XU Baolei, ZHAO Wenping, DU Fei, LI Ying, DU Jianqiang, WANG Shun. Comparison of assessment methods and optimization proposal on railway vehicle material and its joint strength[J]. WELDING & JOINING, 2020, (12): 40-47. DOI: 10.12073/j.hj.20201003000
Citation: XU Baolei, ZHAO Wenping, DU Fei, LI Ying, DU Jianqiang, WANG Shun. Comparison of assessment methods and optimization proposal on railway vehicle material and its joint strength[J]. WELDING & JOINING, 2020, (12): 40-47. DOI: 10.12073/j.hj.20201003000

Comparison of assessment methods and optimization proposal on railway vehicle material and its joint strength

More Information
  • Received Date: October 02, 2020
  • Standards at home and abroad had different assessment methods for static and fatigue strength of base metal, HAZ and weld. The comparison among these standards were conducted in the article. The comparison result indicated that all standards had shortcomings illustrated as followed. There was no regulation on the fatigue strength of spot welded joint. No mention or correct regulation on strength of cold hardening stainless steel welding joint was given. Actual welded joint was hardly able to correlate to the welded joint listed in fatigue assessment standard.There existed no regulation on fatigue load in connection region between running gear and car shell, which resulted in several crack cases of car shell. The smaller allowable stress of dissimilar metals for groove welded joint was adopted. However, no consideration was given to the actual scenario that one sort of welding wire was generally used for all dissimilar metals. Strength ratio between all weld metal and base metal of each side was diversified. Incomplete penetration weld was often regarded as complete penetration weld to assess. For fillet, plug weld and slot weld,only the principal stress of corresponding node was checked whether it exceeded the allowable stress of weld/HAZ or not, but weld size, shear force and additional bending moment were left out. The optimization proposal was put forward pursuant to project experience.
  • [1]
    CEN. Railway applications-structural requirements of railway vehicle bodies-part1: locomotives and passenger rolling stock (and alternative method for freight wagons): EN 12663-1-2010 [S]. CEN-CENELEC Management Center, Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
    [2]
    AWS. Structural welding code-steel: AWS D1.1/D1.1M- 2015 [S]. AWS, USA, 2015.
    [3]
    International Union of Railways. Loadings of coach bodies and their component: UIC 566-1990 [S]. International Union of Railways, Paris, France, 1990.
    [4]
    JISC. Rolling stock-general requirements of car body structures for passenger car: JIS E7106-2018 [S]. JISC, Japan, 2018.
    [5]
    国家铁路局. 动车组车体结构强度设计及试验: TB/T 3451—2016 [S]. 北京: 中国铁道出版社, 2016.
    [6]
    国家铁路局. 机车车辆强度设计及试验鉴定规范 车体 第1部分: 客车车体:TB/T 3550.1—2019 [S]. 北京: 中国铁道出版社, 2019.
    [7]
    BSI. Guide to fatigue design and assessment of steel products:BS 7608-2014 [S]. BSI, Britain, 2014.
    [8]
    DVS. Gestaltung und Dauerfestigkeits-bewertung von Schweiß-verbindungen mit Stählen im Schienenfahrzeugbau: DVS 1612-2014 [S]. DVS, Germany, 2014.
    [9]
    DVS. Gestaltung und festigkeitsbewertung von schweißkon-strucktionen aus aluminium-legierungen im Schienenfahrzeugbau: DVS 1608-2011 [S]. DVS, Germany, 2011.
    [10]
    AWS. Structural welding code-stainless steel: AWS D1.6/D1.6M-2017 [S]. AWS, USA, 2017.
    [11]
    AWS. Structural welding code-aluminum: AWS D1.2/D1.2M-2014 [S]. AWS, USA, 2014.
    [12]
    AAR. Manual of standards and recommended practices section C-partⅡ-design, fabrication, and construction of freight cars: AAR C-II-2015[S]. AAR, USA, 2015.

Catalog

    Article views (19) PDF downloads (1) Cited by()

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return