K. Knothe, Y. Wu
Summary Vertical dynamic behaviour of a railway track on an elastic halfspace or on a
layered halfspace is investigated by a frequency domain analysis. The results are compared with
those for a simpler model, where ballast and subgrade are considered as a viscoelastic foun
dation. In the low and mediumfrequency range up to 250 Hz, great differences are observed
between the results of the halfspace model and the results of the viscoelastic foundation
model. This is because the damping due to wave propagation and coupling between sleepers
cannot be modelled correctly by a viscoelastic foundation. Contradictions observed in the
past between measured and calculated results can be explained with the new halfspace model.
For frequencies higher than 250 Hz, the in¯uence of the subgrade is negligible, so that here
the simpler viscoelastic foundation model can be used.
Key words track model, receptance, subgrade, halfspace
1
Introduction
Over the past ten years, new high speed records have been established in railway technology.
In Germany the ICE achieved a maximum speed of 410 km/h, shortly afterwards the TGV
reached 515 km/h in France, and Shinkansen in Japan ran 443 km/h. In the near future the
operational speed on new high speed lines of DB AG will be 300 km/h, and probably 350 km/h.
Axle load will increase to perhaps 25 tons or even more. New, adhesioncontrolled driving
units will guarantee that the maximum available traction can always be utilized.
The measures which have been taken in order to achieve these aims are subsystem opti
mizations. Rarely is the complete vehicle/track system taken into consideration. Previously
neglected problems have become increasingly important recently: wheels of ICE passenger cars
become outofround within several months, damage phenomena on wheel and rail tread as
well as irregular settlement of the subgrade result in an inacceptable increase in maintenance
costs.
Two aspects are common to problems of this type. On the one hand, they are longterm
variations, which come to view only for thousands or millions of wheelsets running over the
track; on the other hand, for all of these problems vehicle and track have to be dealt with as a
unique system.
Looking closer at available track models, it is evident that they are not adequate. A survey of
track models used up to 1994 can be found in [13]. Nearly all the track models, whether static
or dynamic, are based on the model of an elastic foundation for ballast and subgrade proposed
in 1867 by Winkler. Winkler's original model is still used in civil engineering to investigate
stresses in the rail and in the ballast. Zimmermann's monograph [22] dealing with Winkler's
Archive of Applied Mechanics 68 (1998) 457 ± 470 Ó SpringerVerlag 1998
457
Received 5 January 1998; accepted for publication 7 April 1998
K. Knothe, Y. Wu
Technische UniversitaÈt Berlin, Institut fuÈr Luft und Raumfahrt,
Marchst. 12, D10587 Berlin, Germany
Dedicated to Prof. Peter Haupt on the occasion of his sixtieth
birthday
The ®nancial support for this research was provided by the
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft within the Priority Program
``System Dynamics and Longterm Behaviour of Bogie, Track and
Subgrade''.
model was ®rst published in 1888; in 1953 a reprint appeared. The ®rst dynamic extension of
the model was by Timoshenko [20]. Already Winkler and Timoshenko, and later to a great
extent other authors [13], tried to clarify under which circumstances discrete support (Fig. 1b)
needs to be considered, and whether individual degrees of freedom have to be introduced for
the sleepers. Nowadays, models of this type with discretely supported sleepers are standard [11,
13, 17].
Dynamic models are used when the unknown track parameters are to be identi®ed. First, the
track is excited by a harmonic load, and the displacement at the point of excitation is measured.
The quotient of displacement amplitude and load amplitude is called direct receptance or
dynamic ¯exibility. In parallel, the receptance can be calculated [17]. The unknown data of the
track (pad and ballast parameters) have to be chosen such that an optimal adaption of mea
sured and calculated receptances is obtained [18]. In Fig. 2, measured and calculated re
ceptances of a track are compared.
EI, , µ
r
µ
r
ˆ
ˆ
Q
.
e
i t Ω
x
x
x
Rail
Rail
Rail
k
b
, c
b
k
b
, c
b
k
b
, c
b
k
u
, c
u
k
c
, c
c
l
s
k c
p
,
p
k
p
, c
p
a
c
b
Sleepers
Sleepers
Ballast
ˆ
Q
.
e
i t Ω
ˆ
Q
.
e
i t Ω
Fig. 1. a model of track on an elastic support; b model of track on a discrete support; c discrete model of
track, taking account of ballast mass and shear stiffness
10
8
10
9
10
10
0
40
80
120
160
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
(
m
/
N
)
P
h
a
s
e
l
a
g
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Frequency (Hz)
Calculation
Measurement
Measurement
Calculation
Fig. 2. Comparison between
measurement and calculation with
the model from Fig. 1c
458
Nearly all track models have one disadvantage: the subgrade is not considered. Only a
few papers e.g. [1, 3] as well as [10, 21], make an exception. In their track models, a ®nite
number of sleepers (in most cases seven) is based immediately on the subgrade. Only in the
recent paper [2], a higher number of sleepers and a layered subgrade are considered.
In the present paper, we try to include an in®nite number of discretely supported sleepers laid
either on an elastic halfspace or on a layered elastic halfspace. The ballast is modelled in a special
way which is explained latter on. Receptances of the track model including the subgrade are
calculated and compared with an elastic foundation model as well as with earlier measurements.
2
Mathematical model of track and subgrade
The mechanical model of track and subgrade is shown in Fig. 3. The system is excited through a
vertical harmonic force in order to investigate the dynamic response. For reasons of simplicity
the sleeper is assumed to be a rigid mass. The pad between the rail and the sleeper is modelled
as a viscoelastic layer. The ballast is considered to be a short elastic rod and not an elastic
layer. This is due to practical observations of impressions left by ballast blocks on ballast mats
once the ballast has been exhausted. The subgrade below the ballast rods can be either an
elastic halfspace or a layered elastic halfspace. The load between each ballast rod and the
subgrade is assumed to be uniform. As the ballast is usually tamped in such a way that the main
support is provided below the rail seat, [8], two ballast blocks are assumed below each sleeper.
The ballast is mainly elastic but a damping value can be introduced too. The elasticity of the
ballast has to be estimated by experiments, the ballast mass can be calculated.
The rail is modelled as a Timoshenko beam. Therefore, two partial differential equations are
obtained
EI
o
2
b(xY t)
ox
2
÷GA b(xY t) ÷
ow
r
(xY t)
ox
!
÷ l
r
o
2
b(xY t)
ot
2
= 0 Y (1)
GA
b(xY t)
ox
÷
o
2
w
r
(xY t)
ox
2
!
÷l
r
o
2
w
r
(xY t)
ot
2
=
÷Q(t)d(x) ÷
·
j=÷·
d(x ÷jl
s
) k
p
w
r
(xY t) ÷w
s
(jl
s
Y t) [ [ ÷c
p
ow
r
(xY t)
ot
÷
ow
s
(jl
s
Y t)
ot
! & '
X (2)
where w
r
(xY t) is the vertical displacement of the rail, b(xY t) is the slope of the cross section
of the rail and w
s
(jl
s
Y t) is the vertical sleeper displacement. The sleeper spacing is denoted as
l
s
, and the distance between sleeper `0' and sleeper `j' is jl
s
; d(x) and d(x ÷jl
s
) are Dirac
functions. A secondorder ordinary differential equation is obtained for the rigid sleeper mass
ˆ
Q(t) = Q
.
e
i t Ω
x
Rail
k
p
, c
p
Sleepers
Ballast
m
s
m
s
m
s
S
j 1
T
j 1
S
j
T
j
S
j +1
T
j +1
z, w(x,t)
Subgrade
Fig. 3. Tracksubgrade system
459
÷m
s
o
2
w
s
(jl
s
Y t)
ot
2
÷k
p
w
r
(jl
s
Y t) ÷w
s
(jl
s
Y t) [ [
÷c
p
ow
r
(jl
s
Y t)
ot
÷
ow
s
(jl
s
Y t)
ot
!
÷S
j
(jl
s
Y t) = 0 for ÷·_ j _ · X (3)
The vertical forces between sleeper and ballast are denoted by S
j
(jlsY t) and the resultant vertical
forces acting on the surface of the subgrade by T
j
(jl
s
Y t).
The cross section of the ballast block varies in vertical direction, s. Fig. 3. A system of
differential equations has to be formulated for the ballast rod
M
j
w
j
(t) ÷D
j
w
j
(t) ÷K
j
w
j
(t) =
S
j
÷T
j
& '
Y (4)
where M
j
Y K
j
and C
j
, respectively, are the mass, stiffness and damping matrix. It is suf®cient to
use only two displacements, w
T
j
(t) = w
s
Y w
f
È É
j
, where w
s
is the vertical sleeper displacement
and w
f
is the mean displacement of the foundation (subgrade) below the ballast rod.
The subgrade behaviour is described by frequencydependent vertical direct and cross re
ceptances, as explained in the next section. For a track model used in the lowfrequency range
(f _ 40 Hz) or in the mediumfrequency range (40 Hz _ f _ 400 Hz), the coupling between
two ballast rods through the subgrade is signi®cant. Even if nine sleepers are coupled through
the subgrade, an in¯uence can be seen looking at the vertical direct receptance of the track.
3
Modelling of the subgrade
3.1
General model
In order to combine track and subgrade, it is necessary to formulate coupling conditions.
This can either be done by stiffness or by ¯exibility matrices. If a track with an in®nite
number of sleepers is considered, each formulation can be transformed to the other through
inversion of the speci®c matrices.
In order to determine the dynamic stiffness matrix, displacements of rigid foundations have
to be described, and the reacting resultant forces are obtained by integration of the normal
pressure distribution over the area of the foundation. These forces are components of the
dynamic stiffness matrix.
In order to determine the ¯exibility matrix, a uniform load distribution is imposed on the
areas of the foundation, which is assumed to have no rigidity. The flexibilities are obtained
by integrating the vertical displacements over the area of the foundation.
Both formulations are illustrated in Fig. 4. The stiffness method is denoted by dark arrows,
the ¯exibility method by open arrows.
ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ ˆ T
.
e
j 2
i t Ω
T
.
e
j 1
i t Ω
T
.
e
j
i t Ω
T
.
e
j +1
i t Ω
T
.
e
j +2
i t Ω
j 2 j 1 j j +1 j +2
k
p1
c
p1
c
h1
k
h1
υ
x
w
f
G, , ν ρ
Forces acting
between ballast
and subgrade
Vehicle
trackmodel
Displacements as
structural condition
between ballast
rod and subgrade
Subgrade
model
k c
p p
,
Fig. 4. Vehicletracksubgrade model
460
The ¯exibility method is preferred for two reasons: If displacements of a rigid foundation are
prescribed, then singularities of the stress distribution are obtained at the edges of the foun
dation. This is unrealistic. If a pressure distribution if prescribed, either a uniform or any other
perhaps more realistic distribution can be used. The receptances which are obtained when
pressure distributions are prescribed are much smoother than the dynamic stiffnesses for
prescribed displacements. It is therefore much easier to ®nd analytical approximations for the
receptances which can be transformed into a timedomain model.
3.2
Analysis of dynamic flexibilities
The displacement on the surface of the halfspace or of a layered halfspace, depending on the
resultant vertical force T, is a function of the frequency f , thus, X = 2pf , and of the surface co
ordinates x and y:
w
f
(xY yY iX) =
T
Gb
f
1
(xY yY iX) ÷if
2
(xY yY iX) [ [ Y (5)
where w
f
(xY yY iX) is the surface displacement, T is the amplitude of the resulting pressure
distribution acting on the rectangular foundation, G is the shear modulus of the subgrade and
2b is the length of the foundation normal to the track direction, see Fig. 5. Functions f
1
and f
2
are real and imaginary parts of the dimensionless displacement function; they depend on the
side ratio of the rectangular foundation and on Possion's number [14, 15]. If f
1
÷if
2
is inte
grated over the area of the rectangles, complex mean displacements are obtained which can be
interpreted as direct and transfer receptances. The mean displacement within the loaded
foundation results in the discrete receptance H
00
H
00
(iX) =
1
Gb
1
4ab
a
÷a
b
÷b
f
1
(xY yY iX) ÷if
2
(xY yY iX) [ [dx dy X
The mean displacement of the rectangle below the next sleeper results in the crossreceptance
H
01
. For the next but one sleeper, the crossreceptance H
02
is obtained. The receptances H
00
,
H
01
, H
02
are shown in Fig. 6, H
03
and H
04
are shown in Fig. 7. For the investigation of the
complete track model not only the foundation on one side, as shown in Fig. 5, is loaded but
both foundations belonging to one sleeper are loaded simultaneously.
If one is interested in receptances of layered halfspaces, special computer codes must be
used, e.g. [19].
2 1 0 1 2
G, , ν ρ
w
f
2a
2a
xz plane
xy plane
Left rail
Right rail
2
b
2
b
y
x
Central axis of track
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
Fig. 5. Position of foundations on the subgrade
461
4
Continuization of discrete support and of sleeper coupling
For a discrete model below each sleeper there are ballast rods and foundations, Fig. 3. The
amplitudes of the harmonic forces acting between ballast and subgrade are denoted by
F F F T
÷2
Y T
÷1
Y T
0
Y T
1
Y T
2
F F F etc. In reality each foundation will be coupled with all the other
foundations, which means that T
0
not only provides a contribution to w
f Y0
but also to
w
f Y1
Y w
f Y2
Y w
f Y3
etc. Only a restricted number of these couplings can be taken into account within
a mechanical model. Strong couplings have to be considered, whereas weak couplings can be
neglected. It has to be investigated numerically how many couplings have to be taken into
account. In Fig. 8, a ®vesleeper coupling system is shown. This means that every sleeper is
coupled with the next and the next but one sleeper in both directions. This is true not only for
the sleeper `0', but also for the sleepers `1', `2' etc. If the number of couplings is increased by
one, the coupling H
03
between sleeper 0 and sleeper 3 has to be introduced.
For the consideration of sleeper couplings, an approximation has been introduced. In order
to explain this approximation, only the coupling to the neighbouring sleeper is considered. For
the foundation `0', the amplitude of the displacement w
f Y0
is obtained as
w
f Y0
= T
÷1
H
01
÷T
0
H
00
÷T
1
H
01
X (6)
The equation is slightly rearranged now to obtain
w
f Y0
= (T
÷1
÷2T
0
÷T
1
)H
01
÷T
0
(H
00
÷2H
01
) X
If the forces T
j
are smeared out over the sleeper spacing l
s
one gets
w
f Y0
=
(p
÷1
÷2p
0
÷p
1
)
l
2
s
H
01
l
3
s
÷p
0
(H
00
÷2H
01
)l
s
X (7)
GbH
00
dynamic flexibility
GbH
01
dynamic flexibility
GbH
02
dynamic flexibility
0.04
0.10
0.12
0.14
0
0.08
0.04
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.02
0.12
0
0.16
0.02
0.20
0.04
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
Frequency (Hz)
Frequency (Hz)
R
e
a
l
p
a
r
t
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y
p
a
r
t
Fig. 6. Direct receptance H
00
and cross
receptances H
01
Y H
02
462
Equation (7) is an algebraic difference equation. Introducing the differential quotient
instead of the difference expression, one obtains the following approximation for the dis
placement of the halfspace foundation:
w
f
(x) =
d
2
p(x)
dx
2
H
01
l
3
s
÷p(x)(H
00
÷2H
01
)l
s
Y (8)
where p(x) is a distributed load. If the coupling with the next but one sleeper, as in Fig. 8, is
considered, a fourthorder differential equation is obtained
w
f
(x) =
d
4
p(x)
dx
4
H
02
l
5
s
÷
d
2
p(x)
dx
2
(H
01
÷4H
02
)l
3
s
÷p(x)(H
00
÷2H
01
÷2H
02
)l
s
X (9)
Additional couplings can be treated in the same manner, although the mathematical expres
sions become slightly more complicated.
GbH
03
dynamic flexibility
GbH
04
dynamic flexibility
0.03
0.03
0
0
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
200
200
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
Frequency (Hz)
Frequency (Hz)
R
e
a
l
p
a
r
t
I
m
a
g
i
n
a
r
y
p
a
r
t
Fig. 7. Crossreceptances H
03
Y H
04
T
2
T
1
T
0
T
1
T
2
w
f
l
s
l
s
l
s
l
s
x
H
02
H
02
H
02
H
02
H
02
H
01
H
01
H
01
H
01
Fig. 8. Interaction of foun
dations on the subgrade
463
The continuization of intersleeper coupling means thus that algebraic difference
equations for the subgrade, Eq. (7), are transformed into differential equations, which allows
for effects transmitted through distance. This procedure of course is not completely new;
for example, it has been proposed in [16] to substitute Wintkler's foundation by another type of
foundation, where p(x) would be not only proportional to w
f
(x) but also to its second de
rivative w
//
f
(x). In our procedure, w
f
(x) is proportional to p(x) and p
//
(x). The approach [16]
is a stiffness formulation, while our approach is a flexibility formulation. If a general computer
code for a layered elastic halfspace is available, then it is also possible to determine the
coef®cients for the stiffness formulations and thus for the stiffness approach [16].
5
Solution strategy
As shown in the last section, the discrete support of the sleepers including the coupling
between sleepers could be continuized (smeared out). To obtain the corresponding approxi
mate solution, the Dirac functions in Eqs. (1), (2) and (3) are no longer necessary. Instead of
using jl
s
, the local dependence may be expressed by x. The same kind of approximation is
normally used for Winkler's foundation, and it is well known that only slight deviations are
found up to 600 Hz.
In the present paper the continuized system is solved in the frequency domain. The local
dependency and the time dependency are therefore given by
w
f
(xY t) = w
f
(x)e
iXt
X (10)
This and similar expressions are introduced into Eqs. (1), (2), (3) and (4). The system of partial
differential equations is thus transformed into a system of ordinary ones. Next, a Fourier
transformation is performed
w
f
(ia) =
·
÷·
w
f
(x)e
iax
dx X (11)
The result is an algebraic system of equations where the complex Fourier variable a acts as
an eigenvalue. The linear, algebraic eigenvalue problem has to be solved numerically,
after which the general solution for the displacements w
f
(x)Y w
r
(x) and for the forces t
f
(x)
is obtained by an inverse Fourier transformation
w
f
(x) =
1
2p
·
÷·
w
f
(ia)e
÷iax
da X (12)
The improper integral in Eq. (12) has to be solved using Cauchy's residue theorem, see [9, 12].
The procedure as a whole is illustrated in Fig. 9.
6
Results
Unless otherwise stated, the following parameters have been used for the numerical analysis:
v UIC 60 rail: l
r
= 60X3 kgamY l
r
= 0X24 kgmY EI = 6X41 ×10
6
Nm
2
Y GA = 2X62 ×10
8
NY
v Pad: k
p
= 2X8 ×10
8
NamY c
p
= 3X0 ×10
4
Nsam,
v Rigid B 70 sleeper: m
s
= 290 kg,
v Ballast: E
b
= 2X08 ×10
8
Nam
2
, mass density q = 1800 kgam
3
, thickness 0.3 m,
v Foundation of ballast rod on the subgrade: 2a = 0X468 mY 2b = 1X0 mY
v Subgrade: v
s
= 155 mas , Poisson's ratio 0.4, mass density 1800 kgam
3
.
6.1
Static deflection
Compared with Winkler's foundation, a different behaviour is observed for an elastic
halfspace. If a load is acting on the halfspace, a displacement occurs not only for the
rectangular foundation where the load is acting but also for the neighbouring foundations.
Looking at Fig. 10, the de¯ection of the rail is shown up to 5 m in both directions near the load.
The full line which is denoted as without coupling corresponds to a rail on Winkler's
foundation. At a certain distance from the load the rail lifts off.
464
The more sleeper couplings are taken into account, the more the zero crossing of the
de¯ection is displaced from the load. If more than four sleepers in both directions are coupled,
only a very slight liftoff can be observed. It has to be expected that no more liftoff occurs if the
number of sleeper couplings is further increased. Even in this case, traction forces between
sleeper and ballast will occur in certain ranges of the rail.
6.2
Track receptances
The track receptance (dynamic ¯exibility) is de®ned as the ratio of the rail displacement to the
exciting force. As harmonic excitation is assumed, of course, only the amplitudes of dis
placement and force need to be considered. If the frequencydependent receptance
of the rail is available for the whole frequency range, then all static and dynamic properties
of the track with respect to the point of excitation and the point of the displacement are
available.
In our calculation, ®rst the subgrade is considered as a homogeneous elastic halfspace.
However it is also possible to consider a layered halfspace with locally dependent parameters
(e.g. Young's modulus, mass density etc.). Figure 11 shows how the calculated direct receptance
depends on the number of sleeper couplings which have been considered. The thick, full line is
obtained for a system where no couplings have been considered. A pronounced maximum
can be observed near 60 Hz. Compared with Winkler's foundation, there are two reasons why
this ®rst maximum appears for a comparatively low frequency. On the one hand, not only
rail and sleepers but also the ballast rod are vibrating on the subgrade. On the other hand,
at 60 Hz the direct receptance of the subgrade is still comparatively high, see Fig. 6.
For all the other curves, the coupling has been considered, however for a different
number of sleepers. Concerning the coupling it should be kept in mind that the coupling in
question is an `overlapping' coupling. If e.g. a coupling between nine ballast foundations is
considered, as in the lower part of Fig. 11, then this coupling is valid not only for every sleeper
1 but also for sleeper 2, 3 etc. After the continuization, an ordinary differential equation of
eighth order is obtained. Looking at the curves for different types of coupling, qualitatively
similar results are obtained. The static receptance has always the highest value. For an in
creasing frequency, the receptance decreases; one gets relative maximum values at 70 Hz,
135 Hz and 225 Hz. The maximum at approximately 135 Hz makes a half of the static value.
The minimum value, which is less than 207 of the static value, is found at 270 Hz; then the
receptance increases slightly up to approximately 470 Hz.
One is inclined to interpret the different maxima as resonance peaks of the same type as
they appear for a Winkler's foundation. This interpretation would be wrong. Rather, the
Partial differential equations for
the tracksubgrade model
Fourier transformation
Algebraic equations:
eigenvalue equation for the Fourier variable α
Eigenvalues and eigenvectors
Consideration of boundary condition
and of the load acting on the rail
Inverse transformation using Cauchy’s residual theorem
Solution for the displacements and the forces
acting on the subgrade
Fig. 9. Solution procedure for the continuized
track/subgrade system
465
maxima are a result of wave propagation effects. At frequencies of 70 Hz, 135 Hz and 225
Hz, evidently, the ballast foundation obstructs the wave propagation least of all.
The same calculation has been performed for stiff, medium and soft soil (wave propagation
speeds v
s
= 236X1 mas, 154.6 m/s and 78.7 m/s, respectively). The subgrade receptances
have been provided by the Soil Dynamics Section of TU Berlin (Prof. S. A. Savidis,
R. Hirschauer)
H
04
H
01
H
01
H
02
H
03
H
04
H
02
H
03
4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4
Number of
the foundations
H
01
H
01
H
01
H
01
H
02
H
02
H
02
H
03
H
03
H
04 With couplings
With couplings
With coupling
With couplings
Without coupling
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
Frequency (Hz)
...... ......
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
(
x
1
0
m
/
N
)

9
Q(t) = Q
.
e
i t Ω
x Rail
k
p
, c
p
Sleepers
Ballast rod
m
s
m
s
m
s
Subgrade
ˆ
+ + +
+ +
+
Fig. 11. In¯uence of the number of sleeper couplings on rail receptances (wave propagation speed
v
s
= 155 m/s)
Wheel load (ton)
0.12
0.10
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5
D
e
f
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
(
m
m
/
t
)
Distance (m)
H
01
H
04
H
02
H
01
H
02
H
03
H
04
H
03
4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4
Number of
the foundations
H
01
With couplings
With couplings
With coupling
With couplings
Without coupling
H
01
H
02
H
03
H
04 + + +
H
01
H
02
H
03 + +
H
01
H
02
+
Fig. 10. In¯uence of different sleeper couplings on the static de¯ection of the rail
466
The spectrum of receptances is shown in Figs. 12 and 13. Again, a variety of maxima can be
found, most of them for soft soil. In all three cases for frequencies higher than 400 Hz, the
receptances are quite similar. This makes clear that in the lowfrequency range
(0 Hz _ f _ 40 Hz) as well as in the mediumfrequency range (40 Hz _ f _ 400 Hz) the re
ceptances are governed by the soil properties, whereas in the highfrequency range
(f _ 400 Hz) the pad behaviour is dominant.
In order to control the procedure of continuization, a model with completely discrete sleeper
couplings has been developed additionally. Its theory will be presented elsewhere. Here, only
the results are shown, Fig. 14. The receptance for the discretely supported track has been
calculated for a harmonic force acting between two sleepers, and compared with the results of
the model with continuized support. The results are nearly the same. The receptances of the
discretely supported track model are slightly higher, due to the bending of the rail between two
sleepers. In both cases ®vesleeper coupling has been considered. While the receptances of the
model with discretesleeper support have been calculated up to 1200 Hz, the model with
continuization has only been calculated for values up to 600 Hz. The sharp maximum at
1070 Hz is a result of the discrete support. The corresponding vibration mode of the rail is
often called `pinnedpinnedmode'. Apart from this resonance peak, all the other effects can be
obtained with a model where the discrete support and the coupling between sleepers has been
continuized. The model with continuization is much easier to be dealt with and is therefore
preferred.
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
Frequency (Hz)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
(
x
1
0
m
/
N
)

8
0.1
0.5
1
2
3
Medium subgrade
( = 154.6 m/s) υ
s
Soft subgrade
( = 78.7 m/s) υ
s
Stiff subgrade
( = 236.1 m/s) υ
s
Fig. 12. In¯uence of soil subgrade
properties on track receptances
600 500 400 300 200 100 0
Frequency (Hz)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
(
x
1
0
m
/
N
)

9
1 1 2 3 System
System 2
System 3
m/s m/s m/s
m/s m/s
200 200 200
140 260
= = =
= =
s s s
s s
υ υ υ
υ υ
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Fig. 13. In¯uence of layered half
space on track receptances (thick
ness of the layer 1.15 m)
467
7
Comparison with other available results and with measurements
Only few track de¯ection measurements are available for the frequency range from 0 Hz to
some hundreds Hz. More than 30 years ago Birmann [5, 6] and Betzhold [4] measured the
de¯ections of rail and sleeper and the displacements at several points on the planum and in
the subgrade for an electric locomotive running over the measurement section. These results
have been already used in order to get realistic values for the ballast stiffness. More interesting
are receptance measurements. A comparison of measured and adapted calculated results
has already been shown in Fig. 2. The agreement is excellent, but only for frequencies higher
than 100 Hz. As the model which has been used for adaptation is a Timoshenko beam on
Frequency (Hz)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l
r
e
c
e
p
t
a
n
c
e
(
x
1
0
m
/
N
)

9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1200 1000 500 0
Discretely supported track model
Continuously supported track model
Fig. 14. Vertical direct
receptances for discretely
supported track model and for
a track model with continuization
of discrete support
M 10D
Crossbeam
M 3D
M 1D
excitation
Harmonic
M 5D
Sleeper
Ballast
Fig. 15. Measurements
on track (measuring point:
M 3D, on the head of rail),
from [7]
468
Winkler's foundation, Fig. 1, the calculated receptance decreases for low frequencies whereas
the measured receptance increases for decreasing frequency values. The theoretical results of
Fig. 13 therefore agree qualitatively with the measured results of Fig. 2.
Between 1970 and 1980, Krupp Industrie und Stahlbau (KIS) developed special receptance
measurement equipment. Some of the measurements have been published [7]. Figure 15 shows
displacement amplitudes calculated from measured accelerations. A static preload of 100 kN
and an amplitude of 10 kN for the harmonically varying load have been used. The rail dis
placement of the measurement point M 3D is proportional to the direct receptance of the rail.
Two phenomena can be observed in Fig. 15. First, there is an increase in the receptance
(displacement amplitude) below 50 Hz; secondly, there is a pronounced maximum of the
displacement amplitude (receptance) near 120 Hz.
Hitherto the maximum at 120 Hz has been interpreted as the resonance of rail and sleeper
mass moving on a Winkler foundation, whereas the increase below 50 Hz has been neglected.
The model presented here is able to explain both effects consistently.
8
Conclusions
(a) With the new model, a separate treatment of ballast and subgrade is possible. If ex
periments were performed where sleeper and planum displacements would have been mea
sured separately, then an adaption to both values could be possible.
(b) Looking at the static de¯ection of the rail, signi®cant deviations are observed as com
pared with the results of a Winklerfoundation model. No geometrical liftoff of the rail and the
sleepers exists any longer. However, weak tension forces still may occur between rail and
sleeper and between sleeper and ballast some distance away from the load.
(c) The most surprising result is that the track receptances between 0 Hz and 200 Hz are
distinctly different when a halfspace model is used instead of a viscoelastic foundation model
(generalized Winkler foundation). Using the foundation model, a maximum of the receptance
(resonance) is found between 100 Hz and 200 Hz. For lower frequencies, the amplitude of the
receptance decreases, and a minimum value is obtained for the static case. If, however, a
halfspace model is used, then the receptance increases if the frequency is decreased below
100 Hz; usually a maximum value is obtained for the static case. Certain other maxima in the
frequency range up to 200 Hz are due to wave propagation and must not be interpreted as
resonance phenomena.
(d) Discrepancies between measured receptances and simulation results based on founda
tion models could until now be only insuf®ciently explained by measurements. By the use of
the halfspace model the measurement results can be explained consistently.
(e) Concerning the number of sleeper couplings which needs to be considered, the following
applies:
v For static analysis, at least an overlapping threesleeper coupling is necessary in order to
avoid an error of up to 30%.
v For the investigation of receptances, at least an overlapping ®vesleeper coupling should be
considered.
(f) In the frequency range below 200 Hz, a correct consideration of the subgrade is man
datory. This mainly concerns all simulations where the loads acting on the ballast and long
term variations (ballast settlement) are of interest. For the problem of outofround wheels,
frequencies between 50 Hz and 120 Hz are relevant, so halfspace models should be used for
these simulations. For frequencies higher than 250 Hz, the in¯uence of the subgrade diminishes
and the in¯uence of the railpad becomes dominant. Therefore, for highfrequency problems
like rail corrugation investigations or acoustic problems, the foundation models are suf®cient.
(g) Nonlinear ballast laws and ballast settlement laws require a separation into ballast and
subgrade and correct subgrade modelling.
References
1. Auersch, L.: Zur Parametererregung des RadSchieneSystems: Berechnung der FahrzeugFahrweg
UntergrundDynamik und experimentelle Veri®kation am Hochgeschwindigkeitszug Intercity
Experimental. Ing.Arch. 60 (1990) 141±156
2. Auersch, L.: Vehicle/track interaction and soil dynamics. In I. Zobory (Ed.): The dynamics of vehicles
on roads and on tracks. Proc. of the 15th IAVSD Symposium held at Budapest/Hungary, August 1997.
To be published in: Supplement to Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 28, 1998. Lisse: Swets &
Zeitlinger
469
3. Auersch, L.; Rohrmann, R.; RuÈcker, W.; Said, S.: FahrzegFahrwegUntergrundUmgebung: the
oretische, rechnerische und meûtechnische Untersuchungen. In: Dynamik fortschrittlicher Bahnsy
steme. VDI Berichte 635 (1987) 56±87
4. Betzhold, Ch.: ErhoÈhung der Beanspruchung des Eisenbahnoberbanes durch Wechselwirkung zwisc
hen Fahrzeug und Oberbau. Glasers Annalen, 81 (1957) 76±82, 108±115, 137±145
5. Birmann, F.: Neuere Messungen an Gleisen mit verschiedenen Unterschwellungen. Eisenbahn tech
nische Rundschau, 6 (1957) 229±246
6. Birmann, F.: Track parameters, static and dynamic. Proc. Instn. Mech. Eng., 180 Pt 3F (1965) 73±85
7. Budde, U.: Ergebnisse der Messungen zu Ermittlung der Lagegenauigkeit und der dynamischen Pa
rameter eines Gleises. Technischer Bericht, Statusseminar V, SpurgefuÈhrter Fernverkehr±Rad/Schiene
Technik, Willingen, 1978
8. Esveld, C.: Modern Railway Track. Duisburg: MRTProductions 1989
9. FryÂba, L.: Vibration of solids and structures under moving loads. Groningen: Noordhof International
Publishing 1972
10. Huber, G.; Prange, B.; Triantafyllidis, Th.: Dynamische Wechselwirkung von Untergrund und Ober
bau. VDIBerichte, Nr. 510 (1984) 317±322
11. Ilias, H.: Nichtlineare Wechselwirkungen von Radsatz und Gleis beim U
È
berrollen von Pro®lstoÈrungen.
VDI FortschrittBerichte, Reihe 12, Nr. 297. DuÈsseldorf: VDIVerlag 1996
12. Ilias, H.; Knothe K.: Ein diskretkontinuierliches Gleismodell unter Ein¯uû schnell bewegter,
hamonisch schwankender Wanderlasten. VDI FortschrittBerichte, Reihe 12, Nr. 171. DuÈsseldorf: VDI
Verlag 1992
13. Knothe, K.; Grassie, S. L.: Modelling of railway track and vehicle/track interaction at high frequencies.
Vehicle System Dynamics, 22 (1993) 209±262
14. Knothe, K.; Wu, Y.: Rechteckfundament auf elastischem Halbraum  Ein einfaches Ersatzmodell fuÈr
Frequenzbereichs und Zeitbereichsrechnungen. To appear in: Bauingenieur Band (1998)
15. Knothe, K.; Wu, Y.: Erfassung der Halbraumeigenschaft des Untergrundes fuÈr die Berechnung der
FahrzeugFahrwegWechselwirkung. ILRMitteilung 316, Institut fuÈr Luftund Raumfahrt, Technische
UniversitaÈt Berlin, 1997
16. Pasternak, P. L.: Basis of a new method for the calculation of structures on elastic foundation using two
bed coef®cients. Moscow: Gosstroiizdat 1954
17. Ripke, B.: Hochfrequente Gleismodellierung und Simulation der FahrzeugGleisDynamik unter Ver
wendung einer nichtlinearen Kontaktmechanik. VDIFortschrittBerichte, Reihe 12, Nr. 249. DuÈssel
dorf: VDIVerlag 1995
18. Ripke, B.: Anpassung der Modellparameter eines Gleismodells an gemessene Gleisrezeptanzen. ILR
Mitteilung 274. Institut fuÈr Luft und Raumfahrt, Technische UniversitaÈt Berlin, 1992
19. Sarfeld, W.; Savidis, S. A.; Schuppe, R.; Klapperich, H.: Three dimensional dynamic interaction of ties.
Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Stockholm, 3 (1981) 287±292
20. Timoshenko, S.: Method of analysis of statical and dynamical stresses in rail. Proc. Second Int.
Congress for Appl. Mech. (1926) 407±418
21. Triantafyllidis, T.; Prange, B.: MitgefuÈhrte Biegelinie beim Hochgeschwindigkeitszug ``ICE''Teil I:
Theoretische Grundlagen und Teil II: Vergleich zwischen theoretischen und experimentellen
Ergebnissen. Arch. Appl. Mech. 64 (1994) 154±179
22. Zimmermann, H.: Berechnung des Eisenoberbaues (3. Au¯age). Berlin: Ernst und Sohn 1941
470
eiΩt EI. 2. taking account of ballast mass and shear stiffness model was ®rst published in 1888. First. Nowadays. The unknown data of the track (pad and ballast parameters) have to be chosen such that an optimal adaption of measured and calculated receptances is obtained [18]. measured and calculated receptances of a track are compared. cb kb. In parallel. in 1953 a reprint appeared. cb ls a b ˆ Q.e iΩt x x Rail Rail kp. 17].eiΩt x Rail Sleepers 458 kp. 13. µr. and the displacement at the point of excitation is measured. the track is excited by a harmonic load. Comparison between measurement and calculation with the model from Fig. Vertical receptance (m/N) 108 Calculation 109 Measurement 1010 0 Calculation Phase lag 40 80 120 160 Measurement 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Frequency (Hz) 1200 1400 1600 Fig. cu c kc. cp kb. and whether individual degrees of freedom have to be introduced for the sleepers. 2. cp Sleepers kb. The ®rst dynamic extension of the model was by Timoshenko [20]. b model of track on a discrete support. c discrete model of track. Dynamic models are used when the unknown track parameters are to be identi®ed. cc Ballast Fig. a model of track on an elastic support. tried to clarify under which circumstances discrete support (Fig. 1b) needs to be considered.ˆ Q. cb ku. the receptance can be calculated [17]. models of this type with discretely supported sleepers are standard [11. ˆ r µ ˆ Q. Already Winkler and Timoshenko. 1c . The quotient of displacement amplitude and load amplitude is called direct receptance or dynamic ¯exibility. and later to a great extent other authors [13]. In Fig. 1.
eiΩt x kp. [8]. In their track models. 2 Mathematical model of track and subgrade The mechanical model of track and subgrade is shown in Fig. 3] as well as [10. a ®nite number of sleepers (in most cases seven) is based immediately on the subgrade. This is due to practical observations of impressions left by ballast blocks on ballast mats once the ballast has been exhausted. The system is excited through a vertical harmonic force in order to investigate the dynamic response. Receptances of the track model including the subgrade are calculated and compared with an elastic foundation model as well as with earlier measurements.g. The ballast is modelled in a special way which is explained latter on. Only in the recent paper [2]. As the ballast is usually tamped in such a way that the main support is provided below the rail seat. the ballast mass can be calculated. [1. and the distance between sleeper `0' and sleeper `j' is jls . The ballast is considered to be a short elastic rod and not an elastic layer. b xY t is the slope of the cross section of the rail and ws jls Y t is the vertical sleeper displacement. The sleeper spacing is denoted as ls . d x and d x À jls are Dirac functions. we try to include an in®nite number of discretely supported sleepers laid either on an elastic halfspace or on a layered elastic halfspace.t) Fig. 21]. For reasons of simplicity the sleeper is assumed to be a rigid mass. w(x. The elasticity of the ballast has to be estimated by experiments. cp ms Sj 1 ms Sj ms Sj +1 Ballast Sleepers Rail 459 Tj 1 Tj Tj +1 Subgrade z. The ballast is mainly elastic but a damping value can be introduced too. make an exception. two partial differential equations are obtained ! o2 b xY t owr xY t o2 b xY t À lr EI À GA b xY t 0 Y 1 ox2 ox ot2 ! b xY t o2 wr xY t o2 wr xY t À lr GA ox ox2 ot 2 & !' I owr xY t ows jls Y t d x À jls kp wr xY t À ws jls Y t cp À X 2 À Q td x ot ot jÀI where wr xY t is the vertical displacement of the rail.ˆ Q(t) = Q. Tracksubgrade system Nearly all track models have one disadvantage: the subgrade is not considered. The rail is modelled as a Timoshenko beam. The load between each ballast rod and the subgrade is assumed to be uniform. Therefore. A secondorder ordinary differential equation is obtained for the rigid sleeper mass . a higher number of sleepers and a layered subgrade are considered. 3. Only a few papers e. The subgrade below the ballast rods can be either an elastic halfspace or a layered elastic halfspace. The pad between the rail and the sleeper is modelled as a viscoelastic layer. In the present paper. 3. two ballast blocks are assumed below each sleeper.
eiΩt Tj +2. υ kp1 Vehicletrackmodel cp1 kh1 ch1 x kp. where ws is the vertical sleeper displacement j and wf is the mean displacement of the foundation (subgrade) below the ballast rod. respectively. 4. s. The stiffness method is denoted by dark arrows. These forces are components of the dynamic stiffness matrix. the ¯exibility method by open arrows. as explained in the next section. and the reacting resultant forces are obtained by integration of the normal pressure distribution over the area of the foundation. For a track model used in the lowfrequency range f 40 Hz or in the mediumfrequency range 40 Hz f 400 Hz.eiΩt Tj . an in¯uence can be seen looking at the vertical direct receptance of the track. ν. In order to determine the ¯exibility matrix. which is assumed to have no rigidity. If a track with an in®nite number of sleepers is considered. each formulation can be transformed to the other through inversion of the speci®c matrices. displacements of rigid foundations have to be described. 3.eiΩt j +1 j +2 G. The cross section of the ballast block varies in vertical direction. Vehicletracksubgrade model .1 General model In order to combine track and subgrade. a uniform load distribution is imposed on the areas of the foundation. Even if nine sleepers are coupled through the subgrade. 3 Modelling of the subgrade 3. Fig. are the mass. the coupling between two ballast rods through the subgrade is signi®cant. It is suf®cient to È É use only two displacements. In order to determine the dynamic stiffness matrix. 4.À ms o2 ws jls Y t kp wr jls Y t À ws jls Y t ot 2 ! owr jls Y t ows jls Y t À À Sj jls Y t 0 for À I cp ot ot j I X 3 The vertical forces between sleeper and ballast are denoted by Sj jlsY t and the resultant vertical forces acting on the surface of the subgrade by Tj jls Y t. The subgrade behaviour is described by frequencydependent vertical direct and cross receptances. Both formulations are illustrated in Fig. it is necessary to formulate coupling conditions. wT t ws Y wf j . stiffness and damping matrix. The flexibilities are obtained by integrating the vertical displacements over the area of the foundation.eiΩt j 2 j 1 j ˆ ˆ Tj +1. ρ Forces acting between ballast and subgrade Subgrademodel wf Fig. This can either be done by stiffness or by ¯exibility matrices. cp Displacements as structural condition between ballast rod and subgrade ˆ ˆ ˆ Tj 2. A system of differential equations has to be formulated for the ballast rod & 460 Mj wj t Dj wj t Kj wj t Sj ÀTj ' Y 4 where Mj Y Kj and Cj .eiΩt Tj 1.
If f1 if2 is integrated over the area of the rectangles. 6. and of the surface coordinates x and y: wf xY yY iX T f1 xY yY iX if2 xY yY iX Y Gb 5 461 where wf xY yY iX is the surface displacement.The ¯exibility method is preferred for two reasons: If displacements of a rigid foundation are prescribed. For the investigation of the complete track model not only the foundation on one side. It is therefore much easier to ®nd analytical approximations for the receptances which can be transformed into a timedomain model. 3. 5. T is the amplitude of the resulting pressure distribution acting on the rectangular foundation. If one is interested in receptances of layered halfspaces. see Fig. H01 . The receptances which are obtained when pressure distributions are prescribed are much smoother than the dynamic stiffnesses for prescribed displacements. X 2pf . special computer codes must be used. H02 are shown in Fig. 15]. For the next but one sleeper. G is the shear modulus of the subgrade and 2b is the length of the foundation normal to the track direction. is loaded but both foundations belonging to one sleeper are loaded simultaneously. as shown in Fig.g. If a pressure distribution if prescribed. Position of foundations on the subgrade 2b . ρ 1 2 xz. The receptances H00 . 5. the crossreceptance H02 is obtained. [19]. The mean displacement within the loaded foundation results in the discrete receptance H00 H00 iX 1 1 Gb 4ab a b Àa Àb f1 xY yY iX if2 xY yY iXdx dy X The mean displacement of the rectangle below the next sleeper results in the crossreceptance H01 .plane Left rail 2b Central axis of track x y Right rail ls ls ls ls Fig. 2 1 0 2a G. ν. either a uniform or any other perhaps more realistic distribution can be used.plane wf 2a xy. e. H03 and H04 are shown in Fig. then singularities of the stress distribution are obtained at the edges of the foundation. complex mean displacements are obtained which can be interpreted as direct and transfer receptances. is a function of the frequency f . Functions f1 and f2 are real and imaginary parts of the dimensionless displacement function. 5. depending on the resultant vertical force T.2 Analysis of dynamic flexibilities The displacement on the surface of the halfspace or of a layered halfspace. This is unrealistic. they depend on the side ratio of the rectangular foundation and on Possion's number [14. thus. 7.
the coupling H03 between sleeper 0 and sleeper 3 has to be introduced.20 0. This means that every sleeper is coupled with the next and the next but one sleeper in both directions. whereas weak couplings can be neglected. which means that T0 not only provides a contribution to wf Y0 but also to wf Y1 Y wf Y2 Y wf Y3 etc.14 0 50 50 GbH00 dynamic flexibility GbH01 dynamic flexibility GbH02 dynamic flexibility 100 Frequency (Hz) 150 200 100 Frequency (Hz) 150 200 Fig. This is true not only for the sleeper `0'.08 0. an approximation has been introduced.12 0. only the coupling to the neighbouring sleeper is considered. 3. The amplitudes of the harmonic forces acting between ballast and subgrade are denoted by F F F TÀ2 Y TÀ1 Y T0 Y T1 Y T2 F F F etc.04 0.08 0.462 4 Continuization of discrete support and of sleeper coupling For a discrete model below each sleeper there are ballast rods and foundations. Only a restricted number of these couplings can be taken into account within a mechanical model.04 0.04 0 0. 8. For the foundation `0'. `2' etc. Strong couplings have to be considered.16 Real part 0. For the consideration of sleeper couplings. In order to explain this approximation.12 0. the amplitude of the displacement wf Y0 is obtained as wf Y0 TÀ1 H01 T0 H00 T1 H01 X The equation is slightly rearranged now to obtain 6 wf Y0 TÀ1 À 2T0 T1 H01 T0 H00 2H01 X If the forces Tj are smeared out over the sleeper spacing ls one gets wf Y0 pÀ1 À 2p0 p1 H01 l3 p0 H00 2H01 ls X s l2 s 7 0. It has to be investigated numerically how many couplings have to be taken into account.02 0. a ®vesleeper coupling system is shown. 6.10 0. In reality each foundation will be coupled with all the other foundations.04 0 0.02 0 Imaginary part 0.06 0. If the number of couplings is increased by one. but also for the sleepers `1'. Fig. Direct receptance H00 and crossreceptances H01 Y H02 . In Fig.
although the mathematical expressions become slightly more complicated.03 GbH03 dynamic flexibility GbH04 dynamic flexibility 0 50 100 Frequency (Hz) 150 200 Fig.01 Real part 0 0. Crossreceptances H03 Y H04 Equation (7) is an algebraic difference equation. T2 T1 T0 T1 T2 H01 H01 H01 H01 x H02 wf H02 H02 H02 H02 ls ls ls ls Fig. 8.03 463 0 50 100 Frequency (Hz) 150 200 0. 8.01 0. one obtains the following approximation for the displacement of the halfspace foundation: wf x d2 p x H01 l3 p x H00 2H01 ls Y s dx2 8 where p x is a distributed load.03 0.01 0 0.03 0. a fourthorder differential equation is obtained wf x d4 p x d2 p x H02 l5 H01 4H02 l3 p x H00 2H01 2H02 ls X s s dx4 dx2 9 Additional couplings can be treated in the same manner.02 0. Introducing the differential quotient instead of the difference expression.02 0. If the coupling with the next but one sleeper.0. as in Fig.02 Imaginary part 0. is considered.01 0.02 0. Interaction of foundations on the subgrade . 7.
the Dirac functions in Eqs. thickness 0. In our procedure. (1). Ballast: Eb 2X08 Â 108 Nam2 . 464 5 Solution strategy As shown in the last section. mass density q 1800 kgam3 . Instead of using jls . Foundation of ballast rod on the subgrade: 2a 0X468 mY 2b 1X0 mY Subgrade: vs 155 mas . (3) and (4). The linear. If a load is acting on the halfspace. see [9. algebraic eigenvalue problem has to be solved numerically. At a certain distance from the load the rail lifts off.The continuization of intersleeper coupling means thus that algebraic difference equations for the subgrade. (2) and (3) are no longer necessary. The procedure as a whole is illustrated in Fig. The approach [16] f is a stiffness formulation. 12]. then it is also possible to determine the coef®cients for the stiffness formulations and thus for the stiffness approach [16].4. The local dependency and the time dependency are therefore given by wf xY t wf xeiXt X 10 This and similar expressions are introduced into Eqs. (1). The system of partial differential equations is thus transformed into a system of ordinary ones. . The full line which is denoted as without coupling corresponds to a rail on Winkler's foundation. 10. mass density 1800 kgam3 . the discrete support of the sleepers including the coupling between sleepers could be continuized (smeared out). where p x would be not only proportional to wf x but also to its second derivative wHH x. This procedure of course is not completely new. wf x is proportional to p x and pHH x. The same kind of approximation is normally used for Winkler's foundation.1 Static deflection Compared with Winkler's foundation. for example. the local dependence may be expressed by x. To obtain the corresponding approximate solution.3 m. (7). are transformed into differential equations. 6. the de¯ection of the rail is shown up to 5 m in both directions near the load. after which the general solution for the displacements wf xY wr x and for the forces tf x is obtained by an inverse Fourier transformation 1 wf x 2p I ÀI wf iaeÀiax da X 12 The improper integral in Eq. a displacement occurs not only for the rectangular foundation where the load is acting but also for the neighbouring foundations. which allows for effects transmitted through distance. Eq. Looking at Fig. it has been proposed in [16] to substitute Wintkler's foundation by another type of foundation. 6 Results Unless otherwise stated. (12) has to be solved using Cauchy's residue theorem. a different behaviour is observed for an elastic halfspace. Poisson's ratio 0. while our approach is a flexibility formulation. the following parameters have been used for the numerical analysis: UIC 60 rail: lr 60X3 kgamY lr 0X24 kgmY EI 6X41 Â 106 Nm2 Y GA 2X62 Â 108 NY Pad: kp 2X8 Â 108 NamY cp 3X0 Â 104 Nsam. and it is well known that only slight deviations are found up to 600 Hz. If a general computer code for a layered elastic halfspace is available. Next. 9. (2). In the present paper the continuized system is solved in the frequency domain. Rigid B 70 sleeper: ms 290 kg. a Fourier transformation is performed wf ia I ÀI wf xeiax dx X 11 The result is an algebraic system of equations where the complex Fourier variable a acts as an eigenvalue.
qualitatively similar results are obtained. Young's modulus. mass density etc. which is less than 207 of the static value. As harmonic excitation is assumed. a coupling between nine ballast foundations is considered.). For all the other curves. Solution procedure for the continuized track/subgrade system . ®rst the subgrade is considered as a homogeneous elastic halfspace. the coupling has been considered. then the receptance increases slightly up to approximately 470 Hz. full line is obtained for a system where no couplings have been considered. If more than four sleepers in both directions are coupled. at 60 Hz the direct receptance of the subgrade is still comparatively high. On the one hand. is found at 270 Hz. 3 etc. 6. 135 Hz and 225 Hz. 6. On the other hand. one gets relative maximum values at 70 Hz. 11. After the continuization. Even in this case.g. For an increasing frequency. of course. The maximum at approximately 135 Hz makes a half of the static value. If e. there are two reasons why this ®rst maximum appears for a comparatively low frequency. then this coupling is valid not only for every sleeper 1 but also for sleeper 2. the receptance decreases.2 Track receptances The track receptance (dynamic ¯exibility) is de®ned as the ratio of the rail displacement to the exciting force. Compared with Winkler's foundation. however for a different number of sleepers.The more sleeper couplings are taken into account. then all static and dynamic properties of the track with respect to the point of excitation and the point of the displacement are available. as in the lower part of Fig. The minimum value. It has to be expected that no more liftoff occurs if the number of sleeper couplings is further increased. an ordinary differential equation of eighth order is obtained. If the frequencydependent receptance of the rail is available for the whole frequency range. traction forces between sleeper and ballast will occur in certain ranges of the rail.g. In our calculation. However it is also possible to consider a layered halfspace with locally dependent parameters (e. not only rail and sleepers but also the ballast rod are vibrating on the subgrade. Concerning the coupling it should be kept in mind that the coupling in question is an `overlapping' coupling. only a very slight liftoff can be observed. This interpretation would be wrong. the 465 Partial differential equations for the tracksubgrade model Fourier transformation Algebraic equations: eigenvalue equation for the Fourier variable α Eigenvalues and eigenvectors Consideration of boundary condition and of the load acting on the rail Inverse transformation using Cauchy’s residual theorem Solution for the displacements and the forces acting on the subgrade Fig. Rather. One is inclined to interpret the different maxima as resonance peaks of the same type as they appear for a Winkler's foundation. Looking at the curves for different types of coupling. The static receptance has always the highest value. Figure 11 shows how the calculated direct receptance depends on the number of sleeper couplings which have been considered. only the amplitudes of displacement and force need to be considered. The thick. A pronounced maximum can be observed near 60 Hz. see Fig. 9. the more the zero crossing of the de¯ection is displaced from the load.
02 Deflection (mm/t) 0.. 11.7 m/s.. cp Sleepers Ballast rod Subgrade Number of . evidently. R... A. The subgrade receptances have been provided by the Soil Dynamics Section of TU Berlin (Prof.eiΩt x ms ms ms Rail kp. At frequencies of 70 Hz. 4 the foundations 3 2 H03 H04 1 H01 H02 0 H01 1 H02 2 H03 H04 3 4 . Fig. In¯uence of the number of sleeper couplings on rail receptances (wave propagation speed vs 155 m/s) ...12 With coupling H01 With couplings H01 + H02 With couplings H01 + H02 + H03 With couplings H01 + H02 + H03 + H04 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 Distance (m) 2 3 4 5 Number of the foundations 4 3 2 1 H01 H02 H03 0 H01 1 H02 H03 2 3 4 H04 H04 Fig. 154. the ballast foundation obstructs the wave propagation least of all... In¯uence of different sleeper couplings on the static de¯ection of the rail maxima are a result of wave propagation effects. The same calculation has been performed for stiff..04 0.10 0.08 0.06 Without coupling 466 0. 10. Savidis.Wheel load (ton) 0 0. 135 Hz and 225 Hz. medium and soft soil (wave propagation speeds vs 236X1 mas. S.. respectively). Hirschauer) 12 Vertical receptance (x109 m/N) 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 100 200 300 400 Frequency (Hz) 500 600 Without coupling With coupling H01 With couplings H01 + H02 With couplings H01 + H02 + H03 With couplings H01 + H02 + H03 + H04 ˆ Q(t) = Q.6 m/s and 78.
13. the receptances are quite similar. Here. a variety of maxima can be found. While the receptances of the model with discretesleeper support have been calculated up to 1200 Hz. only the results are shown. 12 and 13. The receptance for the discretely supported track has been calculated for a harmonic force acting between two sleepers. In both cases ®vesleeper coupling has been considered. Its theory will be presented elsewhere. a model with completely discrete sleeper couplings has been developed additionally. In all three cases for frequencies higher than 400 Hz. due to the bending of the rail between two sleepers.The spectrum of receptances is shown in Figs.5 0. This makes clear that in the lowfrequency range 0 Hz f 40 Hz as well as in the mediumfrequency range 40 Hz f 400 Hz the receptances are governed by the soil properties. The corresponding vibration mode of the rail is often called `pinnedpinnedmode'. 14.6 m/s) Stiff subgrade (υs = 236. Apart from this resonance peak.1 m/s) 1 0.15 m) . 12. In¯uence of layered halfspace on track receptances (thickness of the layer 1. 467 3 2 Vertical receptance (x108 m/N) Soft subgrade (υs = 78. and compared with the results of the model with continuized support. whereas in the highfrequency range f ! 400 Hz the pad behaviour is dominant. The model with continuization is much easier to be dealt with and is therefore preferred.7 m/s) Medium subgrade (υs = 154. In¯uence of soil subgrade properties on track receptances 9 Vertical receptance (x109 m/N) 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 0 System 1 System 2 System 3 1 υs = 200 m/s υs = 140 m/s 2 υs = 200 m/s υs = 260 m/s 3 υs = 200 m/s 100 200 300 400 Frequency (Hz) 500 600 Fig. The sharp maximum at 1070 Hz is a result of the discrete support. the model with continuization has only been calculated for values up to 600 Hz. all the other effects can be obtained with a model where the discrete support and the coupling between sleepers has been continuized. In order to control the procedure of continuization.1 0 100 200 300 400 Frequency (Hz) 500 600 Fig. The receptances of the discretely supported track model are slightly higher. The results are nearly the same. Again. most of them for soft soil. Fig.
Vertical direct receptances for discretely supported track model and for a track model with continuization of discrete support 7 Comparison with other available results and with measurements Only few track de¯ection measurements are available for the frequency range from 0 Hz to some hundreds Hz. These results have been already used in order to get realistic values for the ballast stiffness. More than 30 years ago Birmann [5. 15. As the model which has been used for adaptation is a Timoshenko beam on M 10D Harmonic excitation M 1D M 5D Sleeper Ballast Crossbeam M 3D Fig.12 Discretely supported track model 11 Vertical receptance (x109 m/N) 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Continuously supported track model 468 500 Frequency (Hz) 1000 1200 Fig. on the head of rail). Measurements on track (measuring point: M 3D. More interesting are receptance measurements. 14. 6] and Betzhold [4] measured the de¯ections of rail and sleeper and the displacements at several points on the planum and in the subgrade for an electric locomotive running over the measurement section. from [7] . 2. The agreement is excellent. but only for frequencies higher than 100 Hz. A comparison of measured and adapted calculated results has already been shown in Fig.
the amplitude of the receptance decreases. However. This mainly concerns all simulations where the loads acting on the ballast and longterm variations (ballast settlement) are of interest. frequencies between 50 Hz and 120 Hz are relevant. Auersch. References 1. 1. The rail displacement of the measurement point M 3D is proportional to the direct receptance of the rail.): The dynamics of vehicles on roads and on tracks. L. there is an increase in the receptance (displacement amplitude) below 50 Hz. the foundation models are suf®cient. Between 1970 and 1980. If. usually a maximum value is obtained for the static case. 1998.: Zur Parametererregung des RadSchieneSystems: Berechnung der FahrzeugFahrwegUntergrundDynamik und experimentelle Veri®kation am Hochgeschwindigkeitszug Intercity Experimental. 60 (1990) 141±156 2. By the use of the halfspace model the measurement results can be explained consistently. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger . Therefore. (c) The most surprising result is that the track receptances between 0 Hz and 200 Hz are distinctly different when a halfspace model is used instead of a viscoelastic foundation model (generalized Winkler foundation). For the investigation of receptances. a correct consideration of the subgrade is mandatory. weak tension forces still may occur between rail and sleeper and between sleeper and ballast some distance away from the load. To be published in: Supplement to Vehicle System Dynamics. whereas the increase below 50 Hz has been neglected. Two phenomena can be observed in Fig. Zobory (Ed. Ing. For the problem of outofround wheels. No geometrical liftoff of the rail and the sleepers exists any longer. a maximum of the receptance (resonance) is found between 100 Hz and 200 Hz. For lower frequencies. 13 therefore agree qualitatively with the measured results of Fig. Krupp Industrie.Arch. August 1997. signi®cant deviations are observed as compared with the results of a Winklerfoundation model. (f) In the frequency range below 200 Hz. Figure 15 shows displacement amplitudes calculated from measured accelerations. however. and a minimum value is obtained for the static case.Winkler's foundation. 469 8 Conclusions (a) With the new model. so halfspace models should be used for these simulations. for highfrequency problems like rail corrugation investigations or acoustic problems. L. then an adaption to both values could be possible. First. In I. (e) Concerning the number of sleeper couplings which needs to be considered. Some of the measurements have been published [7]. secondly. at least an overlapping threesleeper coupling is necessary in order to avoid an error of up to 30%. Auersch. the calculated receptance decreases for low frequencies whereas the measured receptance increases for decreasing frequency values. (b) Looking at the static de¯ection of the rail. there is a pronounced maximum of the displacement amplitude (receptance) near 120 Hz. Using the foundation model. 28. A static preload of 100 kN and an amplitude of 10 kN for the harmonically varying load have been used. The theoretical results of Fig. a separate treatment of ballast and subgrade is possible.: Vehicle/track interaction and soil dynamics. of the 15th IAVSD Symposium held at Budapest/Hungary. the following applies: For static analysis. at least an overlapping ®vesleeper coupling should be considered. 15. a halfspace model is used. the in¯uence of the subgrade diminishes and the in¯uence of the railpad becomes dominant. Fig. Vol. If experiments were performed where sleeper and planum displacements would have been measured separately. (d) Discrepancies between measured receptances and simulation results based on foundation models could until now be only insuf®ciently explained by measurements. For frequencies higher than 250 Hz. (g) Nonlinear ballast laws and ballast settlement laws require a separation into ballast and subgrade and correct subgrade modelling. then the receptance increases if the frequency is decreased below 100 Hz. Certain other maxima in the frequency range up to 200 Hz are due to wave propagation and must not be interpreted as resonance phenomena. Proc.und Stahlbau (KIS) developed special receptance measurement equipment. Hitherto the maximum at 120 Hz has been interpreted as the resonance of rail and sleeper mass moving on a Winkler foundation. The model presented here is able to explain both effects consistently. 2.
Technische È Universitat Berlin. Nr. Budde. on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering. S. Moscow: Gosstroiizdat 1954 17.: Dynamische Wechselwirkung von Untergrund und Oberbau. Triantafyllidis. B.und Zeitbereichsrechnungen. B. L. Zimmermann. 6 (1957) 229±246 6. K. Au¯age). Proc. Proc. H. Y. Eng. C. Dusseldorf: VDIVerlag 1992 13. Knothe. VDI FortschrittBerichte. Mech. Knothe. Knothe. Second Int.: Three dimensional dynamic interaction of ties. H. R. ILRÈ È Mitteilung 274. Klapperich.: Erhohung der Beanspruchung des Eisenbahnoberbanes durch Wechselwirkung zwischen Fahrzeug und Oberbau. Wu. Spurgefuhrter Fernverkehr±Rad/SchieneTechnik.: Ein diskretkontinuierliches Gleismodell unter Ein¯uû schnell bewegter. Esveld. Proc. 171. Wu. Grassie.. Betzhold. Technischer Bericht. Conf. 10th Int. U.und Raumfahrt. W.. Ilias.: Modelling of railway track and vehicle/track interaction at high frequencies. Ripke. Technische Universitat Berlin. In: Dynamik fortschrittlicher Bahnsysteme. Arch. Appl. Th. 510 (1984) 317±322 È È 11.: Track parameters. Eisenbahn technische Rundschau. Ripke. 297. Sarfeld. 249. K. 1992 19. 81 (1957) 76±82. Triantafyllidis. S. G.. L..: Mitgefuhrte Biegelinie beim Hochgeschwindigkeitszug ``ICE''Teil I: Theoretische Grundlagen und Teil II: Vergleich zwischen theoretischen und experimentellen Ergebnissen. Dusseldorf: VDIVerlag 1996 12.Ein einfaches Ersatzmodell fur Frequenzbereichs. Glasers Annalen. Huber. T. Timoshenko. È VDI FortschrittBerichte. B. 1978 8.: Basis of a new method for the calculation of structures on elastic foundation using two bed coef®cients. Said. Prange. Dusseldorf: VDIVerlag 1995 18. rechnerische und meûtechnische Untersuchungen. A. Nr.. 3 (1981) 287±292 20. Ch. P. 1997 16. VDIFortschrittBerichte. Nr.470 È 3. Ilias.: Method of analysis of statical and dynamical stresses in rail...: Neuere Messungen an Gleisen mit verschiedenen Unterschwellungen.: Rechteckfundament auf elastischem Halbraum . Reihe 12. Berlin: Ernst und Sohn 1941 . È hamonisch schwankender Wanderlasten.: Ergebnisse der Messungen zu Ermittlung der Lagegenauigkeit und der dynamischen PaÈ rameter eines Gleises. VDIBerichte. Willingen. Knothe K.. Instn. Vehicle System Dynamics. H. static and dynamic.. Congress for Appl.. Institut fur Luft. VDI Berichte 635 (1987) 56±87 È 4. L. Y. K. F. Reihe 12. Groningen: Noordhof International Publishing 1972 10. Stockholm. 22 (1993) 209±262 È 14. Prange. L. S. B. Rohrmann. 137±145 5. Nr. F. Birmann. Schuppe.: Hochfrequente Gleismodellierung und Simulation der FahrzeugGleisDynamik unter VerÈ wendung einer nichtlinearen Kontaktmechanik. W. Statusseminar V.: Nichtlineare Wechselwirkungen von Radsatz und Gleis beim Uberrollen von Pro®lstorungen.: FahrzegFahrwegUntergrundUmgebung: theoretische. 108±115. Reihe 12.: Berechnung des Eisenoberbaues (3. Auersch. To appear in: Bauingenieur Band (1998) È 15. R. Birmann.: Vibration of solids and structures under moving loads.: Anpassung der Modellparameter eines Gleismodells an gemessene Gleisrezeptanzen. H.. Fryba. Institut fur Luftund Raumfahrt. Mech. S. Savidis.. Mech. 64 (1994) 154±179 22.: Erfassung der Halbraumeigenschaft des Untergrundes fur die Berechnung der È FahrzeugFahrwegWechselwirkung. ILRMitteilung 316. Pasternak. Rucker. Duisburg: MRTProductions 1989 Â 9.. (1926) 407±418 È 21.: Modern Railway Track.. 180 Pt 3F (1965) 73±85 7.