International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012) Dynamic Analysis of Railway track Sunita Kumari1, Pragyan P Sahoo2, Dr V A Swant3 M.Tech Student, 2Research Scholar, 3Assistant Professor, Address, Deptt Of Civil Engg IIT Roorkee-247667,India Damping of linear hysteretic nature was considered in this study, it is assumed that the foundation displacement at a point is dependent only on the force acting on the point by conducting parametric studies Abstract— In the present analysis, an infinite Euler– Bernoulli beam of constant cross-section resting on an elastic foundation is considered The beam and foundation are assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic The foundation is modeled using one parameter without damping The beam is subjected to a constant point load moving with a constant speed along the beam An effort has been made to find the solution of the governing differential equation analytically The equations governing different responses such as beam deflection, bending moment have been obtained in closed form for undamped case The maximum displacement occurs behind the moving load The configurations of the steady state solutions may change as damping varies.At subcritical speed the absolute value of the deflection of the beam increases with increase of the load velocity Peak maximum deflection appears when the load travels at the critical speed II LITERATURE REVIEW The approach of beams on elastic foundation is used by many researchers for the analysis of pavement The problem concerned with the dynamic behavior of an EulerBernoulli beam Excited by a moving load has received considerable attention in civil engineering in the recent years Kenny (1954) investigated the effect of viscous damping based on the analytical solution for steady state response of an infinite Euler–Bernoulli beam resting on Winkler foundation Harr et al (1969) developed computer program for analyzing beams on elastic foundations, represented by a single layer model whose properties were characterized by two generalized elastic parameters, based on Vlasov’s general variational method Fryba(1972) analyzed the response of an unbounded elastic body subjected to a moving load by using triple Fourier integral transformation A detailed solution for the problem of a constant moving load along an infinite beam resting on an elastic foundation was presented by considering all possible speeds and values of viscous damping based on the concept of equivalent stiffness of the supporting structures Two kinds of finite elements were formulated by Zhaohua and Cook (1983) to analyze beams on one or two-parameter foundations based on exact displacement function Numerical results showed that the element based on the exact displacement function gives exact response even for smaller number of elements Cifuentes(1989) presented a combined finite element-finite difference technique based on Lagrange Multiplier formulation to study the dynamic response of an Euler-Bernoulli beam excited by a moving mass Sun (2001) presented a closed form solution for the response of a beam resting on a Winkler foundation subjected to a moving line load by means of twodimensional Fourier transform and Green’s function The response of the beam was studied for the damped case at subcritical speeds Mallik et al (2006) investigated the steady-state response of Euler–Bernoulli beam placed on an elastic foundation and subjected to a concentrated load moving with a constant speed Keywords— CVR, Euler–Bernoulli beam, Winkler beam I INTRODUCTION Recent findings indicate one of major causes of damages, which are attributed to the resonant behaviors, in a railway track Basically, when a railway track is excited to generalize dynamic loading, the railway track deforms and then vibrates for certain duration Dynamic responses of the railway track and its components are the key to evaluate the structural capacity of railway track and its components The track vibrations can cause the crack damage in railway sleepers or fasteners, or even the breakage of ballast support When the foundation is modeled as an elastic foundation, a critical velocity is found for the existing for moving load Waves excited by a moving load with supercritical velocity propagate in a different way as they when the load velocity is subcritical Because high speed vehicles (e.g., trains and automobiles) are getting extensively adopted as the surface transportation carriers, hence considerable attention should be paid to the response of the transportation structure The main objective of this study is to discuss the vibration and stability of a Bernoulli–Euler beam resting on a Winklertype elastic foundation subjected to a static axial force under a moving load A distributed load with a constant advance velocity was considered instead of a point load because moving loads in practice have normally a finite area over which they are distributed and the point load represents only an extreme case 645 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012) The governing equations in the form of deflection, bending moment and shear force were obtained in closed form for the undamped case For the case where damping is also present, numerical results were obtained for both underdamping and overdamping cases It is being reported that in the ideal undamped case, the steady state will never be attained at supercritical speed of the load Also the effect of difference in the modeling of the foundation was found to be insignificant Kien (2008) adopted the FEM to investigate the dynamic response of prestressed Timoshenko beam resting on twoparameter elastic foundation subjected to a moving concentrated harmonic load It was reported that the critical velocity at which the dynamic deflection of the beam reaches a peak value, is governed by the foundation stiffness Winkler foundation subject to a platoon of moving loads with uniform line distributions was presented by Sun and Luo (2008) Numerical methods based on the fast Fourier transform were presented for efficient computation of dynamic response of the beam In the present analysis, which is the extension of Mallik et al (2006), an infinite Euler–Bernoulli beam of constant cross-section resting on an elastic foundation is considered The beam and foundation are assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic The foundation is modeled using both one parameter without damping The beam is subjected to a constant point load moving with a constant speed along the beam An effort has been made to find the solution of the governing differential equation analytically The equations governing different responses such as beam deflection, bending moment have been obtained in closed form for the undamped case Where w(x,t) is the transverse deflection of the beam(m), E is the Young’s modulus of the beam material(N/m2), I is the second moment area of the beam cross section about its neutral axis(m4), k is the spring constant (first parameter)per unit beam length(N/m2), k1 is the shear parameter (second parameter) of the soil (N), ρ is the mass per unit length of the beam (kg/m), c is the coefficient of viscous damping per unit length of the beam (Ns/m2), P(x, t) is the applied moving load per unit length (N/m), x is the space coordinate measured along the length of the beam (m), t is the time (s) If loads are moving in the positive x direction with a constant advance velocity v, a moving coordinate ξ can be defined by (x-vt) Then, the governing differential equation in a moving Cartesian coordinate system can be expressed as EI 4 w 2 w 2 w dw k kw c P x vt Eq.2 2 x dx t dt Where P is the concentrated load moves with a constant velocity V, P(x, t) = Pδ(x-vt) where δ is the Dirac’s delta function and x is measured from the location of the load at x = Using the two parameter model, the values of k and k1 are based on the constrained deformation of an elastic layer given by Vlazov and Leotiev[9] For a single layer of thickness H with a linear variation of normal stresses, k and k1 per unit width are given by k Es H 1 s 1 2s ; k1 Es H 1 s Divide both sides of Eq (2) by EI to get III MODELING OF BEAMS ON ELASTIC FOUNDATION SUBJECTED TO MOVING LOADS 4 w dx The differential equation of motion for an Euler– Bernoulli beam, resting on a two-parameter foundation and subjected to a moving load is given by w w w dw k1 kw c P x, t dt x dx t EI k1 w k w c w P w x vt Eq.3 EI x EI EI t EI t EI IV INFINITE BEAM ON A ONE PARAMETER FOUNDATION MODEL Eq.1 Now considering one parameter model and without damping the above Eq reduces to 4 w dx 646 k 2 w P w x vt EI EI t EI International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012) Assuming the solution in the form of sin and cos (trigonometric function) with exponential terms Now defining, a EI k k c ; c1 ; d EI 2EI EI ; b2 w1 e C1 sin C2 cos For an infinite beam in the steady state, it is found that the response w becomes a function of (x-vt), rather than of (x, t) The issue of the stability of the moving mass on beam becomes easier to solve if the reference frame is related to the moving mass Thus, the Dirac delta function that locates the position of the contact point between the moving mass and the beam becomes a space-dependent function only Ensuring,w1vanishes as w dx d 4w d b w 2a w t w1 w2 ; w1 w2 w1 w2 ; w1 w2 b2 w 2av P x vt EI d 2w d 0 Let Undamped case (velocity less than critical velocity) We define critical velocity of the moving load vcr b a ; v vcr With av2 b ; v b a Parameters or v vcr ρ(kg/m) EI(Nm2) k (N/m2) k1(N) P(N/m) Es (N/m2) υs Thus four roots of the Eq (6) will be in the form of complex conjugates and can be written as: m1 i m3 i Where ; m2 i ; m4 i b av 2 Pe cos sin for EIb Table Soil and Beam Parameters The roots of the equation as follows: av w2 V PARAMETRIC STUDIES m4 2av2 m2 b2 Eq.5 Pe sin cos for EIb The parametric study is carried out in order to get the response of moving loads in undamed case Default values of parameters used for numerical computation These parameters reflect typical structural and material properties of pavement Using the parametric value deflection has been calculated using the above formulation The variation in deflection and bending moment with new co-ordinate system ξ are calculated This after substituting in Eq (5) yields b w1 Eq.4 w em ; P EI Appling boundary condition, the final solution is obtained as Us assume that the solution of the above equation as m2 av i for Ensuring,w1vanishes as The boundary conditions are as follows: And hence can be written as follows using the above defined parameters w2 e D3 sin D4 cos x vt for b av 2 647 Assumed values 25 1.75×106 40.78×105 666875 93.36×103 3.73×106 0.4 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012) VI RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Deflection without Damping: Based on the above analysis, numerical computation has performed to examine the dynamic displacement response of the beam to a moving load Fig.1 presents the displacement variation of beam with parameter x v t where x varies from to 50m, while time from t=0-1 second The effect of different velocity ratio (such as 0.25, 0.5, 0.75 and 0.99) is illustrated in Figs to It is observed that the defection at x=0 with time t=0 sec deflection is at peak and is found maximum deflection occurs beneath the load With the absence of the damping the dynamic response is found to be symmetric for case x=0, i.e the dynamic response of the moving load propagates along both the direction in the same way for and Fig.2 Deflection VsDistance with velocity ratio= 0.5 without damping Fig.3 Deflection Vs Distance with velocity ratio = 0.75 without damping Fig.1 Deflection Vs Distance with velocity ratio= 0.25 without damping 648 International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459, Volume 2, Issue 11, November 2012) With the distance away from the load the response gradually dies down Here also from the figure it may be inferred that maximum shear force acting at point where the profile of the bending moment changes For subcritical velocity, the bending moment distribution is almost symmetrical about the load Again considering, the increasing effect of the load velocity ratio, negative bending moment increases rather than the positive bending moment This can be justified from Fig -6 Fig.4 Deflection Vs Distance with velocity ratio= 0.99 without damping Fig 1-2shows that with increase of distance i.e at x=10m the deflection is almost same in both cases where as in Fig.3 it is more than the earlier observation So it may be concluded that with increase of velocity ratio maximum deflection increases This is true for subcritical speed whereas in Fig.4 the critical velocity ratio 0.99 close to critical velocity hence the deflection shoots high Hence it may be concluded that most of the deflection occurs under the load as the energy of the deformation in the beam foundation system propagates with a speed lower than that of load At a distance away from the load the deflection gradually diminishes as absorption of radiation energy increases with distance Fig.5 B.M Vs Distance with velocity ratio=.25 without damping Bending Moment without Damping It is clearly seen that the maximum negative bending moment occurs at a point shifted ahead of the load and the amount of shifting decreases with increasing speed The maximum positive bending moment however occurs near the load as long as v