Selection and ranking of the main beam geometry of a freight wagon for lightweighting

Abstract

The traditional freight wagons employ I-beam sections as the main load-bearing structures. The primary loads they carry are vertical (from loading units) and axial (from train traction and buffers). Ease of manufacturing has played an important role in the selection of the I-beam for this role. However, with lightweighting increasingly becoming an important design objective, an evaluation needs to be done to assess if there are other existing or new section profiles (geometry) that would carry the same operational loads but are lighter. This paper presents an evaluation of 24 section profiles for their ability to take the operational loads of freight wagons. The profiles are divided into two categories, namely ‘conventional – made by wagon manufacturers (including the I-beam)’ and ‘pre-fabricated’ sections. For ranking purposes, the primary design objectives or key performance indicators were bending stress, associated deflection and buckling load. Subsequently, this was treated as a multi-criteria decision-making process. The loading conditions were applied as prescribed by the EU standard EN 12663-2. To carry out structural analysis, finite element analysis was implemented using ANSYS software. To determine the validity of the finite element analysis results, correlation analysis was done with respect to beam theory. Parameters considered were: maximum stress, deflection, second moment of area, thickness, bending stiffness and flexural rigidity. The paper discusses the impreciseness related to the use of beam theory since the local stiffness of the beam is neglected leading to an inaccurate estimation of the buckling load and the vertical displacement. Even more complicated can be the estimation of the maximum stress to be used for comparison when features such as spot welds are present. The nominal stress values computed by means of Navier equation lead to an inaccurate value of the stress since it neglects the variations in the local stiffness, which can lead to an increase in the bending stress values. The main objective of the paper is the applicability of particular section profiles to the railway field with the aim of lightweighting the main structure. Sections commonly adopted in civil applications have also been investigated to understand the stiffness and strength under railway service loads. The common approach reported in literature so far makes use either of the beam theory or topological finite element approach to determine the optimised shape under the action of the simplified loading conditions. Although the previous approaches seem to be more general, the assumptions made affect the optimisation process since the stress state differs from that attained under the actual service load in the real structure. In this paper, the use of complex shape cross sections and detailed finite element models allows to take account of the real behaviour in terms of stiffness distribution and local stress effects due to manufacturing features like welds. The structural assessment carried out with the detailed models also allows for the proper comparison among the considered sections. Analysis of the results showed that three out of the 24 section profiles have the highest potential to be fitted as the main load-bearing beams for freight wagons, with the pre-fabricated Z-section being the optimum of the three.

Keywords

Intermodal freight wagon section profiles/geometry bulking bending deflection multi-criteria decision making lightweighting

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Findik

Turan

. Materials selection for lighter wagon design with a weighted property index method. Mater Des 2012; 37: 470–477.

Lee

H-A

et al.

Structural-optimization-based design process for the body of a railway vehicle made from extruded aluminum panels. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2016; 230: 1283–1296.

Prasad

Chakraborty

. A quality function deployment-based model for materials selection. Mater Des 2013; 49: 525–535.

Farshi

Alinia-Ziazi

. Sizing optimization of truss structures by method of centers and force formulation. Int J Solids Struct 2010; 47: 2508–2524.

Seo

Y-D

Kim

H-J

Youn

S-K

. Shape optimization and its extension to topological design based on isogeometric analysis. Int J Solids Struct 2010; 47: 1618–1640.

Kim

Yoon

. Multi-resolution multi-scale topology optimization—a new paradigm. Int J Solids Struct 2000; 37: 5529–5559.

Kim

. Topology optimization of beam cross sections. Int J Solids Struct 2000; 37: 477–493.

Liu

J-S

. Multi-objective and multi-loading optimization of ultralightweight truss materials. Int J Solids Struct 2004; 41: 619–635.

Ashby

Cebon

. Materials selection in mechanical design. Le J Phys IV 1993; 3: 1155–4339.

10.

Ashby

. Multi-objective optimization in material design and selection. Acta Mater 2000; 48: 359–369.

11.

Ashby

et al.

Selection strategies for materials and processes. Mater Des 2004; 25: 51–67.

12.

Karande

Gauri

Chakraborty

. Applications of utility concept and desirability function for materials selection. Mater Des 2013; 45: 349–358.

13.

Wright

. Design methods in engineering and product design, London: McGraw-Hill, 1998.

14.

Richardson

Coelho

Adriaenssens

. Robust topology optimization of truss structures with random loading and material properties: a multiobjective perspective. Comput Struct 2015; 154: 41–47.

15.

Seyfried

et al.

Light weighting opportunities and material choice for commercial vehicle frame structures from a design point of view. Adv Manuf 2015; 3: 19–26.

16.

Polyzois

Charnvarnichborikarn

. Web-flange interaction in cold-formed steel Z-section columns. J Struct Eng 1993; 119: 2607–2628.

17.

Ghosn

. Deflection of nested cold-formed steel Z-section beams. J Struct Eng 2002; 128: 1423–1428.

18.

Ghosn

Sinno

. Load capacity of nested, laterally braced, cold-formed steel Z-section beams. J Struct Eng 1996; 122: 968–971.

19.

Alinia

Dibaie

. Buckling and failure characteristics of slender web I-column girders under interactive compression and shear. Comput Methods Civil Eng 2012; 3: 15–34.

20.

Zhou

. Strength design curves and an effective width formula for cold-formed steel columns with distortional buckling. Thin-Walled Struct 2014; 79: 62–70.

21.

Naderian

Ronagh

. Buckling analysis of thin-walled cold-formed steel structural members using complex finite strip method. Thin-Walled Struct 2015; 90: 74–83.

22.

Hou

Jeronimidis

. A novel bogie design made of glass fibre reinforced plastic. Mater Des 2012; 37: 1–7.

23.

Matsika E, O'Neill C, Grasso M, De Iorio A, et al. Deliverable 3.1 detailed structural design concept for a high performance freight wagon. EC SPECTRUM Project FP7 Grant Agreement No. 266192, 2014.

24.

Wennberg D, Stichel S and Wennhage P. Substitution of corrugated sheets in a railway vehicle’s body structure by a multiple-requirement based selection process. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2012; 228: 143–157.

25.

Wallentowitz

Leyers

Parr

. Materials for future automotive body structures. Business Brief Global Automotive Manuf Technol 2003, pp. 1–4.

26.

Vasilenko DA. Refining methods of calculating fatigue resistance in welded connections of the frames of long flat wagons. PhD thesis, 2010. Defended at Petersburg State Transport University (St. Petersburg), 115.

27.

Steel T. Cold formed sections. UK TSCSS01, 2011.

28.

Limited PI. Adding strength to Indian railways. New Delhi: Railway Products Division, 2009.

29.

EC, EN 12663-2:2010 Railway applications – structural requirements of railway vehicle bodies. Part 2: freight wagons, 2010.

30.

EC, EN 14363:2005 Railway applications – testing for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway vehicles – testing of running behaviour and stationary tests, 2005.

31.

Ashby

. Materials selection in mechanical design. MRS Bull 2005; 30: 995–995.