Vibration responses of fixed-simply supported thin-walled beams under moving random wheel–rail forces.
Saved in:
| Title: | Vibration responses of fixed-simply supported thin-walled beams under moving random wheel–rail forces. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cai, Yong1 (AUTHOR) 18803314336@163.com, Zhang, Laifu1 (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Mechanics Based Design of Structures & Machines. 2025, Vol. 53 Issue 11, p7662-7687. 26p. |
| Subjects: | Random vibration, Euler-Bernoulli beam theory, Calibration, Monte Carlo method, Rolling contact, Mechanical vibration research, Structural components |
| Abstract: | In this study, the random vibration response of a fixed-simply supported thin-walled beam under wheel–rail forces is investigated. A wheel–rail force model that considers track irregularities is established using the random vibration theory. Based on the Euler–Bernoulli theory, the formulation of the beam's random vibration response is derived through the application of the Fourier transform method, complemented by spectral decomposition and modal superposition techniques. Following this, a comparison was made between the theoretical formulas and both the Monte Carlo simulation and the novel scaled tests designed by the authors, which revealed a very good alignment. During the parameter study, the focus was on investigating the influence of parameters that are of significant concern in practical engineering on the dynamic response of thin-walled beams. The results indicate that: (1) Resonance speed increases the mean dynamic response of the beam but has minimal impact on the maximum standard deviation of displacement; (2) An increase in the wheel–rail force spacing significantly reduces the vibration response, as demonstrated by the increase from 5 to 15 m, which leads to a decrease in the maximum mid-span displacement from 3.65 × 10-3 to 1.21 × 10-3 m, and a reduction in maximum acceleration from 0.34 to 0.15 m/s2; (3) Beam damping mainly affects displacement in free vibration, with minimal impact on forced vibration but significantly impacts bridge acceleration during forced vibration; (4) The stiffness of the train's suspension has a negligible effect on the vibration response, whereas an increase in train weight significantly amplifies the response and variability of beam vibrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Mechanics Based Design of Structures & Machines is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Engineering Source |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | In this study, the random vibration response of a fixed-simply supported thin-walled beam under wheel–rail forces is investigated. A wheel–rail force model that considers track irregularities is established using the random vibration theory. Based on the Euler–Bernoulli theory, the formulation of the beam's random vibration response is derived through the application of the Fourier transform method, complemented by spectral decomposition and modal superposition techniques. Following this, a comparison was made between the theoretical formulas and both the Monte Carlo simulation and the novel scaled tests designed by the authors, which revealed a very good alignment. During the parameter study, the focus was on investigating the influence of parameters that are of significant concern in practical engineering on the dynamic response of thin-walled beams. The results indicate that: (1) Resonance speed increases the mean dynamic response of the beam but has minimal impact on the maximum standard deviation of displacement; (2) An increase in the wheel–rail force spacing significantly reduces the vibration response, as demonstrated by the increase from 5 to 15 m, which leads to a decrease in the maximum mid-span displacement from 3.65 × 10-3 to 1.21 × 10-3 m, and a reduction in maximum acceleration from 0.34 to 0.15 m/s2; (3) Beam damping mainly affects displacement in free vibration, with minimal impact on forced vibration but significantly impacts bridge acceleration during forced vibration; (4) The stiffness of the train's suspension has a negligible effect on the vibration response, whereas an increase in train weight significantly amplifies the response and variability of beam vibrations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 15397734 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/15397734.2025.2491032 |
