Performance Based Track Geometry Phase 2 (2015)

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.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation. It was conducted through the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FRA, FTA, Transit Development Corporation, or AOC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This material has not been edited by TRB.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................................................. i LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................................... ii LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................... iv SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1 Background ............................................................................................................... 3 CHAPTER 2 Research Approach ................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Vehicle Characterization and Ride Quality Testing ............................................... 5 2.2 Vehicle Characterization Tests at PATH ............................................................... 5 2.2.1 Carbody Resonance Tests ......................................................................... 7 2.2.2 Suspension Stiffness Tests ........................................................................ 9 Longitudinal Stiffness Test ....................................................................... 9 Lateral Stiffness Test ............................................................................... 11 Vertical Stiffness Test ............................................................................. 12 2.3 On-Track Tests ..................................................................................................... 15 2.3.1 ISO 2631 Ride Quality Analysis Requirements ...................................... 19 2.3.2 Journal Square to 33rd Street.................................................................... 19 2.3.3 Newark to World Trade Center ............................................................... 25 CHAPTER 3 Findings and Application ........................................................................................ 30 3.1 Model Validation .................................................................................................. 30 3.2 Neural Net Development ...................................................................................... 34 3.2.1 DART NN Development ......................................................................... 35 3.2.2 PATH NN Development ......................................................................... 38 CHAPTER 4 Conclusions and Suggested Research ..................................................................... 42 4.1 NUCARS Model Validation ................................................................................ 42 4.2 On-track Tests ...................................................................................................... 42 4.3 PBTG NN Development ...................................................................................... 43 4.4 Recommendation for Future Research: Phase 3 ................................................... 43 i

List of Figures Figure 1. PATH Rail System Map ................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. PATH’s PA5 Car .............................................................................................................. 6 Figure 3. Carbody Rigid Body Modes excited during Test .............................................................. 7 Figure 4. Acceleration Placement and Description .......................................................................... 8 Figure 5. Example of Carbody Resonance Data ............................................................................... 9 Figure 6. Longitudinal Suspension Setup between Two Railcars .................................................. 10 Figure 7. Displacement Transducer for Longitudinal Suspension Test ......................................... 10 Figure 8. Example of Longitudinal Stiffness Test Data ................................................................. 11 Figure 9. Lateral Stiffness Test Setup ............................................................................................ 12 Figure 10. Air Suspension Equivalent Mechanical System............................................................ 13 Figure 11. Secondary Suspension Vertical Test Setup ................................................................... 13 Figure 12. Primary Suspension System – Chevron ........................................................................ 14 Figure 13. Primary Suspension Vertical Test Setup ....................................................................... 14 Figure 14. Axle Box Accelerometer ............................................................................................... 17 Figure 15. Carbody Accelerometer at Truck Centerline ................................................................ 17 Figure 16. Carbody Accelerometer at Center of Car ...................................................................... 17 Figure 17. Carbody Accelerometer in Driver’s Cab ....................................................................... 18 Figure 18. Instrumentation Setup ................................................................................................... 18 Figure 19. Consist Setup ................................................................................................................ 20 Figure 20. VDV Ride Quality calculated for Journal Square to 33rd Street ................................... 20 Figure 21. VDV Ride Quality calculated for 33rd Street to Journal Square ................................... 21 Figure 22. Vertical Accelerations compared to Track Geometry ................................................... 22 Figure 23. Lateral Accelerations compared to Track Geometry .................................................... 23 Figure 24. Lateral Frequency Content ............................................................................................ 24 Figure 25. Vertical Frequency Content .......................................................................................... 24 Figure 26. Consist Setup ................................................................................................................ 25 Figure 27. VDV Ride Quality calculated for Newark to World Trade Center ............................... 25 Figure 28. VDV Ride Quality calculated World Trade Center to Newark .................................... 26 Figure 29. Vertical Accelerations compared to Track Geometry ................................................... 27 Figure 30. Lateral Accelerations compared to Track Geometry .................................................... 28 ii