View
204
Download
11
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Citation preview
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 1
The WPR2000 Wheel profile Lessons
learned from introduction
into the DIRN in 2001
21 May,2014 Brisbane Hilton Graeme Templer
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 2
History of Railway Mistakes
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 3
ARTC process of lessons learned
• ARTC has a process to review all finished projects to evaluate for implementing continuous improvement.
• The process involves evaluation of projects where things go wrong and putting in place processes so the mistakes of the past are not repeated in the future.
• To go forward the process involves looking at the past mistakes.
• The findings are put into a document called lessons learned and the findings are relayed to everyone in ARTC.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 4
Why Did ARTC investigating the
WPR2000 wheel profile
• Damaged freight Sydney to Perth
• Loss of business and market share in the
most profitable corridor
• High maintenance costs of rollingstock on
the interstate network
• Abnormal damage to track components.
• Repeat what this means to ARTC
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 5
Summary of lessons learned
With the WPR2000 wheel profile
• A prototype profile was designed then implemented with inadequate stability testing of the profile design on freight wagons
• Normal scientific method was not followed; come up with a hypothesis then by rigorous testing prove the hypothesis
• There was no stability testing of freight vehicles at high speed on the interstate network
• Quote from the wheel rail committee minutes • “ Brian Turnbull indicated that high speed testing of freight
vehicles would not serve any purpose” • Quote from the wheel rail minutes of locomotive instability • “Effective tight gauge could be the cause of dynamic
instability and that once the new profiles were installed the problem may be reduced.”
• Full copies of the minutes handed out.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 6
Summary of lessons learned
With the WPR2000 wheel profile
• Existing standards for tight gauge limits were not evaluated for the WPR2000 profile. What is the effect on stability for freight vehicles at speed with tight gauge, what are the limits of tight gauge for stability
• The grinding tolerances necessary for the profile to be stable were not determined
• For a correct grinding profile the lateral shift tolerance of the profile to become unstable was not determined.
• No cost benefit was carried out Sydney to Albury, Sydney to Queensland border Sydney to Broken Hill the cost of maintaining the NCOP profiles versus the savings in rail and wheel life.
• No assessment was made of the effect of stability of worn wheel profiles running on primarily tangent track.
• No assessment was made on the effect of variable gauge on stability at speed.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 7
Summary of lessons learned
With the WPR2000 wheel profile
• No assessment was made on whether the correct rail profile would stabilise the WPR2000 wheel when a slight track defect had caused instability
• No assessment was made on the effect of changing one aspect of the wheel rail interface and the effect on all existing procedures and existing standards.
• No assessment was made on the practicality of being able to apply a perfect ground rail profile on 10,000 kilometres of primarily interstate standard gauge tangent track.
• The profile was designed for curves and applied to tangent track
• Little investigative work was done on the tangent track rail.
• Every wheel profile has a critical instability speed the day it is first drawn on paper, this is an accepted design theory for all rail wheels that has been around and unchallenged for a very long time,
• The critical instability speed for the WPR2000 was never determined, for tangent track and freight Vehicles
• There was no documented proof that freight vehicles would track correctly
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 8
The WPR2000, I in 10 conicity with a Worn
Sydney Metro Profile in the corner
The high conicity is designed to pull the high outer wheel
from the high rail and reduce wear of both wheel and
rail
The thickening of 7mm total in the gauge corner gives the
wheel more metal to wear
The 1 in 10 conicity allows this profile to go around tighter
curves than the ANZR1 profile without wheel creep
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 9
The WPR2000 has been thickened
at the contact zone in the gauge corner
compared to the ANZR 1 profile
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 10
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
WPR2000 wheel profile
Millimetres
Mill
imet
res
or c
onic
ity 1
:n
WPR2000 shape
Conicity, 1:n
Variable Conicity of the
WPR2000 Profile
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 11
Conicity of the ANZR1 profile
• The conicity of the ANZR1 wheel is 1 in 20
over the tread when new
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 12
Condition of NSW track at the
time the WPR2000 was introduced
• Parkes to Broken Hill
• 53 kg rail no grinding at all, no profile
• MacArther to Albury
• Only the curves had been ground, Tahmoor to Albury no tangents ground
• Newcastle to Queensland Border
• Only the curves had been ground Stratford to the Queensland border
• Basically all tracks unground and gauge corner flow creating tight gauge
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 13
Examples in NSW, rail cascaded to the
freight lines and transposed Wheel/Rail position at
556.578km Werris Creek to
Boggabrai
Railmate at 556.578km Dn rail showing a lip of 5.9mm
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 14
NSW condition of rail in freight
lines Werris Creek to Boggabrai
Railmate at 556.578km Up rail showing a lip of 6.3mm
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 15
More examples of cascaded
rail and transposed
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 16
Broken Hill to Parkes 609 kms
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 17
Broken Hill to Parkes 605kms
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 18
Broken Hill to Parkes 603kms
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 19
New 53 kg rail with new ANZR1 wheels
12mm clearance, 5mm below rail head the fillet radii is 11 mm
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 20
Add a lip and a square gauge corner to gauge corner
As occurs in places between Parkes to Broken Hill
Worst case illustrated
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 21
Add WPR2000 Wheel profile with
effective tight gauge of 7 mm
2.5mm clearance, 5mm below rail
head
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 22
Add 5mm tight gauge
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 23
Actual conditions as measured at
the 813 kms on the Broken Hill Line
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 24
Add Lip plus 7mmTG WRP2000
plus 5mm tight gauge
0mm clearance, 5mm below rail head, continuous flanging and possibility of uplift.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 25
NSW track gauge. The AK car measures
gauge electronically 16mm from rail surface.
This is the track ARTC inherited in Sept 2004
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 26
The motion of a conical wheel set
Called the klingel movement 1883
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 27
The motion of a conical wheel set
describes a sinusoidal path as
the wheel set moves along the track
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 28
What happens to the klingel movement
when the gauge is tightened
As per the videos
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 29
What was happening in NSW when
the WPR2000 was introduced in 2001
• The previous slides demonstrate what existed in
NSW on the Nth Sth and East West mainlines
when the WPR2000 was introduced in year
2001
• i.e. no grinding of tangent tracks and no
allowance for the thickening of the gauge corner
of the WPR2000 wheel and the gauge corner
flow creating effective tight gauge
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 30
NSW standards that existed at the
time the WPR2000 was introduced
• ARTC inherited these standards
• C2009
• C2012
• Base operating standards
• At 11 mm tight gauge apply a 20 kph
speed restriction
• Or Fix the problem
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 31
Slightly worn WPR 2000
Is unstable i
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 32
The WPR2000, I in 10 conicity with a Worn
Sydney Metro Profile in the corner
The high conicity is designed to pull the high outer
wheel from the high rail and reduce wear of
both wheel and rail
The thickening of 7mm total in the gauge corner
gives the wheel more metal to wear
The 1 in 10 conicity allows this profile to go around
tighter curves than the ANZR1 profile without
wheel creep
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 33
Vee crossing up end Leeor Loop
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 34
WPR 2000 on Unground Rail
Nth sth and east west mainlines
in NSW in 2001 except the metro
Note All Loading is in the gauge corner leading to rapid formation of
Rolling contact fatigue and other surface defects
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 35
WRP2000 Wheel on unground 53 kg rail
Broken Hill to Parkes and most of
MacArthur to Albury in year 2000 and at take up
Very Very high stresses in gauge corner, 4000 MPA plastic flow
occurs quickly. Rail behaves likes plasticine stresses are 4 times
failure stress
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 36
Plastic failure in the gauge corner creating
untestable railCorrugations, Shelling,
Flaking, Squats, RCF
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 37
Independent report for
ARTC by Monash
• Contained in this report
• The WPR2000 has wheel hollowing and flange wear
• This gives the following undesirable results
• On perfectly ground curves the high rail (H2 profile) suffers high gauge
corner contact stress.
• On tangent track the effective conicity will increase beyond a worn ANZR1
and beyond a new WPR2000 and will be unstable
• When an ANZR1 travels around a curve with a perfect H2 profile. The rail
will suffer more side wear
• The ANZR1 wheels will suffer more wear with the H2 profile.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 38
In an ideal World
• If the gauge was perfect
• If the Grinding profile was perfect
• Track geometry was perfect
• Initial investigation has shown by ARTC’s consultants the WPR 2000 profile
to be unstable when even slightly worn. New wheels borderline.
• Once instability is initiated it stays in an unstable condition until it hits a
curve or set of points.
• The profile is not commercially correct
• The WPR2000 becomes unstable when it encounters – A weld not properly ground off
– Slightly misaligned rail
– Slightest variation in gauge
– All the above are OK by the NSW standards ARTC inherited
–
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 39
Inference that the WPR2000 instability
was due to the rail profile not being
installed correctly
• ARTC will now address the wheel rail issues in the following manner
following the inference that stability is due to rail not being ground correctly
• Check stability of the wheel profiles on the rail for tangent track. – Check effective conicity for new and worn ANZR1 wheels on ground rail and worn rail
profiles.
– Likewise for the WPR 2000 new and worn profiles on ground and worn rail.
– If necessary will model bogie behaviour with the various mixes of new and worn wheel; and
rail profiles.
– Tests prototype profiles on real wagons before full introduction.
• Calculate contact stresses for the various new and worn wheels on ground
and worn rail profiles. – Curves - Check both hollow tread ( leading to gauge corner cracking of rail) and flange worn
wheels ( two point contact on the rail) – cannot assume perfect conformal contact.
– Tangent – check contact stress, including the effect on development of squats.
• .
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 40
What ARTC is addressing
• Check the curving performance of new and worn wheels on the proposed high and low leg rail profiles.
• Any other issues that the experts consider need addressing.
• Assess the costs and benefits to above and below rail operations.
• ARTC will not be skipping the analysis phase and go directly to testing. The cost of analysis is significantly below the cost of testing. Testing will be used to validate modelling so that we can readily assess a wide range of wheel profiles on the various rail profiles for the various wagons. We may suggest follow up testing on the critical combinations
• Any above or below rail CEO will not be accepting a proposal to introduce our next “good idea” and then wait and see what happens. We will need a very sound analysis for the next proposal.
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 41
Inference that Newcastle to Brisbane
is stable because of rail profile
• The WPR2000 is stable on curves (where it was designed to operate) at speeds up to 115kph
• Irrespective of the rail profile, is stable on unground rail, incorrectly ground rail and on rail with a good profile (on curves).
• The WPR2000 becomes unstable on tangent track at speeds above
• 94 kph
• ARTC business administration course. The confirming evidence trap: don’t seek supporting information only.
• Newcastle to Brisbane is predominantly curves, very few places freight trains can exceed 94 kph. Hence the accelerations will not be as high as elsewhere on the interstate network
7/05/2014 Presentation Title - to change this title go to: View >
Header & Footer 42
The Way forward
• A new rail profile has been developed by
RISSB
• The effect of tight gauge has been
considered.
• Stability has been considered
Recommended