Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
50 The principal objective of this research was to provide guidance on this topic. Complete understanding of all the issues associated with the dynamics and performance of cen- ter trucks on this type of LFLRV would be a considerable task; therefore, these conclusions should be seen as observations that have arisen during the course of this research. 1. Performance issues have arisen during the introduction of LFLRVs in the United States; however, in all cases they are now being managed reasonably effectively and, as a result, performance has improved. The solutions adopted may not be the optimum ones and are certainly not optimum for application in all cases. The issues that have arisen do not appear to be significantly worse than those that have arisen in other parts of the world during the introduction of this type of vehicle. 2. The issues associated with introducing these cars to older systems, where the track conditions may not be ideal, and new ones where the infrastructure can be built to accom- modate them differ markedly. There are also issues associ- ated with introducing new vehicle types into an established operating and maintenance culture, and compatibility with earlier, different car types. 3. In terms of the vehicle, most performance issues are influ- enced by the use of IRWs, rather than the configuration and attachment of the center truck. The issues are, there- fore, mainly those associated with the use of that type of wheel and with the design of the wheel profile. 4. Track standards must be appropriate for this type of vehi- cle. This may mean modifications to existing systems that introduce them and will mean that appropriate mainte- nance standards must be applied. 5. The introduction of LFLRVs to the United States and Canada has not had the same effect as in other parts of the world where this concept now dominates. Only two low- floor vehicle concepts have been applied, whereas other concepts might give better overall performance if they could be introduced. 6. There does not seem to be any significant difference in the standards used in the United States and those used in Ger- many that is affecting LFLRV performance. The compari- son with Germany is appropriate because that country has a history of continuous large-scale streetcar and light rail development and a substantial body of accepted stan- dards. There are, however, different philosophies in how standards are applied. 7. Each system in the United States and Canada has tended to adopt its own specifications and solutions to emerging problems. For example, nearly every system has its own wheel profile. This lack of standardization makes intro- ducing new technology and effective solutions to issues much more difficult. 8. The general advice to ensure that the wheel-rail interface is both compatible and managed properly is even more important for this type of vehicle. 9. New systems that intend on using LFLRV should avoid the extreme track geometry that characterized older streetcar lines and adopt standards appropriate to the type of system for which these cars were originally developed. C H A P T E R 6 Conclusions