介绍铁路路基动态变形模量理论计算公式的推导及动态变形模量的测试原理,采用有限元软件模拟动态变形模量的测试过程,分析承载板与土体接触压力、路基动态变形模量的影响因素,并计算动态变形模量的有效测试深度.结果表明:在承载板中心一定范围内,接触压力模拟结果较理论计算值大;土体的动弹性模量对接触压力影响很小,可以忽略;路基动态变形模量测试冲击荷载作用下,土体只发生弹性变形;动态变形模量与土体动弹性模量呈线性关系,路基动态变形模量的模拟结果大于理论计算值;土体的泊松比对动态变形模量影响较小;动态变形模量有效测试深度建议取0.5~0.6 m. 相似文献
研究目的:铁路预应力路堤在国内外尚属一种新型路基加固法,其受力变形特性暂未得到系统化研究,相关加固设计理论仍处于探索性阶段。因此,有必要通过数值手段了解预应力路堤的工作状态,以掌握其加固性能。鉴于此,借助ABAQUS软件平台构建预应力路堤仿真系统,分析差异化预应力加固参数对路堤变形和承载能力的影响以及预应力加固构件的受力特征。研究结论:(1)路堤本体段坡面较优加固位置为距本体顶面以下0.3倍本体高度处;(2)坡率1∶1的预应力路堤在第1、2排侧压板分别施加50 k Pa、100 k Pa预压荷载时,其变形与承载力均可达传统路堤(坡率1∶1.5)水平,并可通过提升加固标准进一步强化路堤承载性能;(3)当对第1、2、3排侧压板分别施加50 k Pa、100 k Pa、100 k Pa预压荷载时,路堤内部附加围压S11>13.5 k Pa区域大致呈"x"形分布并形成横贯路堤的"预压加固区";(4)侧压板锚固区受力集中且复杂,应注意保障锚固区板体强度;(5)力筋在路堤加载前后的应力变化量与坡面侧向变形特征相关;(6)本研究成果可为铁路预应力路堤的加固设计提供技术指导。 相似文献
A new regularisation of non-elliptical contact patches has been introduced, which enables building the look-up table called by us the Kalker book of tables for non-Hertzian contact (KBTNH), which is a fast creep force generator that can be used by multibody dynamics system simulation programs. The non-elliptical contact patch is regularised by a simple double-elliptical contact region (SDEC). The SDEC region is especially suitable for regularisation of contact patches obtained with approximate non-Hertzian methods for solving the normal contact problem of wheel and rail. The new regularisation is suitable for wheels and rails with any profiles, including worn profiles.
The paper describes the new procedure of regularisation of the non-elliptical contact patch, the structure of the Kalker book of tables, and parameterisation of the independent variables of the tables and creep forces.
A moderate volume Kalker book of tables for SDEC region suitable for simulation of modern running gears has been computed in co-simulation of Matlab and program CONTACT.
To access the creep forces of the Kalker book of tables, the linear interpolation has been applied.
The creep forces obtained from KBTNH have been compared to those obtained by program CONTACT and FASTSIM algorithm. FASTSIM has been applied on both the contact ellipse and the SDEC contact patch. The comparison shows that KBTNH is in good agreement with CONTACT for a wide range of creepage condition and shapes of the contact patch, whereas the use of FASTSIM on the elliptical patch and SDEC may lead to significant deviations from the reference CONTACT solutions.
The computational cost of calling creep forces from KBTNH has been estimated by comparing CPU time of FASTSIM and KBTNH. The KBTNH is 7.8–51 times faster than FASTSIM working on 36–256 discretisation elements, respectively.
In the example of application, the KBTNH has been applied for curving simulations and results compared with those obtained with the creep force generator employing the elliptical regularisation. The results significantly differ, especially in predicted creepages, because the elliptical regularisation neglects generation of the longitudinal creep force by spin creepage. 相似文献