Development of the FXT Track System presented by André Van Leuven Dynamic Engineering
Existing Stiff LIM Track System Power rails Vehicle LIM Running Rail fastener LIM rail CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 2
Fundamental design issues with ART trackwork High capital and installation cost for adapting LIM rail track. DF rail fasteners: specified with high vertical stiffness to ensure precise dynamic control of LIM gap (9 mm) versus low-track stiffness traditionally applied for rotary design for good track design. DF vertical stiffness: due to LIM performance requirements, ART specifies very stiff rail fastening systems (up to 24 kn/mm) or <1 mm vertical track deflection at max. loads versus 3 mm typical deflection for conventional transit track. Re-occurrence of rail corrugation: higher wayside vibrations and rail noise generally attributed to stiff trackwork resulting in additional routine track maintenance and rail wear. Maintenance effort to adjust LIM rail height CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 3
Primary requirements of the new track system Improve Trackwork Cost: Fewer trackwork interface fasteners Installation tolerances Installation time Reduce concrete secondpour support structure Improve Vehicle Propulsion: Control LIM air gap variations Improve Environmental Impact: Vehicle interior & exterior airborne noise reduction (20 25 dba) Wayside trackwork groundborne vibration reduction (20 25 db) Electrical rail stray current control Improve Track Maintenance: Less rail grinding from rail corrugation Track and LIM rail adjustment more easily accessible CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 4
FXT Rail Fastener System (3rd rail) Power rail Rail fastener LIM rail CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 5
Technical Review Rail Fastener (10kN preload) CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 6
Super resilient rail fastener Preload imposes a deflection (= compression) to the pad. Preload is such that the additional deflection will be less than 4 mm Preload is such that the springs are completely released under wheel passage Direct fixation resilient pad Total deflection without precompression δ>4mm δ<4mm Pre -Compression = = Preload Deflection felt by the rail CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 7
Kingston FXT Installation and Testing CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 8
Installation Process Install self-locking GRP inserts and 1-1/4 anchor fasteners Fewer guideway anchors improves isolation CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 9
FXT Installation (1000 mm tie spacing ) CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 10
Maintenance and Adjustments LIM rail shims (2 mm) and attachment location simplifies adjustment CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 11
Power Rail Support and Isolation Option - improves isolation and eliminates final set-up CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 12
Measurements to demonstrate a cost effective noise reduction Rail roughness measurements: on the stiff track (Kingston reference track) on the FXT track (new prototype) Track decay rate and rail impedance measurements: on the stiff track on the FXT track Wheel impedance measurements on the ART MKII Pass-by noise & vibration measurements: on the stiff track on the FXT track CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 13
Measurements in Kingston - Rail is RE115 Fastener spacing [m] Fastener stiffness [kn/mm] Stiff track 0.75 22 FXT track 1.00 4 CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 14
50 40 31.5 25 20 16 12.5 10 8 6.3 5 4 3.15 2.5 2 1.6 1.25 1 0.8 0.63 0.5 0.4 0.32 Roughness [db(re.1e-6m)] Rail Roughness 20 15 10 Stiff track - Right rail Stiff track - Left rail FXT track - Right rail FXT track - Left rail ISO3095:2005 limit 5 0-5 -10-15 Third Octave Band Wavelength [cm] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 15
Track Decay CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 16
Track Decay Rates - Vertical CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 17
Track Decay rates - Horizontal CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 18
ART mkii Wheel Impedance radial tread response axial tread response axial web response CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 19
125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000 Third Octave Band RMS Level [db(a)(re.2e-5pa)] Noise Predictions with WR Software Stiff track 80 km/h 100.0 90.0 80.0 Rail Wheel Total 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Third Octave Band Frequency [Hz] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 20
125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000 Third Octave Band RMS Level [db(a)(re.2e-5pa)] Noise Predictions with WR Software FXT track 80 km/h 100.0 90.0 Rail Wheel Total 80.0 70.0 60.0 50.0 40.0 30.0 20.0 Third Octave Band Frequency [Hz] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 21
Tel (dba) for Kingston for 80 km/h Stiffness FXT Rail 82.8 84.9 Wheel 80.7 81.5 Total 84.9 86.5 MKII has important resonances at 800 Hz and 1600 Hz Wheel dominates total response below 315 Hz and above 2500 Hz CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 22
50 40 31.5 25 20 16 12.5 10 8 6.3 5 4 3.15 2.5 2 1.6 1.25 1 0.8 0.63 0.5 0.4 0.32 Roughness [db(re.1e-6m)] Roughness during grinding 20 15 10 Before grinding After grinding intermediate 1 intermediate 2 ISO3095:2005 limit 5 0-5 -10-15 Third Octave Band Wavelength [cm] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 23
Noise Simulations for ART MKII (Tel) Before (BG) and after (AG) grinding Roughness [db] Noise [db(a)] 40 km/h 80 km/h Stiff BG 27.0 90.8 98.9 Stiff AG 19.6 85.8 93.0 Grinding -7.4-5.0-5.9 FXT AG 19.6 88.4 94.6 Stiff AG 19.6 85.8 93.0 Difference - 2.6 1.6 Small initial difference FXT has no roughness growth Initial difference is quickly eliminated CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 24
Excessive corrugation: 5 weeks Voie 1 - courbe à gauche (9/6-10/12) exemple d UO UO St. Catherine 7SFDV1 6 5 4 3 2 1 0-1 -2-3 -4-5 -6-7 -8-9 -10 Déplac Vert 3108-11 Déplac Vert 0609-12 Déplac Vert 1309-13 Déplac Vert 2109-14 Déplac Vert 2809-15 Déplac Vert 0510-16 -17 Déplac Vert 1210-18 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 Déplac. Long. ( cm ) Dépl. Long. Min.: -0,05 cm DATE 16.10.2001 Dépl. Long. Max: 102,36 cm CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 25
Noise Simulations for ART MKII (Tel) Excessive Corrugation Roughness [db] Noise [db(a)] 40 km/h 80 km/h 6 Sept 40 111 113 12 Oct 48 115 122 5 weeks +8 +4 +9 Small initial difference FXT has no roughness growth Initial difference is eliminated in a few days CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 26
2.5 3.15 4 5 6.3 8 10 12.5 16 20 25 31.5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 Insertion loss [db(re.1e-9m/s)] Insertion Loss Stiff to FXT 40 35 30 25 20 20km/h 40km/h 60km/h 70km/h average 15 10 5 0-5 -10 Third Octave Band Frequency [Hz] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 27
[db(re.1e-9m/s)] Vibration levels for MKII at 40 km/h 130 120 without FXT - OA:117.6dB(re.1e-9m/s) with FXT - OA:95.95dB(re.1e-9m/s) 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 8 10 12.5 16 20 25 31.5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency [Hz] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 28
[db(re.1e-9m/s)] Vibration levels for MKII at 80 km/h 130 120 without FXT - OA:123dB(re.1e-9m/s) with FXT - OA:101.8dB(re.1e-9m/s) 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 8 10 12.5 16 20 25 31.5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1/3 Octave Band Center Frequency [Hz] CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 29
20km/h 40km/h 60km/h 70km/h acceleration without brakes acceleration with brakes on Average vibration (1-1000Hz) [db(re.1e-9m/s)] Vibration measurements with TV06 130 125 FXT track (2009) Stiff track (2009) 120 115 117 120 121 120 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 99 102 101 100 108 95 95 88 Case CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 30
Technical Benefits FXT system combines running rail and LIM rail onto common platform FXT supports and maintains air gap relative to TOR Rail vertical deflection increases from <1 mm to 3-4 mm at max. load Reduced wheel impact forces and rail noise Elastomeric pads easily serviceable CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 31
Technical Benefits Adapts / retrofits to existing ART DF track systems: Single anchor stud installed in-between existing rail fasteners Single anchor stud reduces number of embedded track fasteners: Single GRP insert per m rail minimizes stray current paths Reduces ground borne vehicle vibrations from trackwork: Provides 3-4 mm rail deflection versus <1 mm resulting in 25 db reduction in vibrations and reduced trackwork noise (similar to floating slab) CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 32
Technical Benefits Reduces dynamic vehicle LIM air- gap variation: LIM rail floats with track deflection resulting in less adjustment Reduces effort for maintaining LIM rail TOR height: adjustment provision at top cap permits use of small hand tools Reduces track maintenance: Studies identify elimination of rail corrugation due to soft rail fasteners CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 33
Conclusions Installed cost: up to 10% less DF vertical stiffness: specified as 4-6 kn/mm Super resilient rail fastening system: not prone to rail corrugation initiation Vibration mitigation similar to Floating slab track at fraction of cost (20 db reduction) Reduced Maintenance effort to adjust LIM rail height Easily adaptable: up-grade most existing slab track installations CSJ213 - APTA 2012 - Dallas, June 3-6, 2012 34