Advertisement

Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Flexural Behaviour of Composite Bearers in Railway Switches and Crossings

  • Sakdirat KaewunruenEmail author
  • Pasakorn Sengsri
  • Andre Luis Oliveira de Melo
Conference paper
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)

Abstract

Composite bearers, which are the long crosstie beams, are safety-critical components in railway switches and crossings. Recent adoption of composites to replace aging timber bearers has raised the concern about their engineering performance and behaviour. Since the design and test standards for composite bearers are not existed, most performance evaluations are based on the flexural tests in accordance with the test standards for railway concrete sleepers. In this study, both numerical and experimental studies into the flexural behaviours of composite bearers have been conducted to improve the understanding into the resilience and robustness of the components under service load condition. The full-scale composite bearers are supplied by an industry partner. The full-scale tests have been conducted in structures laboratory at the University of Birmingham. 3D finite element modelling of the bearers has been developed using Strand7. The comparison between numerical and experimental results yields an excellent agreement with less than 3% discrepancy. The results exhibit that the composite bearers behave in the elastic region under service load condition. This implies that they can recover fully under the load, enhancing engineering resilience of the turnout systems.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge to the European Commission for the financial sponsorship of the H2020-MSCA-RISE Project No. 691135 “RISEN: Rail Infrastructure Systems Engineering Network,” which enables a global research network that tackles the grand challenge in railway infrastructure resilience and advanced sensing in extreme environments (www.risen2rail.eu) [42]. In addition, this project is partially supported by the European Commission’s Shift2Rail, H2020-S2R Project No. 730849 “S-Code: Switch and Crossing Optimal Design and Evaluation”.

References

  1. 1.
    Silva, E.A., Pokropski, D., You, R., Kaewunruen, S.: Aust. J. Struct. Eng. 18, 160–177 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kaewunruen, S.: J. Compos. Constr. 23, 07018001 (2019).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CC.1943-5614.0000833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M., Murray, M.H.: Front. Mater. 1, 8 (2014).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmats.2014.00008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaewunruen, S.: Struct. Monit. Maint. 1(1), 131–157 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kaewunruen, S.: Case Stud. Nondestruct. Test. Eval. 1(1), 19–24 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kaewunruen, S., Bin Osman, M.H., Rungskunroch, P.: Front. Built Environ. 4, 84 (2018).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2018.00084
  7. 7.
    Kaewunruen, S., You, R., Ishida, M.: Composites for timber-replacement bearers in railway switches and crossings. Infrastructures 2, 13 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures2040013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaewunruen, S.: Proceedings of 2013 International Workshop on Railway Noise, 9th–13th September 2013, Uddevalla, Sweden (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M.: Eng. Fail. Anal. 16(3), 705–712 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gamage, E.K., Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M., Ishida, T.: Infrastructures 2, 3 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures2010003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gamage, E.K., Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M., Ishida, T.: Infrastructures 2, 5 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures2010005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tavares de Freitas, R., Kaewunruen, S.: Environments 3, 34 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kaewunruen, S., Martin, V.: Sustainability 10, 3753 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Remennikov, A.M., Kaewunruen, S.: Struct. Control. Health Monit. 15(2), 207–234 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M.: Aust. J. Civ. Eng. 14, 63–71 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bin Osman, M.H., Kaewunruen, S.: Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit (2019)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kaewunruen, S.: Monitoring in-service performance of fibre-reinforced foamed urethane material as timber-replacement sleepers/bearers in railway urban turnout systems. Struct. Monit. Maint. 1, 131–157 (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kaewunruen, S.: In situ performance of a complex urban turnout grillage system using fibre-reinforced foamed urethane (FFU) bearers. In: Proceedings of the 10th World Congress on Rail Research, Sydney, Australia, 25–28 November 2013Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kaewunruen, S.: Monitoring structural deterioration of railway turnout systems via dynamic wheel/rail interaction. Case Stud. Nondestruct. Test. Eval. 1, 19–24 (2014). (CrossRef)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Indraratna, B., Salim, W., Rujikiatkamjorn, C.: Advanced Rail Geotechnology—Ballasted Track. CRC Press/Balkema, Leiden (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Remennikov, A.M., Kaewunruen, S.: A review of loading conditions for railway track structures due to train and track vertical interaction. Struct. Control. Health Monit. 15, 207–234 (2007). (CrossRef)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Standards Australia: Australian Standards: AS3818.2 Timber; Standards Australia, Sydney, Australia (2001)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    RailCorp: Timber Sleepers & Bearers; Engineering Specification SPC 231; RailCorp, Sydney, Australia (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M.: Dynamic flexural influence on a railway concrete sleeper in track system due to a single whel impact. Eng. Fail. Anal. 16, 705–712 (2009). (CrossRef)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Van Erp, G., McKay, M.: Recent australian developments in fibre composite railway sleepers. Electron. J. Struct. Eng. 13, 62–66 (2013)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Dindar, S., Kaewunruen, S., An, M., Sussman, J.M.: Saf. Sci. 110, 20–30 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Freimanis, A., Kaewunruen, S.: Appl. Sci. 8(11), 2299 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kaewunruen, S., Goto, K., Xie, L.: Experimental investigations into failure modes of fibre reinforced foamed urethane composite beams. In: Selection and Peer-Review Under Responsibility of 4th Advanced Materials Conference 2018, 4th AMC 2018, 27th & 28th November 2018, Hilton Kuching Hotel, Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia (2018)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M.: Electron. J. Struct. Eng. 13, 41–61 (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Manalo, A.: Behaviour of fibre composite sandwich structures: a case study on railway sleeper application. Ph.D. Thesis, Centre of Excellence in Engineered Fibre Composites Faculty of Engineering and Surveying University of Southern Queensland Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia (2011)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sekisui Co.: Engineering Properties of FFU Materials. Sekisui Co., Tokyo, Japan (2012)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Li, D., Selig, E.: Evaluation of railway subgrade problems. Transp. Res. Rec. 1489, 17 (1995)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tata Steel: Steel Sleepers, 1st edn. Tata Steel Europe Ltd., Brockhurst Cres, Walsall, UK (2014). http://www.tatasteeleurope.com. Accessed 20 Apr 2019
  34. 34.
    Health and Safety Executive: Rail Track and Associated Equipment for Use Underground in Mines (2007). http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/mines06.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr 2019
  35. 35.
    European Federation of Railway Trackworks Contractors: Newsletters EFRTC (2007). http://www.efrtc.org/htdocs/newsite/newsletters.htm. Accessed 1 May 2019
  36. 36.
    Cai, Z.: Modelling of rail track dynamics and wheel/rail interaction. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Queen’s University, Ontario, Canada (1992)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Grassie, S.L.: Dynamic modelling of concrete railway sleepers. J. Sound Vib. 187, 799–813 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Kaewunruen, S., Remennikov, A.M.: Sensitivity analysis of free vibration characteristics of an in situ railway concrete sleeper to variations of rail pad parameters. J. Sound Vib. 298, 453–461 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Neilsen, J.C.O.: Eigenfrequencies and eigenmodes of beam structures on an elastic foundation. J. Sound Vib. 145, 479–487 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    G+D Computing: Using STRAND7 introduction to the Strand7 finite element analysis system, G+D Computing Pty Ltd. (2002)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    G+D Computing: STRAND7 theoretical manual, G+D Computing Pty Ltd. (2005)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kaewunruen, S., Sussman, J.M., Matsumoto, A.: Front. Built Environ. 2, 4 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.3389/fbuil.2016.00004CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sakdirat Kaewunruen
    • 1
    Email author
  • Pasakorn Sengsri
    • 1
  • Andre Luis Oliveira de Melo
    • 1
  1. 1.School of EngineeringThe University of BirminghamBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations