Anda di halaman 1dari 26

URBAN TRACK

Final Conference
Alternative to Floating Track Slab
High Attenuation Sleeper
Presented by Ian Robertson, ALSTOM
24 June 2010, Prague

Contents
Specific objectives of study
Chosen concept
Detailed design and laboratory test
Site test (ongoing)
Conclusions

Final Conference 24 June 2010

Specific objectives of study


Develop slab track with following technical characteristics
metro environment (18t axle load, 100 kph)
equivalent vibration performance to Floating Slab Track
ability to meet all railway constraints
Safety (derailment) including track level evacuation
Comfort
maintenance

Construction method
for standard equipment and methods
production rate as conventional track slab
Lower costs compared to AFST
For capital portion (design+procure+build)
For maintenance portion

Final Conference 24 June 2010

Chosen concept
Review of existing systems worldwide
Previous generation bi-block sleepers for CTRL
Relatively low weight
Tie bar overstressed with very soft pads
Track gauge variations with very soft pads
Chosen concept = mono-block resilient sleeper
High attenuation due to
High sleeper mass (350 400 kg)
Very soft resilient inserts (8KN/mm/fastener)
Adapted to tracklaying gantries
Maintenance friendly
Final Conference 24 June 2010

Detailed design and laboratory test


HAS mono-bloc sleeper concept

Fastening
system
according
to
customer
choice
Final Conference 24 June 2010

Concrete
sleeper

Holes for
conductor
rail
support

sealing
Rigid boot

Detailed design and laboratory test


Insertion gain target
Comparison of Different Antivibratile System
20

Insertion Gain (dB)

251

158

100

63

40

25

16

10

6,3

2,5

1,6

10

-10

-20

-30

Insertion Gain SFS 312 (dB)


-40

Insertion Gain DFC Pandrol (dB)


Insertion Gain CTRL 2(dB)

-50

Insertion Gain FST (Taipei) (dB)


Insertion Gain EGG_2(dB)

-60
Frequency (Hz)

Final Conference 24 June 2010

Detailed design and laboratory test


Typical tunnel layout

DESIGN FULLY COMPLIANT WITH MOST RAIL FASTENERS

Final Conference 24 June 2010

Detailed design and laboratory test


Typical case of impact on tunnel diameter
Based on OBLEX project 20 cm gain

Dia.5.8

Final Conference 24 June 2010

Dia. 5.6

Detailed design and laboratory test


HAS mono-bloc sleeper dynamic testing regime
Load

2 Hz
5 Hz

Fmax
.Fmax

Actual

load diagram with sine shape


Time

Optimum load diagram with triangle


Simplified

shape simulating wheel passage

load diagram used during fatigue test to simulate bogie passage

ACHIEVED 4,5 MILLIONS LOAD CYCLE WITH SUCCESS


Final Conference 24 June 2010

Detailed design and laboratory test


Mechanical test carried out
Fatigue test with inclined loads according to the
following phases :
1M Cycles @ low frequency (3 Hz) applied load between 10kN et
75kN, centred, inclined at 38
0.5MCycles @ moderate frequency (5 Hz) applied load between
30/40kN et 75kN centred , inclined at 38

2M Cycles @ low frequency (3 Hz) applied load between 10kN et


75kN, inclined at 10 and 38
1 M Cycles @ moderate frequency (5 Hz) applied load between
30/40kN et 75kN, inclined at 10 and 38

NO PAD WEARING & NO VERTICAL STIFFNESS LOSS AFTER 4.5M


CYCLES
(EN13230: 2M CYCLES)
Final Conference 24 June 2010

10

Detailed design and laboratory test


Testing arrangements
Acoustic test
mechanical test
RAIL
PRELOAD

EXCITATIO
N
RAIL
SENSOR
S

CONCRETE
BASE
Final Conference 24 June 2010

RIGID
HULL
MONOBLOC
SLEEPER
11

Detailed design and laboratory test


Dynamic test results
Stifffness vs static load at 8Hz
K (MN/m)

12
10
8
MN/m 6
4
2
0
0

Final Conference 24 June 2010

32

40

50

64

kN

12

Site test (ongoing)


Introduction
Several possibilities reviewed notably
SINGAPORE Circle Line
CEF test site (Valenciennes)
CEF chosen
Easier logistics
To respect URBAN TRACK timing
Construction just completed June 11
Vibration tests scheduled July
Final Conference 24 June 2010

13

Site test - Situation


Situation within CEF site

Test section
190m radius
160mm cant

Actual track to replace


ballasted track
fishplated U50 rail
good ground conditions
EV2 above 80 MPA

Final Conference 24 June 2010

14

Site test
General Layout

50m of High Attenuation Track


2 x 6.5m of transition slab with ballasted track
Sleeper spacing 700mm
Welded rail on high attenuation zone
Fishplated joints allowing movement at each end of test

Final Conference 24 June 2010

15

Site test
Typical section

Final Conference 24 June 2010

16

Site test
Detailed design concept
Reinforced U-shaped foundation
Track slab concrete
unreinforced
With frequent joints to avoid shrinkage cracking
200
230

2583

80

80

230

Final Conference 24 June 2010

17

Site test
Detailed design assumptions
After HAS vibration testing
Axle load = 25 tonnes
Total load = 280MGT
HAS resilient inserts to replace by stiffer inserts
(30MN/M)
Structural design based on Eurocode 2
Load Model 71
Crack 0.2mm

Final Conference 24 June 2010

18

Site test
Transition slab design
7
0.6

Ballast
track

0.7

0.7

0.7

Transition zone

HAS
Track

Neighbouring (existing) ballast track


Total dynamic stiffness around 80kN/mm per fastener
High Attenuation Sleeper Track
Under sleeper pad = 1,5*8 kN/mm
Total stiffness = 11kN/mm per fastener
Transition zone
Target total stiffness = 46kN/mm
Under sleeper pad = 70 to 80 kN/mm per fastener
Total stiffness = 47 to 52 kN/mm per fastener
Final Conference 24 June 2010

19

Site test
Construction after concreting of foundation

Final Conference 24 June 2010

20

Site test
Construction before track slab concreting

Final Conference 24 June 2010

21

Site test
Testing
In July testing of following zones
HAS track
Transition track
Static measurements
Soil impedance
Unloaded and loaded track impedance
Determination of in situ HAS track characteristics
Rail surface quality

Final Conference 24 June 2010

22

Site test
Testing
Dynamic measurements (6 pass-bys)
train induced vibration levels
on track slab concrete
outside U shaped foundation

rail

and sleeper deflection of both rails


rail and sleeper lateral displacements

Final Conference 24 June 2010

23

Site test
Testing
Strain measurements
Captors on rail foot
5 sleeper spacing per measurement site

Final Conference 24 June 2010

24

Site test
Testing
Vibration simulation
HAS track parameters measured
PACT reference track parameters
Measured roughness
Rolling Stock data
Insertion

gain calculation in 1/3rd octave bands

Final Conference 24 June 2010

25

Conclusions
High Attenuation Sleeper
High performance alternative to floating track slab
Ideal for underground metro applications
Could absorb railway loads applied to sensitive bridges
In high speed tunnel application

Theoretically compared to S3 high speed 4dB (halved the vibration level)


Limiting operational criteria (mixed operations, speed, twist) to determine

Costing being completed but ballpark figures are

Compared to typical metro floating track slab


Design, procure and build cost HAS gives 10% saving
Maintenance costs for HAS are much lower
Potential to reduce tunnelling costs

Further information
final report will be ready after completion of CEF tests in August 2010
See URBAN TRACK website http://www.urbantrack.eu/
RGCF no 191 February 2010
Railway Engineering 2009

Final Conference 24 June 2010

26

Anda mungkin juga menyukai