] [kN] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa]
1.1 25% 11,3 -10,6 92,0 87,9 77,3 32,2 39,5 45,5
1.2 25% -11,3 11,4 89,0 92,3 86,5 -35,1 -35,5 -41,35
1.1 50% 22,5 -21,1 182,2 177,2 158,9 65,8 75,6 92,6
1.2 50% -22,5 22,6 181,0 185,0 170,7 -72,5 -76,3 -84,2
1.1 75% 33,8 -32,4 276,2 271,3 244,4 103,1 115,6 137,9
1.2 75% -33,8 34,3 276,3 281,2 257,8 -111,1 -119,3 -127,8
1.1 100% 45,0 -43,8 368,8 364,3 329,1 143,1 155,8 185,7
1.2 100% -45,0 45,8 370,6 374,8 343,2 -145,6 -160,7 -162,1
1.3 75% 67,5 -65,4 547,8 540,2 489,9 206,4 223,1 277,4
1.4 75% -67,5 69,5 555,7 562,8 512,9 -220,2 -246,3 -235,5
1.3 100% 90,0 -86,7 733,3 721,5 657,6 273,6 291,2 377,9
1.4 100% -90,0 93,6 744,3 755,5 686,6 -298,7 -337,1 -313,7
1.5 100% 100,0 -95,8 814,6 800,9 731,1 302,8 320,4 419,9
1.6 100% -100,0 104,3 830,2 843,4 766,5 -336,0 -379,5 -351,4
Table 8: Results of load case 1 – Exceptional loads
5.2 Static test – Dynamic loads

The results of the static test with dynamic loads are shown in table 9.
Fz1 Fz2 σvR03 σvR04 σvR06 DMS01 DMS02 DMS05

Load case
[kN] [kN] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa] [MPa]
2.1 52,5 -51,0 433,5 429,0 389,0 172,2 180,4 221,0
2.2 -52,5 53,6 436,1 440,5 403,2 -173,6 -196,8 -194,5
2.3 70,9 -68,8 582,2 575,6 523,3 226,7 238,7 293,8
2.4 -70,9 72,9 589,0 596,5 544,0 -239,6 -268,1 -256,7
Table 9: Results of load case 2 – Dynamic loads

2019-1-1 en 00 17 von 36
34
5.3 Fatigue test
The results of the preliminary fatigue test are shown in table 10.
Load Frequency Fz1 Fz2 DMS01 Δ-stat-dyn DMS02 Δ-stat-dyn DMS05 Δ-stat-dyn
case [Hz] [kN] [kN] [MPa] [%] [MPa] [%] [MPa] [%]
70,9 -68,8 226,7 0,0 238,7 0,0 293,8 0,0
N1 Static
-70,9 72,9 -239,6 0,0 -268,1 0,0 -256,7 0,0
70,9 -69,0 236,1 4,2 248,3 4,2 294,9 0,4
N1 0,5
-70,9 72,3 -246,8 3,0 -270,4 0,9 -265,6 3,5
70,9 -69,3 235,8 4,0 246,4 3,2 288,0 -2,0
N1 1
-70,9 71,9 -243,1 1,5 -267,0 -0,4 -268,2 4,5
Table 10: Comparison of results between static and dynamic test for strain gauges
In the following figures are shown the stress-histories of the rosettes and strain gauges.
The evaluation of the results of rosettes R03, R04 and R06 and of strain gauges DMS01,
DMS02 and DMS05 was performed with dense interval until 1,2 Mio load cycles. After 1,2 Mio
load cycle, the scope of the test was the fatigue limit of the ARB unit. Therefore, the evaluation
of the test results was performed in larger intervals in agreement with the customer.

2019-1-1 en 00 18 von 36
34
Figure 13: Time response rosettes R03, R04 and R06 until 1,0 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 19 von 36
34
Figure 14: Time response rosettes R03, R04 and R06 until 2,0 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 20 von 36
34
Figure 15: Time response of strain gauges DMS1, DMS2 and DMS5 until 1,0 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 21 von 36
34
Figure 16: Time response of strain gauges DMS1, DMS2 and DMS5 until 2,0 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 22 von 36
34
5.4 Summary
The anti-roll bar performed 2 Mio. load cycles in Stage 1 of fatigue load. The non-destructive
tests (NDT) performed during and at the end of the test on the anti-roll bar unit according to
[B1], as well as an addition NDT flux test performed only on the bar, showed no cracks or
indications of cracks. The NDT reports are listed in Attachment 5.

2019-1-1 en 00 23 von 36
34
6 Attachment
6.1 Attachment 1: Test object
Figure 17: Equipped anti-roll bar installation, [Z1] (customer document)

2019-1-1 en 00 24 von 36
34
6.2 Attachment 2: Check in list
Figure 18: Check in list 2015-3-1_BTC QS-2015-008.2A (Anti-roll bar and Lever)

2019-1-1 en 00 25 von 36
34
6.3 Attachment 3: Measurement points
Figure 19: Plan of measurement points at test specification [B1] (customer document)

2019-1-1 en 00 26 von 36
34
6.4 Attachment 4: Working plan
Figure 20: Working plan

2019-1-1 en 00 27 von 36
34
6.5 Attachment 5: Protocols for magnetic particle inspection
Figure 21: Protocol of magnetic particle inspection for anti-roll bar and lever before start of test

2019-1-1 en 00 28 von 36
34
Figure 22: Protocol of magnetic particle inspection for torsion bar and lever after 0,2 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 29 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 30 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 31 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 32 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 33 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 34 von 36
34

2019-1-1 en 00 35 von 36
34
Figure 29: Protocol of magnetic particle inspection for lever after 2,0 Mio. load cycles

2019-1-1 en 00 36 von 36
34
Figure 30: Protocol of magnetic particle Flux inspection for torsion bar after 2,0 Mio. load cycles


2019-1-1 Test-Report ARB M7 Rev00 en

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2019-1-1 Test-Report ARB M7 Rev00 en

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BTC-Testlaboratory

Test report no. 2019-1-1

BTC-Testlaboratory Technical Document Extern

21.10.2022 E.Zenuni Test report free

24.10.2022 G.Bieker 2019-1-1_Test-Report_ARB_M7_Rev00_En 00 en 2 of 36

Subject of test: Anti-roll bar M7

Date of delivery: May 09, 2019

Elaboration time: July 2019 until April 2020

Customer: Bombardier Transportation

Test Laboratory: Bombardier Transportation

Authorized test specialist: Dipl. Ing. H.-D. Dörner

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

1 ORDER AND SCOPE 6

2 STANDARDS, DOCUMENTS, DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT 6

3 TEST OBJECT AND TEST SETUP 8

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

ARB Anti-roll bar

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

2 Standards, Documents, Devices and Equipment

The sampling rate was 50 to 100Hz.

Bogie rig Instron Dynamic test of bogie components 1000006560

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

2.6 Inspection equipment

Name Manufacturer Use Serial number Calibration

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 1: Test object

In Attachment 1 is the drawing [Z1] of the ARB unit listed.

3.2 Test setup

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 2: Test setup and coordinate system

Figure 3: Lateral guidance

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 4: Fixation of torsion bar

3.3 Measurement equipment

In Figure 5 and 6 are shown the location of position sensors.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 7: Strain gauge rosette R3

Figure 8: Strain gauge rosette R4

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 9: Strain gauge rosette R6

Figure 10: Strain gauges DMS1 and DMS2

Figure 11: Strain gauge DMS5

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

During all tests, the environment temperature was 20-22°C.

4.1 Static test – Exceptional loads

4.2 Static test – Dynamic loads

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Frequency Fz1 Fz2

Stage Scale factor Fz [kN] N° of cycles

The data was continuously recorded and hourly stored.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Figure 12: Time response of cylinder forces

4.4 Measurement uncertainty

5.1 Static tests – Exceptional loads

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

Fz1 Fz2 σvR03 σvR04 σvR06 DMS01 DMS02 DMS05

5.2 Static test – Dynamic loads

Fz1 Fz2 σvR03 σvR04 σvR06 DMS01 DMS02 DMS05

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.

© 2021, Bombardier Inc. or its subsidiaries. All rights reserved.