重载列车运行工况仿真与试验比较研究
Comparative Study on Simulation and Experiment of Heavy Haul Train Operating Conditions

DOI: 10.12677/OJTT.2019.82016, PP. 129-137

Keywords: 重载列车，制动系统，空气制动，列车操纵，仿真分析
Heavy Haul Train, Braking System, Air Brake, Train Operation, Simulation Analysis

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

重载列车实际运行过程中受诸多不确定性因素影响，其相应仿真精度难度较大，使得其纵向动力学研究和操纵优化难度增加，因此仿真模拟准确性比较研究具有重要现实意义。本文根据朔黄2万吨试验数据，采用列车空气制动和纵向动力学联合仿真系统(TABLDSS)，计算了列车实际运行工况下的速度和纵向动力学水平，将仿真结果与试验结果进行比较。结果表明：仿真速度曲线与试验吻合很好，速度变化趋势基本一致，速度误差最大0.8 km/h，列车运行阻力、机车牵引/动力制动力模型准确性较高；空气制动减压特性基本一致，制动缓解时尾压基本吻合，制动出闸时间误差较小，最大为0.8 s，空气制动模型是准确的；仿真最大车钩力发生位置与试验一致，最大车钩力出现在列车缓解过程中部机车附近，制动距离和车钩力误差分别为2.4%和4.4%，仿真系统准确性较高。该工作为列车操纵优化提供了有利工具。
The actual operation of heavy haul trains is affected by many uncertain factors, and the corres-ponding simulation accuracy is difficult, which makes the longitudinal dynamics research and maneuver optimization difficult. Therefore, the comparative study of simulation accuracy has important practical significance. According to the test data of 20,000 tons of turmeric, the train air brake and longitudinal dynamics simulation system (TABLDSS) is used to calculate the speed and longitudinal dynamics of the train under actual operating conditions, and the simulation results are compared with the test results: the results show that the simulation speed curve agrees well with the test; the speed change trend is basically the same; the speed error is maximum 0.8 km/h; the train running resistance, the locomotive traction/dynamic braking force model have higher accuracy, and the air brake decompression characteristics are basically the same. When the brake is relieved, the tail pressure is basically the same; the brake opening time error is small; the maximum is 0.8 s; the air brake model is accurate; the simulated maximum coupler force occurs in the same position as the test, and the maximum coupler force appears in the train mitigation process. Near the middle locomotive, the braking distance and the hook force error were 2.4% and 4.4%, respectively, and the simulation system was highly accurate. This work provides an advantageous tool for train manipulation optimization.

References

[1]	Uyulan, C., Gokasan, M. and Bogosyan, S. (2017) Modeling, Simulation and Slip Control of a Railway Vehicle Integrated with Traction Power Supply. Cogent Engineering, 4, Article ID: 1312680. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311916.2017.1312680
[2]	Mohammadi, S. and Nasr, A. (2010) Effects of the Power Unit Location on In-Train Longitudinal Forces during Brake Application. International Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, 5, 176. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJVSMT.2010.037125
[3]	刘华伟, 王自力. 车钩间隙对重载列车牵引启动纵向冲动的影响[J]. 铁道车辆, 2018, 56(6): 7-9.
[4]	耿志修, 李雪峰, 张波. 大秦线重载列车运行仿真计算研究[J]. 中国铁道科学, 2008, 29(2): 89-92.
[5]	董克毓，魏伟. 万吨重载列车在神朔段长大下坡道循环制动优化[J]. 大连交通大学学报, 2017, 38(1): 17-20.
[6]	魏伟, 赵旭宝, 姜岩. 列车空气制动与纵向动力学集成仿真[J]. 铁道学报, 2012, 34(4): 40-46.
[7]	魏伟. 两万吨组合列车制动特性[J]. 交通运输工程学报, 2007, 7(6): 12-16.
[8]	Wu, Q., Spiryagin, M., Cole, C., et al. (2018) International Benchmarking of Longitudinal Train Dynamics Simulators: Results. Vehicle System Dynamics, 56, 343-365. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2017.1377840
[9]	胡杨. 神华铁路万吨重载列车纵向动力学试验与仿真研究[D]: [博士学位论文]. 大连: 大连交通大学, 2017: 73-84.
[10]	Wei, W., Hu, Y., Wu, Q., et al. (2017) An Air Brake Model for Longitudinal Train Dynamics Studies. Vehicle System Dynamics, 55, 517-533. https://doi.org/10.1080/00423114.2016.1254261
[11]	魏伟, 张善荣, 刘庆忠. 长大列车制动系统减压特性的计算机模拟[J]. 大连交通大学学报, 1992, 13(4): 43-49.

Full-Text