applied

sciences
Case Report
Case Report
Prediction
Prediction of
of Theoretical Derailments Caused
Theoretical Derailments Caused by
by Cross-Winds
Cross-Winds
with Frequency
JunWoo Kim 1, InHo Song
, InHo Song 2 and
2 and JeongSeo Koo
JeongSeo 2,* 2,
Koo *

11 Department
DepartmentofofRolling
RollingStock
StockSystem
SystemEngineering,
Engineering,Seoul
SeoulNational
NationalUniversity
UniversityofofScience
Scienceand
andTechnology,
Technology,
Seoul
Seoul01811,
01811,Korea;
Korea;jwkim@seoulmetro.co.kr
jwkim@seoulmetro.co.kr
22 Department of Railway Safety Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology, Seoul
Department of Railway Safety Engineering, Seoul National University of Science and Technology,
01811,
SeoulKorea;
01811, ho020202@naver.com
Korea; ho020202@naver.com
** Correspondence:
Correspondence:koojs@seoultech.ac.kr
koojs@seoultech.ac.kr

Abstract:
Abstract: In this paper,
In this paper,theoretical
theoreticalderailment
derailmentequations
equations forfor cross-wind
cross-wind withwith frequency
frequency werewere de-
derived
rived to assess running safety. For a KTX (Korean high-speed train) unit, the wheel
to assess running safety. For a KTX (Korean high-speed train) unit, the wheel unloading ratios, which unloading ratios,
which
are theare the criteria
criteria for evaluating
for evaluating derailments
derailments in UIC (International
in UIC (International union of railways)
union of railways) and TSI
and TSI (Technical
(Technical
SpecificationSpecification for Interoperability)
for Interoperability) regulations, regulations,
were calculated were calculated
through throughunder
the formula the formula un-
the driving
der the driving regulations according to cross-wind speeds, and the theoretical
regulations according to cross-wind speeds, and the theoretical results were compared and evaluated results were com-
pared
through anda evaluated
multibodythrough
dynamics a multibody dynamics In
(MBD) simulation. (MBD) simulation.
addition, the wheelIn addition,
unloading theratios
wheelwere
un-
loading
calculatedratios
forwere calculated
various for various
frequencies frequencies
of cross-winds. Asofa cross-winds. As a result
result of the formula andof MBD,
the formula and
the wheel
MBD, the wheel
unloading ratiosunloading
were shown ratios were shown
to increase rapidlyto regardless
increase rapidly
of the regardless
dampers inofsuspension
the dampers in sus-
when the
pension when the cross-wind frequency and the natural frequency of a vehicle
cross-wind frequency and the natural frequency of a vehicle were in agreement. Finally, we calculated were in agreement.
Finally, we calculated
the changes the changesratio
of wheel unloading of wheel unloading
for different trackratio for different
gauges and found track
thatgauges
these and found
theoretical
that these theoretical
equations equations
could calculate more could
accuratecalculate
results more accurate
than the existingresults than the
Kunieda’s existing
formula. TheKunieda’s
formula
formula.
derived in The formula
this study derived
has the in this studyofhas
advantage the advantage
considering of considering
various variables, suchvarious variables,cross-
as fluctuant such



as fluctuant cross-winds, rail irregularities, and derailment behaviors, which
winds, rail irregularities, and derailment behaviors, which were not considered in previous studies were not considered


in
orprevious
Kunieda’s studies or Kunieda’s
formula. It could beformula.
used for Itsetting
couldsuspensions
be used for setting suspensions
or railway or railway vehicle
vehicle specifications in the
Citation: Kim, J.; Song, I.; Koo, J. specifications in the initial design stage.
initial design stage.
Prediction of Theoretical Derailments
Citation: Kim, J.W.; Song, I.H.; Koo,
Caused by Cross-Winds with Keywords:
Keywords: derailment;
derailment; cross-wind;
cross-wind; frequency;
frequency; dynamic
dynamic simulation
simulation
J.S. Prediction of Theoretical
Frequency. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947.
Derailments Caused by Cross-Winds
https://doi.org/10.3390/app11072947
with Frequency. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11,
x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx
Academic Editor: Nicola Bosso
1. Introduction
Introduction
Academic Editor: Nicola Bosso
Received: 9 February 2021 There
There are a lot of derailment causes
causes for
for railway
railway vehicles,
vehicles, such
such asas improper
improper wheel–
wheel–
Accepted: 22 March 2021 rail interactions,
rail interactions,track
trackirregularities,
irregularities,and
andcross-winds.
cross-winds. Recently,
Recently, thethe speeds
speeds of railway
of railway ve-
Received: 9 February 2021 vehicles
hicles including
including freight
freight trains
trains haveincreased
have increasedbutbutthe
theweights
weightsof of railway
railway vehicles
vehicles have
Published: 25 March 2021
Accepted: 22 March 2021
decreased. For these
thesereasons,
reasons,cross-winds
cross-windshavehaveincreasingly become
increasingly becomethethecause of derailment
cause of derail-
Published: 25 March 2021
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral ment accidents [1]. In addition, the strength of typhoons or gusts has increased climate
accidents [1]. In addition, the strength of typhoons or gusts has increased due to due to
with regard to jurisdictional claims in change.change.
climate So the risk
So of
thederailments by strongby
risk of derailments winds has
strong increased
winds [2,3]. Derailment
has increased accidents
[2,3]. Derailment
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu-
published maps and institutional affil- by cross-wind
accidents frequentlyfrequently
by cross-wind occur all around thearound
occur all world, the
including
world, Japan
including[4], China
Japan [5],
[4], and so
China
tral with regard to jurisdictional
iations. forth,
[5], andasso
shown
forth,inasFigure
shown1.in Figure 1.
claims in published maps and institu-
tional affiliations.

Copyright: ©©2021
Copyright: 2021
by by the authors.
the authors. Li-
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article
This article is
is an
an open
open access
accessarticle
article
distributed under the terms
distributed under the terms and con- and
conditions
ditions of Creative
of the the Creative Commons
Commons At-
Attribution (CC BY) license (https://
tribution (CC BY) license (http://crea-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/
tivecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Figure 1. Derailment
Derailment accidents
accidents in Japan by strong cross-winds. [4].
4.0/).

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x. https://doi.org/10.3390/xxxxx www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947. https://doi.org/10.3390/app11072947 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 20
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 2 of 21

As
As derailment accidents by
derailment accidents bystrong
strongwinds
windshave
have become
become serious,
serious, thethe risks
risks of derail-
of derailment
ment by winds are evaluated by criteria given in standards like EN (European
by winds are evaluated by criteria given in standards like EN (European Standard), JIS Standard),
JIS (Japanese
(Japanese Industrial
Industrial Standards)
Standards) at at thedesign
the designstage
stageofofrailway
railwayvehicles.
vehicles. In Europe, the the
safety
safety of
of cross-winds
cross-winds by by CWC
CWC (characteristic
(characteristic wind
wind curves)
curves) inin EN
EN standard
standard has
has usually
usually
been
been evaluated
evaluated[6,7],
[6,7], and
and the
the EN
EN andand UIC
UIC regulations
regulations provide
provide aa model
model forfor wind
wind forces
forces
actingon
acting onaavehicle
vehicleunder
undervarious
variousconditions
conditions such
such as
as aa wind
wind force
force of
of Chinese
Chinese hat
hat type
type and
and
wind pressure
wind pressure acting
acting onon aa vehicle
vehicle when
when entering a tunnel, as shown in Figure 2 [8,9].

Figure2.
Figure Tunnel pressure
2.Tunnel pressure profile
profile at a position just behind the nose of a train.

Sincethe
Since the1970s
1970sinin Japan,
Japan, Masharu
Masharu Kunieda
Kunieda [10][10] proposed
proposed Kunieda’s
Kunieda’s formula
formula to eval-to
evaluate the risk of derailment by cross-wind because derailment accidents
uate the risk of derailment by cross-wind because derailment accidents had been fre- had been
frequently
quently caused
caused by strong
by strong cross-winds.
cross-winds.
Since the shape of railway vehiclesisis aa box
Since the shape of railway vehicles box type
type which
which can
can be
be severely
severely affected
affected byby
cross-wind, much research on derailment by cross-wind has been
cross-wind, much research on derailment by cross-wind has been carried out.carried out.
Thestudies
The studiesofofcross-winds
cross-windsacting
actingon
onrailway
railwayvehicles
vehiclescan
canbe
bedivided
dividedinto
intotwo
twofields:
fields:
(1) aerodynamics, which considers the wind flow and force effects on vehicles,
(1) aerodynamics, which considers the wind flow and force effects on vehicles, and (2) and (2)
vehicle dynamics, which evaluates the risk of derailments of trains using the force
vehicle dynamics, which evaluates the risk of derailments of trains using the force effects effects
derivedfrom
derived from aerodynamics.
aerodynamics.

•• Aerodynamics
Aerodynamics
Zhuang Sun measured
Zhuang measured the thewind
windforce
forceacting
actingonon a train when
a train whenit passed by aby
it passed windbreak
a wind-
breach,
break and studied
breach, the effects
and studied according
the effects to the gap
according to thesizegap
of the
sizewindbreak breach through
of the windbreak breach
simulations
through [11]. Mulugeta
simulations BiadgoBiadgo
[11]. Mulugeta Asress Asress
carriedcarried
out simulations
out simulationson theonICE the2ICE
high-
2
speed train for a range of various yaw angles to compare with wind tunnel
high-speed train for a range of various yaw angles to compare with wind tunnel test data, test data, and
evaluated
and evaluatedthe changes of wind
the changes flows
of wind according
flows to the
according to yaw angles
the yaw through
angles simulation
through [12].
simulation
S. Giappino studied the aerodynamic coefficients through wind tunnel
[12]. S. Giappino studied the aerodynamic coefficients through wind tunnel tests on tests on down-scale
models, which
down-scale werewhich
models, on a lightweight train and a high-speed
were on a lightweight train, and evaluated
train and a high-speed train, androllover
evalu-
risks using the CWC based on static equilibrium [13].
ated rollover risks using the CWC based on static equilibrium [13].
Research on
Research on aerodynamics
aerodynamicshas hasbeen
beencarried
carriedoutout
through
throughtests, using
tests, real real
using or down scale
or down
models, and CFD (computational fluid dynamics) simulations. The tests
scale models, and CFD (computational fluid dynamics) simulations. The tests using a real using a real vehicle
were carried
vehicle out only
were carried inonly
out a special case because
in a special of cost of
case because and
costtest
andbed problems.
test In many
bed problems. In
studies, down-scale tests and CFD simulations were performed in
many studies, down-scale tests and CFD simulations were performed in order to obtain order to obtain wind
force acting on a vehicle or aerodynamic characteristics of a vehicle. Whereas down-scale
wind force acting on a vehicle or aerodynamic characteristics of a vehicle. Whereas down-
tests yield highly reliable values of the measured forces, CFD simulation reduces the cost
scale tests yield highly reliable values of the measured forces, CFD simulation reduces the
of studies on phenomena, such as the pressure field and the wind flow [14].
cost of studies on phenomena, such as the pressure field and the wind flow [14].
• Vehicle dynamics
Takahiro Hosoi [15] used MBD (multibody dynamics) simulation to obtain the derail-
ment coefficient for all wheels when cross-wind was applied in a curved track. In addition,
 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 20

• Vehicle dynamics
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 3 of 21
Takahiro Hosoi [15] used MBD (multibody dynamics) simulation to obtain the de-
railment coefficient for all wheels when cross-wind was applied in a curved track. In ad-
dition, the derailment coefficients according to vehicle speeds and wind speeds were an-
the derailment coefficients according to vehicle speeds and wind speeds were analyzed.
alyzed. C. Baker [16] performed down-scale tests and CFD simulations to obtain the aer-
C. Baker [16] performed down-scale tests and CFD simulations to obtain the aerodynamic
odynamic coefficients
coefficients of a passenger of acar
passenger car and
and a freight car.a freight
The wind car.forces
The wind wereforces were calculated
calculated based on
based
the on the
results andresults
appliedand applied
to the MBDto the MBD The
simulation. simulation. The risk ofwas
risk of derailment derailment
assessedwas under as-
sessed under various conditions reflecting wind forces
various conditions reflecting wind forces and actual track conditions. Masaharu Kunieda and actual track conditions.
Masaharu
studied theKunieda
rollover studied
derailment the that
rollover
could derailment
be causedthat could be caused
by cross-wind and/or bycentrifugal
cross-wind
and/or centrifugal force using physical parameters such
force using physical parameters such as the center of gravity, aerodynamic coefficient,as the center of gravity, aerody-
namic coefficient, and the center of wind force on a vehicle
and the center of wind force on a vehicle body [10]. It was confirmed that the theoretical body [10]. It was confirmed
that the
results theoretical
obtained results
through the obtained
formula and through the formula
the statical and the
experimental onesstatical experimental
obtained through
ones obtained through the full-scale real tests were
the full-scale real tests were in good agreement [17]. The formula has been usedin good agreement [17]. Theinformula
Japan
has
to been used in
theoretically Japan atorollover
predict theoretically predictbya cross-winds
derailment rollover derailment
until now by cross-winds
[18]. S. W. Nam until
now [18]. S. W. Nam researched the rollover derailment safety
researched the rollover derailment safety of the KTX based on Kunieda’s formula, consid- of the KTX based on Ku-
nieda’s
ering theformula,
wind forcesconsidering
generated the bywind forces
a train generated
running from bythe
a train running
opposite from the
direction and oppo-
the
site direction
cross-wind on and the cross-wind
a curved track [19]. on a curved track [19].
Researchon
Research onderailments
derailmentsisiscarried carriedout outusing
usingMBDMBDsimulations
simulations andand theoretical
theoretical calcu-
calcula-
lations.
tions. ByBy thethe way,
way, it is
it is difficult
difficult toto obtainaccurate
obtain accurateresults
resultsthrough
throughtheoretical
theoreticalcalculation
calculation
becausethe
because thebehavior
behaviorof ofaarailway
railwayvehicle
vehiclecouldcouldbe beobtained
obtainedthrough
throughvarious
variousvariables
variablesand and
nonlinearequations.
nonlinear equations.So, So,in in
manymany studies,
studies, the the running
running safetysafety has evaluated
has been been evaluated using MBDusing
MBD simulation
simulation to obtainto obtain
resultsresults
similarsimilar
to realtosituations.
real situations.
However,However, a theoretical
a theoretical derail-
derailment
ment analysis
analysis is necessary
is necessary to derive to derive good estimations
good estimations on suspensions
on suspensions at the design
at the initial initial design
stage,
stage, because
because everyof
every detail detail of information
information on a vehicleon a vehicle
must bemust be prepared
prepared for MBD forsimulations,
MBD simu-
lations,
which which
give giveresult.
a better a better result.
Although a lot
Although a lot of of studies
studies onon derailments
derailments by cross-wind
by cross-wind werewereconducted,
conducted,the derailment
the derail-
study on cross-winds
ment study on cross-windswith frequencies
with frequencies generated by geographical
generated by geographical features or wayside
features or way-
structures
side structuresis insufficient.
is insufficient.
AAcross-wind
cross-windwith withexciting
excitingfrequency
frequencycan canactactononvehicles
vehiclesdue duetotorailside
railsidestructures
structures
that
that are
are repeatedly placed, placed, as asininFigure
Figure3,3,when when running
running on on a bridge.
a bridge. However,
However, the
the theo-
theoretical derailment equations due to cross-wind in the
retical derailment equations due to cross-wind in the previous studies could only stati- previous studies could only
statically
cally evaluateevaluate
the the derailment
derailment riskrisk
underunder a constant
a constant windwindspeedspeed condition
condition [10,19],
[10,19], andandthe
the fluctuant wind or gust conditions have been evaluated
fluctuant wind or gust conditions have been evaluated using a multibody dynamics sim- using a multibody dynamics
simulation [15,16,20].
ulation [15,16,20].

Figure3.3.Structures
Figure Structuresinstalled
installedwith
withregular
regularintervals.
intervals.

Inthis
In thispaper,
paper,aatheoretical
theoreticalformula
formulaononthe
therisk
riskof
ofderailment
derailmentwas
wasderived
derivedconsidering
considering
cross-windswith
cross-winds withvarying
varyingwind
wind forces
forces generated
generated by by structures
structures displaced
displaced at regular
at regular inter-
intervals
vals
on theon the trackside.
trackside. Then,
Then, the the relationship
relationship of the cross-wind
of the cross-wind frequencyfrequency to the
to the natural natural
frequency
of a vehicle was evaluated. The main content in this study is to predict the behavior of
a railway vehicle using theoretical calculations, and the aerodynamic coefficients and
cross-wind condition were referred to in previous studies [21–23] and the regulation [24]
on driving conditions of high-speed trains in Korea.
 frequency of a vehicle was evaluated. The main content in this study is to predict the be-
havior of a railway vehicle using theoretical calculations, and the aerodynamic coefficients
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 4 of 21
and cross-wind condition were referred to in previous studies [21–23] and the regulation
[24] on driving conditions of high-speed trains in Korea.
To consider the
To consider thedynamic
dynamiceffects
effects
of of cyclic
cyclic cross-winds
cross-winds and and wheelsets
wheelsets runningrunning on
on tracks
tracks with irregularities, we combined this formulation with the single wheelset
with irregularities, we combined this formulation with the single wheelset derailment derail-
ment formula
formula derived
derived by Koo byand
Koo and others
others in previous
in previous studiesstudies
[25–27].[25–27].
So, this So, this derailment
derailment formula
formula
was improved for running train derailments, which is different from Kunieda’s Kunieda’s
was improved for running train derailments, which is different from formula or
formula
previousorderailment
previous derailment
theories fortheories forstanding
statically staticallytrain
standing train derailments.
derailments.

2.2.Vehicle
Vehicle Behaviors
Behaviors under
under aa Constant
Constant Cross-Wind
Cross-Wind
2.1. Formula for a Constant Cross-Wind Acting on aa Car
2.1. Formula for a Constant Cross-Wind Acting on Car Body
Body
Sincerailway
Since railwayvehicles
vehiclesrun
runon onrails,
rails,the
thelateral
lateraland
and vertical
vertical forces
forces applied
applied to
to the
the rails
rails
can be used to assess derailment. When a cross-wind acts on a car body,
can be used to assess derailment. When a cross-wind acts on a car body, the forces acting the forces acting
onsuspensions
on suspensionsof ofthe
thevehicle
vehiclemust
mustbe be known
known to to evaluate
evaluate its
its derailment.
derailment. These
Theseforces
forces are
are
closely related to the data of the vertical and horizontal displacements and
closely related to the data of the vertical and horizontal displacements and the roll angle the roll angle of
the body.
of the body.
Thefree
The freebody
bodydiagram
diagram of of aa railway
railway vehicle
vehicle is
is shown
shown inin Figure
Figure 44 [28].
[28].

Figure
Figure4.4.The
Thefree
freebody
bodydiagram
diagramof
ofaavehicle
vehicleunder
underaacross-wind.
cross-wind.

Thefree
The free body
body diagram
diagramisis divided
dividedintointoaacarcar body,
body, aa bogie,
bogie, and
and aa wheelset
wheelset when
when aa
cross-wind force
cross-wind force with an upper
upper angle
angle ofof ϕφisisapplied
appliedatataadistance
distanceofof“d”“d”from
fromthe center
the of
center
gravity of the body.
of gravity of the body.
To take
To take into
into account
account thethe equivalent
equivalent amount
amount to to one
one wheelset,
wheelset, itit isis assumed
assumed that
that the
the
massand
mass androtational
rotationalinertias
inertias ofof the
the car
car body
body are are 1/4
1/4and andthose
thoseofofthe thebogie
bogieare
are1/2
1/2[29].
[29].
Forthe
For theprimary
primarysuspension,
suspension,the thevertical
verticalandand lateral
lateral stiffness
stiffness values
values of
of rubber-metal
rubber-metal
springsinstalled
springs installed atat an
an axle
axle box
box were
were denoted
denoted as as kk1l1land
andkk1v1v, respectively,
, respectively,because
becauseeach
eachaxle
axle
box is directly connected with the bogie. For the secondary suspension,
box is directly connected with the bogie. For the secondary suspension, the vertical and the vertical and
lateral stiffness values of air springs connecting the bogie and the
lateral stiffness values of air springs connecting the bogie and the car body were denoted car body were denoted
askk2l2land
as andkk2v2vconsidering
consideringtheir
theirhalf
halfvalues
valuestotoeacheachwheelset.
wheelset.
The static equilibrium equation of a vehicle unittotopredict
The static equilibrium equation of a vehicle unit predictthe thespring
springforces transmitted
forces transmit-
by the
ted by thecross-wind
cross-wind cancan
be summarized
be summarized as follows.
as follows.
• Static equilibrium equation for the car body:

v2
 
∑ Fx2 = Pt cos ∅ + m2 r
cos ϕ − g sin ϕ − FRH2 − FLH2 = 0 (1)

 2 
v
∑ Fy2 = m2
r
sin ϕ + g cos ϕ − Pt sin ∅ − FRV2 − FLV2 = 0 (2)
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 5 of 21

∑ MG2 = Pt (d cos ∅ + l sin ∅) + ( FRH2 + FLH2 )h2 + ( FLV2 − FRV2 )e2 = 0 (3)

• Static equilibrium equation for the bogie:

v2
 
∑ Fx1 = m1 r cos ϕ − g sin ϕ + FRH2 + FLH2 − FRH1 − FLH1 = 0 (4)

 2 
v
∑ Fy1 = m1 r sin ϕ + g cos ϕ + FRV2 + FLV2 − FRV1 − FLV1 = 0 (5)

∑ MG1 = ( FRH2 + FLH2 )h1u + ( FRV2 − FLV2 )e2 + ( FRH1 + FLH1 )h1l + ( FLV1 − FRV1 )e1 = 0 (6)

• Static equilibrium equation for a wheelset:

v2
 
∑ Fx0 = FLH1 + FRH1 + m0 r
cos ϕ − g sin ϕ − R RH = 0 (7)

 2 
v
∑ Fy0 = m0
r
sin ϕ + g cos ϕ + FLV1 + FRV1 − R RV − R LV = 0 (8)

∑ MG0 = RRH h0 + ( FRV1 − FLV1 )e1 + ( R LV − RRV )e0 = 0 (9)

The forces of the secondary suspension springs generated by the relative displace-
ments between the body and the bogie are as follows.

FRH2 = FLH2 = k2l ( x2 − x1 − h2 θ2 + h1u θ1 ) (10)

FRV2 = k2v (y2 − y1 + e2 θ2 − e2 θ1 ) (11)

FLV2 = k2v (y2 − y1 − e2 θ2 + e2 θ1 ) (12)
The forces of the primary suspension springs generated by the relative displacements
between the bogie and the wheelset are as follows.

FRH1 = FLH1 = k1l ( x1 − x0 − h1l θ1 ) (13)

FRV1 = k1v (y1 − y0 + e1 θ1 − e1 θ0 ) (14)

FLV1 = k1v (y1 − y0 − e1 θ1 + e1 θ0 ) (15)
The contact forces between the wheel and the rail can be calculated from the primary
suspensions deformations as follows.

R RH = k0l ( x0 − h0 θ0 ) (16)

R RV = k0v (y0 + e0 θ0 ) (17)

R LV = k0v (y0 − e0 θ0 ) (18)

2.2. Dynamic Equations for a Cyclical Cross-Wind Acting on the Body

Winds in nature can generally blow at a constant speed but sometimes in the form
of momentary gusts in the EN regulation. However, a cross-wind with various frequency
components acts on railway vehicles by means of wayside structures repeatedly positioned
or a cross-running train from the opposite direction.
In this study, we assumed that the cyclical cross-wind consists of one sine component.
We evaluated how it affects derailment of a railway vehicle.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20
tioned or a cross-running train from the opposite direction.
In this study, we assumed that the cyclical cross-wind consists of one sine compo-
nent. We evaluated how it affects derailment of a railway vehicle.
We can acts
components consider a wind vehicles
on railway force with
byfrequency
means of as the summation
wayside of repeatedly
structures a constant wind
posi-
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 force ofor𝑃a cross-running
tioned and an alternating
train wind force
from the of 𝐹 sin
opposite 𝜔𝑡 as shown in Figure 5.
direction. 6 of 21
In this study, we assumed that the cyclical cross-wind consists of one sine compo-
nent. We evaluated how it affects derailment of a railway vehicle.
WeWecan
canconsider
consideraawind
windforce
force with
with frequency
frequencyas as the
the summation
summationofofaa constant
constantwind
wind
force of 𝑃
forceof and an
Pt and an alternating
alternating wind
windforce ofF𝐹
forceof sinωt
w sin 𝜔𝑡asasshown
shownininFigure
Figure5.5.

Figure 5. The wind force with a frequency component.

In order to derive the dynamic equations for the cross-wind with frequency, the free
body diagram in term of a deformed shape is shown in Figure 6. In this step, the centrifu-
gal force
Figure
Figure and
The
5.5.The gravity
wind
wind forcewere
force withaanot
with considered
frequency
frequency because their effects were considered in the
component.
component.
previous step in Figure 4.
InInorder
And order
then,tothe
to derive the
finalthe
derive dynamic
forces equationsand
of suspensions
dynamic equations forthe
for thecross-wind
cross-wind
behavior awith
of with
trainfrequency, thefree
can be calculated
frequency, the free
body diagram
by superimposing
body in
diagram in term term of
the of a
two deformed shape
results obtained
a deformed is shown
shape isinshown in Figure
the previous
in Figure 6.
stepIn this step,
(Figure
6. In the
4) and
this step, centrifugal
this step
the centrifu-
force
(Figure
gal and
force gravity
6).and
Here wewere
gravity not considered
assumed
were cyclicbecause
theconsidered
not effects their
are
because effects
small were considered
compared
their effects to those
were in the
of the constant
considered previous
in the
step in Figure
force.
previous step in4.Figure 4.
And then, the final forces of suspensions and the behavior of a train can be calculated
by superimposing the two results obtained in the previous step (Figure 4) and this step
(Figure 6). Here we assumed the cyclic effects are small compared to those of the constant
force.

Figure
Figure6.6.The
Thefree
freebody
bodydiagram
diagramunder
underthe
thecyclic
cyclicwind
windforce
forcewith
with aa specific
specific frequency.
frequency.

Andequation
The then, the offinal forces
motion of suspensions
for the car body: and the behavior of a train can be calcu-
lated by superimposing the two results obtained in the previous step (Figure 4) and this
step (Figure
Figure 6. The free = 𝐹 (sin
𝐹6). body
Here we𝜔𝑡) cos
assumed
diagram ∅ −the
under 𝐹 cyclic
the − 𝐹wind
cyclic =force
𝑚 are
effects 𝑥with
small compared
a specific to those of(19)
frequency. the
constant force.
Theequation
The equationof ofmotion
motionfor
forthe
thecar
carbody:
body:
..
𝐹 ∑ F𝜔𝑡)
= 𝐹 (sin x2 =cos
Ft (∅sin
− ωt
𝐹 ) cos
− 𝐹∅ − = 𝑚 𝑥− FLH2 = m2 x2
FRH2 (19)
(19)

..
∑ Fy2 = − Ft (sin ωt) sin ∅ − FRV2 − FLV2 = m2 y2 (20)
..
∑ MG2 = Ft (d cos ∅ + l sin ωt) + h2 ( FRH2 + FLH2 ) + e2 ( FLV2 − FRV2 ) = I2 θ 2 (21)
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 7 of 21

The forces of the secondary suspension springs generated by relative displacements

between the body and the bogie can be obtained by the Equations (10)~(12), but the
following assumptions are made to simplify these equations.

k1l  k2l , k1v  k2v → x2  x1 , y2  y1 , θ2  θ1

From the Equations (19) and (21), the natural frequencies (ω2a , ω2b ) for the lateral and
rolling directions of the body are derived as the following Equations (22) and (23).
In general, since most of the cross-wind acting on a vehicle has low frequencies, the
first natural frequency of the car body on suspensions becomes an important factor to
assess derailment safety.
   
2k2l 2k2l h22 2k2v e22
m2 + I2 + I2

 

 
2 1  
w2a = s   (22)
2 2k2l 2k2l h22 2k2v e22 2k2l 2k2v e22 


 − m + 2I + 2 I − 2
4 m I


 2 2

   
2k2l 2k2l h22 2k2v e22
+ +

 

 m2 I2 I2 
2 1 
w2b = s  (23)
2 2k2l 2k2l h22 2k2v e22 2k2v e22
 + + + − 4 2k 2l
 

 m2 I2 I2 m2 I2 


From the free body diagram of Figure 6, the equations of motion of the bogie and the
wheelset can be derived as follows.
• The equation of motion for the bogie frame:

..
∑ Fx1 = FRH2 + FLH2 − FRH1 − FLH1 = m1 x1 (24)

..
∑ Fy1 = FRV2 + FLV2 − FRV1 − FLV1 = m1 y1 (25)

..
∑ MG1 = h1u ( FRH2 + FLH2 ) + h1l ( FRH1 + FLH1 ) + e2 ( FRV2 − FLV2 ) + e1 ( FLV1 − FRV1 ) = I1 θ 1 (26)
• The equation of motion for the wheelset:

..
∑ Fx0 = FRH1 + FLH1 − RRH = m0 x0 (27)

..
∑ Fy0 = FRV1 + FLV1 − RRV − R LV = m0 y0 (28)

..
∑ MG1 = RRH h0 + e1 ( FRV1 − FLV1 ) + e0 ( FLV − FRV ) = I0 θ 0 (29)
It is possible to predict the forces of suspensions and wheel/rails, and the behavior of
a vehicle by solving the simultaneous differential Equations (19)–(21), and (24)–(29).

3. A Dynamic Simulation Model to Evaluate the Formulation

3.1. A Model for Multibody Dynamics Simulation
The commercial software “Simpack” was used to evaluate the derived equations [30].
Here, Simpack is a general multibody dynamics (MBD) simulation software enabling users
to simulate the nonlinear motion of any mechanical or mechatronic system.
The simulation model was based on the power car of the KTX. The compositions of
the primary and secondary suspensions are shown in Figure 7. The characteristics of the
suspensions are shown in Tables 1–3 [21,22]. In addition, the simulation model to evaluate
the theoretical equations is shown in Figure 8. Table 4 shows the height of the center of
vehicle gravity, and the masses of the body, the bogie, and the wheelset [23].
 suspensions are shown in Tables 1–3 [21,22]. In addition, the simulation model to evaluate
the theoretical equations is shown in Figure 8. Table 4 shows the height of the center of
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 vehicle gravity, and the masses of the body, the bogie, and the wheelset [23]. 8 of 21

(b) Second suspension

(a) First suspension
FigureFigure
7. The7. compositions of of
The compositions suspensions.
suspensions.

Table 1.Table 1. Specifications

Specifications of primary
of the the primary suspensions.
suspensions.
Suspension DoubleDouble
Suspension Coil Spring Guide
Coil Spring GuideSpring
Spring Vertical
VerticalOil Damper
Oil Damper
X direction
X direction 0.58130.5813 20.0
20.0 -
-
Y direction 0.5813 4.5 -
specifications
specifications

Y direction 0.5813 4.5 -

Z direction 0.75 0.25 0.01
Z direction 0.75 0.25 0.01
T direction 0.1 0.044 -
T direction 0.1 0.044 -
P direction 0.1 0.03 -
P direction
W direction
0.1 0.1
0.03
0.473 -
-
W direction 0.1 MN/m 0.473
MN/m -
Units MN·s/m
MN/mMN·m/rad MN/m
MN ·m/rad
Units MN·s/m
MN·m/rad MN·m/rad
Table 2. Specifications of an anti-yaw damper.
Table 2. Specifications of an anti-yaw damper.
Specification
Specification
Velocity [m/s] 0.0 0.0026
Velocity [m/s] 0.0 0.0026 0.01 0.01 0.02
0.02 0.3
0.3
Force [kN] 0.0 11.0
Force [kN] 0.0 11.0 11.6 11.6 12.0
12.0 19.0
19.0

Table 3.Table
Specifications of the
3. Specifications of secondary suspensions.
the secondary suspensions.

Vertical Oil
Vertical Oil Lateral
LateralOilOil
Suspension Coil Spring Pivot Joint
Suspension Coil Spring Damper Damper Pivot Joint
Damper Damper
X direction 0.15 - - 10.29
X direction 0.15 - - 10.29
Specifications

Y direction 0.15 - 0.1 -

Specifications

Y direction 0.15 - 0.1 -

Z direction 0.634 0.02 - -
Z direction
T direction
0.6340.1
0.02- -
- -
-
T direction
P direction 0.10.1 -- - - - -
P direction
W direction 0.10.1 -- - - - -
W direction 0.1
MN/m MN/m- - -
Units MN·s/m MN/m
MN
MN/m ·m/rad MN ·
MN/m m/rad
Units MN·s/m MN/m
MN·m/rad MN·m/rad
 Appl.Sci.
Appl. Sci.2021,
2021,11,
11,2947
x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 9ofof2120

Figure8.8.The
Figure The3D
3Dsimulation
simulationmodel
model(Simpack).
(Simpack).

Table4.4.Specifications
Table Specificationsofofthe
thepower
powercar.
car.

Values
Values
Wheel weight 1745 [kg]
Wheelset Moment
Wheel of inertia
weight 1745 740 [kg][kg·m2]
Wheelset Height of
Moment of inertia
weight center 740 0.46 [kg·m2 ][m]

Bogie Height ofBogie

weightweight
center 0.46 2420 [m] [kg]
Moment of inertia
Bogie weight 2420
972.5 [kg]
[kg·m2]
frame
Bogie frame Height of weight center 0.56 [m]
Moment of inertia 972.5 [kg·m2 ]
Car body weight 54,960 [kg]
Height of weight center 0.56 [m]
Car body Moment of inertia 13,246.36 [kg·m2]
Car bodyofweight
Height weight center 54,960 1.72 [kg] [m]
Car body
Height of the wind force center
Moment ofon the car body
inertia 13,246.36 2.015 [kg·m2 ][m]
Height of weight center 1.72 [m]
As mentioned above, the theoretical equations were derived as a 2D formula simpli-
Height of the wind force center on the car body 2.015 [m]
fied for a real vehicle. So, the vehicle parameters must be converted for a 2D quarter model
on one wheelset. Table 5 shows the modified input data for 2D dynamic simulations
As mentioned
matching above, the
the 2D quarter theoretical equations were derived as a 2D formula simplified
model.
for a real vehicle. So, the vehicle parameters must be converted for a 2D quarter model on
one wheelset.
Table 5. Input Table 5 shows
data for the modified input data for 2D dynamic simulations matching
2D simulations.
the 2D quarter model.
Parameters Values Parameters Values
𝑚
3.2. Evaluation of Natural
1745Frequency of the Vehicle
[kg] ℎ 0.46 [m]
The𝐼 natural frequency
740 of the power
[kg·mcar
2 𝑒 characteristic
] is a unique 0.7175determined[m]by its
weight 𝑚 and suspensions, 1210and it is a factor ℎ
[kg] closely related to the derailment
0.067 safety
[m]when
𝐼
considering cross-winds with
972.5 low frequency.
[kg·m ]2 ℎ 0.435 [m]
The𝑒 natural frequencies
1 for lateral
[m]and rolling directions are derived as shown in
Equations
𝑚 (22) and (23) using the motion
13,740 [kg]equations ofdthe vehicle in Section 2.2. [m]
0.295
The natural frequencies of the derived formula and the MBD model were compared
𝐼 13,246 [kg·m2] 𝑙 1.335 [m]
in Table 6. Figure 9 show the behaviors of the vehicle in which the exciting frequency
component𝑒 coincides with 1.025its natural frequency.
[m] ℎ 1.093 [m]
𝑘 100 [kg/mm] 𝑘 100 [kg/mm]
𝑘 9.58 [kg/mm] 𝑘 1.25 [kg/mm]
𝑘 0.51 [kg/mm] 𝑘 0.74 [kg/mm]

3.2. Evaluation of Natural Frequency of the Vehicle

 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 10 of 21

Table 5. Input data for 2D simulations.

Parameters Values Parameters Values

m0 1745 [kg] h0 0.46 [m]
I0 740 [kg·m2 ] e0 0.7175 [m]
m1 1210 [kg] h1u 0.067 [m]
I1 972.5 [kg·m2 ] h1l 0.435 [m]
e1 1 [m]
m2 13,740 [kg] d 0.295 [m]
Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20
I2 13,246 [kg·m2 ] l 1.335 [m]
e2 1.025 [m] h2 1.093 [m]
k0l 100 [kg/mm] k0v 100 [kg/mm]
The natural frequency of the power car is a unique characteristic determined by its
k1l 9.58 [kg/mm] k1v 1.25 [kg/mm]
weight and suspensions, and it is a factor closely related to the derailment safety when
k2l 0.51 [kg/mm] k2v 0.74 [kg/mm]
considering cross-winds with low frequency.
The natural frequencies for lateral and rolling directions are derived as shown in
Table
Equations The comparison
(22)6. and (23) usingofthe
the resonant
motionfrequencies
equationsbetween
of thethe theoretical
vehicle formula and
in Section 2.2.Simpack.
The natural frequencies of the derived formula and the
Resonant MBD model
Frequencies [Hz] were compared
in Table 6. Figure 9 show the behaviorsLateral of the vehicle in which Rolling
Direction the exciting frequency
Direction
component coincides with
Theory its natural frequency.
0.94 2.51
Simpack 0.90 2.77

(a) Lateral resonance (b) Rolling resonance

Figure 9. Figure
The vehicle behavior
9. The vehicle underunder
behavior the resonant frequencies.
the resonant frequencies.

4. Evaluation
Table 6. The comparisonofof Derailment Safety under
the resonant frequencies Cross-Wind
between the theoretical formula and Simpack.
4.1. Operating Regulations of the KTX According to Wind Speed
The operating regulations of the KTX for Resonant
cross-windFrequencies [Hz] as shown in
speeds are enforced,
Table 7, to prevent derailments Lateral
[24]. Direction Rolling Direction
Table
Theory 8 shows the aerodynamic coefficient
0.94 and side areas of the KTX,2.51
and air density.
The values related to the aerodynamics of the KTX are based on the previous research
Simpack 0.90 2.77
and data from vehicle manufacturers [19]. Equation (30), which is based on Bernoulli’s
Equation, is used to calculate aerodynamic forces due to cross-winds [31].
4. Evaluation of Derailment Safety under Cross-Wind
4.1. Operating Regulations of the KTX According to Wind Speed
The operating regulations of the KTX for cross-wind speeds are enforced, as shown
in Table 7, to prevent derailments [24].
Table 8 shows the aerodynamic coefficient and side areas of the KTX, and air density.
The values related to the aerodynamics of the KTX are based on the previous research and
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 11 of 21

Table 7. The regulations on driving conditions according to wind speeds.

Wind Speed [m/s] Driving Conditions

45~ Operation stop
40~45 Under 90 [km/h]
30~40 Under 170 [km/h]
~30 Decelerated operation

Table 8. The specifications of the high-speed train.

Parameters Values
Aerodynamic side force coefficient (Cy ) 0.6
Side area (A) 70.5 [m2 ]
Air density (ρ) 1.275 [kg/m3 ]

The regulations of Table 7 for wind speeds are converted into the equivalent lateral
forces by using Equation (30) and the aerodynamic characteristics of the KTX in Table 8.

ρv2
Fwind = Cy × A × (30)
2

4.2. Criteria of Derailment

In advanced railway countries, such as Europe, North America, and Japan, there are
various technical criteria to prevent derailments, as in Table 9 [32–35].

Table 9. The various evaluation criteria of derailment.

Country/Regulation Method/Criteria Note

EU (P/Q)smu < 0.8 2 m moving average of derailment coefficient
UIC P/Q < 0.8 Derailment coefficient
TSI ∆Q/Q0 < 0.9 Ratio of wheel unloading
P/Q < 1.0 Derailment coefficient
North America ∑ |P/Q| < 1.0 ∼ 1.5 Weinstock coefficient
∆Q/Q0 < 0.9 Ratio of wheel unloading
RTRI (Japan) ∆Q/Q0 < 1.0 Ratio of wheel unloading

Although there are many ways to judge derailments, the ratio of the lateral and
the vertical forces (P/Q) is generally used for a wheel climb-up derailment. The wheel
unloading ratio (∆Q/Q0 ) is used to assess a rollover derailment. As cross-winds usually
cause a rollover derailment, the rollover risk is assessed using the wheel unloading ratio.
The definitions of P and Q are as follows: P is for the lateral force, Q for the verti-
cal force.

4.3. Derailment Safety According to the Cross-Wind Regulations

The ratios of wheel unloading between simulations and the theoretical formula were
compared under the driving conditions (Table 7), in the case that wind forces are applied
in a horizontal direction (∅ = 0◦ in Figures 4 and 6) on the ground.
Table 10 shows the ratio of wheel unloading when constant cross-winds act on the
KTX power car on the straight track and curved tracks (lateral acc. 0.5 [m/s2 ]; this is the
case of 1.0 [m/s2 ] referred to in the EN regulation [EN 14067]). Here it is assumed that
there are no lateral forces transmitted to the wheelset due to rail irregularities.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 12 of 21

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 12 of 20

Table 10. The ratio of wheel unloading (∆Q/Q) between the theoretical formula and the simulation
for cross-winds.

Table 10. The ratio of wheel unloading (∆Q/Q) between

Wind Speeds Ratiosthe
of theoretical formula and the simulation
Wheel Unloading
Track Condition
for cross-winds. Differences
[m/s] Theory Simulation
Wind Speeds
0 Ratios of
0 Wheel Unloading
0 0
Track Condition 30 0.120 0.119
Differences
0.001
Straight track [m/s] Theory Simulation
40 0.233 0.220 0.013
0 0 0 0
45 0.292 0.276 0.016
30 0.120 0.119 0.001
Straight track 0 0.128 0.120 0.008
40 0.233 0.220 0.013
Curved track 30 0.248 0.248 0
2
(Lateral Acc. = 0.5 m/s ) 45 40 0.292
0.343 0.276
0.353 0.016
0.010
0 45 0.128
0.398 0.120
0.395 0.008
0.003
Curved track
30 0 0.248
0.256 0.248
0.242 0
0.014
(Lateral Acc. = 0.5 m/
Curved track 40 30 0.343
0.376 0.353
0.364 0.010
0.012
𝑠 )= 1.0 m/s2 )
(Lateral Acc. 45 40 0.471
0.398 0.463
0.395 0.008
0.003
45 0.526 0.526 0
0 0.256 0.242 0.014
Curved track
30 0.376 0.364 0.012
(Lateral
FigureAcc. 1.0 m/the contact forces of wheel/rail and the ratio of wheel unloading.
10 =shows 40 0.471 0.463 0.008
𝑠 ) speed of about 65 [m/s] acts on the vehicle, the wheel unloading ratio
When the wind
45 0.526 0.526 0
exceeds the TSI criteria for the rollover derailment (∆Q/Q < 0.9).

Figure 10. The

Figure10. The ratios
ratios of wheel unloading
unloading to
to cross-wind
cross-windspeeds
speedsunder
underthe
theoverturning
overturningderailment
derailment
condition.
condition.

On
Onthe
theother
otherhand,
hand,basic
basiclateral
lateralforces
forcesacting
actingon
onrunning
runningwheelsets
wheelsetstake
takeplace
placedue
duetoto
wheel
wheelconicity
conicityandandrail
railirregularities,
irregularities,even
eventhough
thoughthere
thereisisno
nocross-wind.
cross-wind.In Inthe
theprevious
previous
study,
study, the
the KTX has aa measured
KTX has measuredcoefficient
coefficientofofderailment
derailment (P/Q
(P/Q = 0.315)
= 0.315) during
during normal
normal run-
running on a high-speed rail [36,37]. Using the measured coefficient of derailment
ning on a high-speed rail [36,37]. Using the measured coefficient of derailment and Equa- and
Equation
tion (31),(31), the P/Q
the P/Q canconverted
can be be converted
to antoadditional
an additional lateral
lateral force
force acting
acting on on
thethe wheelset,
wheelset, as
as given in Equation
given in Equation (32). (32).
The
The ratios ofwheel
ratios of wheelunloading
unloading according
according to cross-wind
to cross-wind speeds
speeds are compared
are compared in
in Table
Table 11. These results were obtained considering both the wheel–rail interactions and the
11. These results were obtained considering both the wheel–rail interactions and the lat-
lateral forces due to cross-winds on the running vehicle.
eral forces due to cross-winds on the running vehicle.
P𝑃 ((𝐹 + FRH1 )()(1 ) −−
= LH1 + 𝐹
F 1 ++µβ𝜇𝛽) µ(𝜇(1
1 + γ+) F𝛾)𝐹 + 𝜇𝛾𝐹
LV1 + µγF RV1
(31)
Q𝑄 = ((1 ) FRV1 −−
1 ++γ𝛾)𝐹 γF𝛾𝐹
LV1 + β ( F
+ 𝛽(𝐹LH1 + F+RH1
𝐹 )) (31)
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 13 of 21

h i h i
P P
Q (1 + γ ) − µγ FLV1 + µ(1 + γ) − Qγ FRV1
FH = h i (32)
P
(1 + µβ) − Q β

Here, β = he 0 , γ = 2ee 0 (see Figure 4).

1 1
h0 : Radius of wheel
e0 : Track width (distance between two contact points of both treads)
e1 : Distance between the contact point of a wheel tread and the primary suspension
µ: Friction coefficient

Table 11. The ratios of wheel unloading (∆Q/Q) between the theoretical formula and the simulation
for cross-wind along with dynamic wheel–rail interactions (P/Q = 0.315).

Ratios of
Wind Speeds Wheel Unloading
Track Condition Differences
[m/s]
Theory Simulation
0 0.198 0.173 0.025
30 0.318 0.304 0.014
Straight track
40 0.413 0.403 0.010
45 0.468 0.462 0.006
0 0.323 0.305 0.018
Curved track 30 0.443 0.429 0.014
(Lateral Acc. = 0.5 m/s2 ) 40 0.538 0.528 0.010
45 0.593 0.587 0.006
0 0.448 0.454 0.006
Curved track 30 0.568 0.579 0.011
(Lateral Acc. = 1.0 m/s2 ) 40 0.663 0.681 0.018
45 0.718 0.739 0.021

4.4. Derailment Safety Due to the Cross-Wind Frequencies

When a constant wind force acts on a vehicle, the ratio of wheel unloading must
be within 0.9 not to be derailed on the straight track and the curved tracks (lateral acc.
0.5 [m/s2 ], 1.0 [m/s2 ] in the EN). However, wind speeds in nature are not constant. In
addition, the winds generated by wayside structures on the track or other opposite trains
make exciting frequencies [38].
In this section, the ratios of wheel unloading according to the winds with frequency were
compared using the theoretical formula derived in Section 2 and the dynamic simulations.
The conditions to compare the ratios of wheel unloading according to different wind
frequencies are shown in Table 12.

Table 12. The conditions to compare the derailment coefficients according to cross-wind frequencies.

Parameters Values
Track Straight
Rail irregularity (P/Q) 0.315
Vehicle velocity 300 [km/h]
Average speed 45 [m/s]
Wind
Fluctuation speed ±4.5 [m/s]
 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 14 of 20

In the 2D dynamic vehicle model of Section 2, the dampers in suspension are not
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 14 of 21
considered to formulate theoretical equations. Therefore, if the lateral natural frequency
of the vehicle and the frequency of the cross-wind are matched, resonance phenomena
will occur and the amplitude will be continuously increased as time goes by.
4.4.1. The 2D Dynamic Vehicle Model without Dampers
The resonance phenomena can easily be described using the dynamic equation of a
In the
simple 2D dynamic
spring-mass vehicle
system. Whenmodel of Section
a periodic 2, the
external dampers
force in suspension
is applied arewith-
to the system not
considered
out dampers, the dynamic equation is shown in Equation (33), and its general solutionofis
to formulate theoretical equations. Therefore, if the lateral natural frequency
the vehicle
shown and the frequency
in Equation (34) [39]. of the cross-wind are matched, resonance phenomena will
occur and the amplitude will be continuously increased as time goes by.
The resonance phenomena can m𝑥 + 𝑘𝑥
easily be=described
𝐹 cos 𝜔𝑡 using the dynamic equation(33) of
a simple spring-mass system. When a periodic external𝐹force is applied to the system
without dampers, the dynamic cos 𝜔 𝑡 +is𝐵shown
x(t) = Aequation sin 𝜔 𝑡in+Equation (33),cos 𝜔𝑡 (34)
𝑚(𝜔 − 𝜔 ) and its general solution
is shown in Equation (34) [39].
A and B are constants determined by the initial conditions and 𝜔 is a natural fre-
..
quency. mx + kx = F0 cos ωt (33)

𝜔 = 𝑘/𝑚 F0 (35)
x(t) = A cos ω0 t + B sin ω0 t + 2 2

cos ωt (34)
m ω −ω
If the frequency of external forces (ω) is equal to0or very near to that of the vehicle
(𝜔 ),Atheand B are of
solution constants determined
the dynamic equation by canthe initial conditions
be converted as shownand ω0 is a(36).
in Equation natural
frequency. √ 𝐹
x(t) = A cos 𝜔 ω𝑡0+=𝐵 sin 𝜔 𝑡+
k/m 𝑡 sin 𝜔 𝑡 (35)
(36)
2𝑚𝜔
If the frequency of external forces (ω) is equal to or very near to that of the vehicle
Because of the term 𝑡 sin 𝜔 𝑡, the solution continuously increases with the passage
(ω0 ), the solution of the dynamic equation can be converted as shown in Equation (36).
of time. This phenomenon is called a resonance as shown in Figure 11.
However, the actual springs in a vehicle suspension F0 must not be extended longer
(t) = A cos
than the predesigned xdistance not ω + permanently
to0 tbe B sin ω0 t + deformed
2
t sin ωor0 t damaged over the(36) de-
2mω0
sign limit. So, the spring constant (k) must be assumed as a nonlinear over the linear elastic
range of a normal
Because term t sin
of thespring, ω0 t,means
which Equation
the solution (33) is invalid
continuously in an excessive
increases amplitude
with the passage of
time. This phenomenon is called a resonance as shown in Figure 11.
condition.

Figure11.
Figure 11.The
The amplitude under
under aa resonance
resonance condition.
condition.

However, the actual

Figure 12 and springs
Table 13 show in
thearesults
vehiclethat
suspension
the ratiosmust
of thenot be extended
wheel unloadinglonger
of the
than the predesigned distance not to be permanently deformed or damaged
simulation and the current formula without dampers are rapidly increased at a resonance over the
design limit. So, the spring constant (k) must be assumed as a nonlinear over the linear
condition.
elasticHowever,
range of the
a normal
resultsspring, which means
using Kunieda’s Equation
formula (33) is invalid
are constant in an
regardless of excessive
the cross-
amplitude condition.
wind frequency because the formula cannot consider it. Also, the formula cannot take into
Figure
account the12 and Table
change 13 of
of ratio show theunloading
wheel results that
bythe
railratios of the wheel
irregularities. Thus,unloading
when rail ofir-
the
regularity (P/Q = 0.315) is applied, as shown in Figure 12, the value of the ratioatofawheel
simulation and the current formula without dampers are rapidly increased reso-
nance condition.
unloading is low compared to other results, even in low frequency.
 TSI criteria regards over 0.9 as a derailment. Here, the simulation contact forces were fil-
tered using 1.5 [Hz] low-pass filter to remove high-frequency components caused by nu-
merical factors.
Although oscillatory lateral forces between wheel–rails are generated by the wheel
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 conicity in the simulation, our formulations could not consider it. These oscillation effects
15 of 21
gave higher values in simulation compared to the results of our formula in Table 13.

Figure 12.
Figure The
12.The comparison
comparison of the
of the ratios
ratios of wheel
of wheel unloading
unloading according
according to thetofrequencies
the frequencies of a
of a cross-
cross-wind.
wind.

Table
Table 13.
13. The
The comparison
comparison between
between the
the theoretical
theoretical formulas
formulas (current
(current study
study and
and Kunieda’s
Kunieda’sformula)
formula)
and simulations.
and simulations.
Theory
Theory
Frequency
Frequency Simulation
Simulation
Current Study (P/Q = Kunieda’s Formula
[Hz]
[Hz] Current Study Kunieda’s Formula (P/Q == 0.315)
(P/Q 0.315)
(P/Q = 0.315)
0.315) (P/Q
(P/Q = 0)
= 0)
0.10.1 0.488
0.488 0.355
0.355 0.528
0.528
0.3 0.496 0.355 0.530
0.3 0.496 0.355 0.530
0.5 0.510 0.355 0.532
0.5 0.510 0.355 0.532
0.7 0.548 0.355 0.579
0.70.9 0.548
0.908 0.355
0.355 0.579
1.000
0.91.1 0.908
0.585 0.355
0.355 1.000
0.636
1.11.3 0.525
0.585 0.355
0.355 0.580
0.636
1.31.5 0.507
0.525 0.355
0.355 0.569
0.580
1.5 0.507 0.355 0.569
4.4.2. The 2D Dynamic Vehicle with Dampers
The amplitude (X) and the phase angle (𝛿) are obtained using the dynamic equation
However, the results using Kunieda’s formula are constant regardless of the cross-
with a spring damper and an external force with a constant frequency. The dimensionless
wind frequency because the formula cannot consider it. Also, the formula cannot take
amplitude (X) and the phase angle (𝛿) are expressed as shown in Equations (37) and (38).
into account the change of ratio of wheel unloading by rail irregularities. Thus, when rail
applied, as shown in1Figure 12, the value of the ratio of wheel
irregularity (P/Q = 0.315) is𝑋𝑘
unloading is low compared 𝐹 = results, even in low frequency.
to other
𝜔
Even though the ratio of the wheel unloading 𝜔 1 as the maximum value,
can have (37)
1− + 2ζ
𝜔
the TSI criteria regards over 0.9 as a derailment. Here, the𝜔
simulation contact forces were
filtered using 1.5 [Hz] low-pass filter to remove high-frequency components caused by
numerical factors.
Although oscillatory lateral forces between wheel–rails are generated by the wheel
conicity in the simulation, our formulations could not consider it. These oscillation effects
gave higher values in simulation compared to the results of our formula in Table 13.
 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 16 of 21

4.4.2. The 2D Dynamic Vehicle with Dampers

The amplitude (X) and the phase angle (δ) are obtained using the dynamic equation
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW a spring damper and an external force with a constant frequency. The dimensionless
with 16
amplitude (X) and the phase angle (δ) are expressed as shown in Equations (37) and (38).

Xk 1
= s (37)
F0 𝜔i2
2 2
2ζ
 h 
1− ω
+ 2ζ ω
ω0 𝜔 ω0
tan 𝛿 =
𝜔
2ζ ωω0 1 − 𝜔
 

tan δ =  2 (38)
Here, the used symbols are defined
1 −inωωTable
0
14.
Here, the used symbols are defined in Table 14.
Table 14. The symbols used in the damped vibration equation.
Table 14. The symbols used in the damped vibration equation.
Natural frequency q 𝜔 =
Natural frequency ω0 = mk
Critical damping √ 𝑐 = 2√𝑚𝑘 = 2𝑚𝜔
Critical damping cc = 2 mk = 2mω0
Damping factor ζ=
c
Damping factor ζ= cc
cω
= c cc ω=2ζ ω = 2ζ
k cc k = ω0

Theabove
The above equations
equations show
show that that the amplitude
the amplitude and are
and phases phases are the of
the functions functions
fre- of
quency ratio(ω/ω
quency ratio (ω/𝜔 ) and
0 ) and damping
damping ratio ratio (ζ),they
(ζ), and andcan
they can beinshown
be shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13.

6
ζ =0
ζ = 0.1
5
ζ = 0.2
ζ = 0.5
4
ζ = 1.0
Xk
3
F0

0
0 1 2 3 4
ω
Frequency ratio ω
0

Figure 13.Nondimensional
Figure 13. Nondimensional values
values of amplitude
of amplitude depending
depending on damping
on damping factors. factors.

In general, an actual train has dampers, as shown in Figure 14, which is expected to
In general, an actual train has dampers, as shown in Figure 14, which is expecte
reduce the amplitude at resonant frequencies as described above. The characteristics of
reduce
dampersthe amplitude
installed at resonant
in the KTX frequencies
were applied as results
for accurate described above.
because The characteristic
the dampers can
dampers installed results.
affect the simulation in the KTX were
Figure applied
15 shows for accurate
the simulation results
results because
between the dampers
the models
affect the simulation
with dampers and withoutresults. Figure 15 shows the simulation results between the mo
dampers.
with dampers and without dampers.

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947
In general, an actual train has dampers, as shown in Figure 14, which is expected t
reduce the amplitude at resonant frequencies as described above. The characteristics o
dampers installed in the KTX were applied for accurate results because the dampers ca
affect the simulation results. Figure 15 shows the simulation results between
17 ofthe
21 model
with dampers and without dampers.

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 17 of 2

Figure14.14.The
Figure The motor
motor bogie
bogie of KTX.
of the the KTX.

Figure 15.The
Figure15. Thecomparison
comparison of the ratios
of the of wheel
ratios unloading
of wheel between
unloading the models
between with dampers
the models and
with dampers
without dampers
and without (simulation
dampers results). results).
(simulation

Although the ratios of the wheel unloading showed a little difference in frequencies
Although the ratios of the wheel unloading showed a little difference in frequencie
other than resonance, the results showed a good agreement and exceeded the TSI criteria
other than resonance, the results showed a good agreement and exceeded the TSI criteria
of 0.9 in the frequency near to the resonance regardless of dampers.
of 0.9 in the
Even frequency
though near to theofresonance
the characteristics dampers can regardless of dampers.
affirmatively affect the running safety,
Even though the characteristics of dampers can
the phenomenon of a resonance is critical to derailments regardless affirmatively
of dampers.affect the running
In a design
safety,
stage, the
it is phenomenon
important of a how
to evaluate resonance
much aiscross-wind
critical towith
derailments
frequencyregardless of dampers. In
near to the natural
a design stage,
frequency it is important
of a vehicle to running
can affect the evaluatesafety
how regardless
much a cross-wind
of dampers.with frequency near to
the natural frequency of a vehicle can affect the running safety regardless of dampers.
4.5. Derailment Safety According to Track Gauges
Track gauges
4.5. Derailment are generally
Safety Accordingclassified
to TrackasGauges
narrow gauges, standard gauges, and wide
gauges. Various track gauges are used around the world.
Track gauges
High-speed areoperating
trains generally classified
above as narrow
300 [km/h] gauges,
generally standard
use the standardgauges,
gauge ofand wid
gauges. Various track gauges are used around the world.
1435 [mm]. However, in order to compare the effects of the track gauges, simulations and
High-speed
theoretical formulastrains operatingaccording
were calculated above 300 [km/h]
to the generally
track gauges. Theuse the
risks of standard
derailmentgauge o
were assessed considering the different gauges under the driving speed and the cross-wind
1435 [mm]. However, in order to compare the effects of the track gauges, simulations and
condition
theoreticalin formulas
Table 15. were calculated according to the track gauges. The risks of derailmen
were assessed considering the different gauges under the driving speed and the cross
wind condition in Table 15.

Table 15. The symbols used in the damped vibration equation.

Parameters Values
Speed 30 [m/s]
Wind
Angle 0 [°]
 Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 18 of 21

Table 15. The symbols used in the damped vibration equation.

Parameters Values
Speed 30 [m/s]
Wind
Angle 0 [◦ ]
Vehicle speed 300 [km/h]
Rail irregularity (P/Q) 0.315
Track Straight Curved
Lateral acc. - 1 [m/s2 ]

Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of

Figure 16a shows the change of the ratios of wheel unloading when a train runs on a
straight track according to the gauges. The results of our formula, Kunieda’s formula, and
MBD simulations showed that the larger the gauges, the less the risks.

(a) Straight track (b) Curved track: lateral acc. 1.0 m/s2
Figure 16. The ratios of wheel unloading according to track gauges.
Figure 16. The ratios of wheel unloading according to track gauges.
The deviations between our formula and the MBD simulation were only about 0.04
onFigure
the straight track. Itthe
16b shows is shown
change that
ofthe
thetheoretical
ratios of equations of this paper
wheel unloading whenwerea more
train runs o
theaccurate
curvedto predict
track derailment
according risksgauges.
to the than Kunieda’s formula
The results showwhentheconsidering
decreasing variables
tendency like
such as rail irregularity which are not considered in existing theory.
form of a quadratic curve. Although the overall trend of the results using Kunieda’s fo
Figure 16b shows the change of the ratios of wheel unloading when a train runs on the
mula andtrack
curved the theory
accordingof to
this
thepaper
gauges. wasThesimilar, the wheel
results show unloading
the decreasing ratios
tendency using
like a formKunieda
formula were relatively
of a quadratic large.theInoverall
curve. Although addition,
trend the results
of the results of simulations
using and theand
Kunieda’s formula theoretic
ones
theof this research
theory showed
of this paper very similar
was similar, the wheelvalues,
unloadingbutratios
our theoretical solutions
using Kunieda’s formulacould giv
were relatively large. In addition, the results
more accurate results than those of Kunieda’s formula. of simulations and the theoretical ones of
this research showed very similar values, but our theoretical solutions could give more
accurate results than those of Kunieda’s formula.
5. Conclusions
5. Even though there was a lot of theoretical research to predict the risk of derailmen
Conclusions
due to cross-winds, most
Even though there of athem
was lot ofcould not consider
theoretical research tothe variables
predict like
the risk wheel–rail intera
of derailment
tions and frequencies of cross-winds. So, there occurred some differences interac-
due to cross-winds, most of them could not consider the variables like wheel–rail compared wit
tions and frequencies
actual results. of cross-winds. So, there occurred some differences compared with
actual results.
In this study, a new theoretical formula was proposed to predict the risk of derai
ment due to cross-winds with frequency considering wheel–rail interactions. The pro
posed formula was verified using MBD simulations.
The following conclusions were obtained:
(1) The static equilibrium equations for the body, the bogie, and the wheelset wer
derived under a constant force of winds applied to the vehicle using the 2D free bod
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 19 of 21

In this study, a new theoretical formula was proposed to predict the risk of derailment
due to cross-winds with frequency considering wheel–rail interactions. The proposed
formula was verified using MBD simulations.
The following conclusions were obtained:
(1) The static equilibrium equations for the body, the bogie, and the wheelset were
derived under a constant force of winds applied to the vehicle using the 2D free body
diagram. The wheel–rail and suspension forces, and the displacements and rotation
angle of the vehicle were obtained by solving the equations for each static variable.
(2) The dynamic equations for the body, the bogie, and the wheelset were derived under
a wind force with frequency components applied to the vehicle using the 2D free
body diagram. The wheel–rail and suspension forces, and the displacements and
rotation angle of the vehicle were obtained by solving the equations for each dynamic
variable. In addition, the lateral and rolling natural frequencies of the vehicle were
derived by solving the motion equations for the lateral and rolling directions.
(3) The wheel–rail forces obtained from summing the dynamic and static ones were
improved using a known derailment coefficient to consider wheel–rail interactions
during a normal train running without winds.
(4) The multibody dynamics software (Simpack) model was generated using the spec-
ifications of a Korean high-speed train (KTX) to evaluate our theoretical formula.
For the operational regulations of the KTX under cross-wind conditions, the ratios
of wheel unloading on the dynamic simulation and our theoretical formula were
compared and well matched.
(5) The ratio changes of wheel unloading were investigated under the presence or absence
of suspension dampers considering the natural frequency of a vehicle and the cross-
wind frequency. As a result, the ratios were found to exceed the TSI criteria regardless
of the presence or absence of dampers if the natural frequency of the vehicle and the
cross-wind frequency were matched.
(6) The ratio changes of wheel unloading were investigated according to track gauges
using the simulations, Kunieda’s formula, and our theoretical one. Although all
the results were similar on the straight and curved tracks, the wheel unloading
ratios using Kunieda’s formula were larger than the simulations and ours which
are in a good agreement. So, our theoretical formula gives more accurate results
than Kunieda’s formula, because it considers various operational conditions like a
cross-wind frequency and a normal running derailment coefficient due to wheel–rail
interaction.
Therefore, this formula has strong advantages over the previous studies or the com-
monly used Nadal or Kunieda’s formula because it considers various variables, such as
fluctuant cross-winds, rail irregularities, and dynamic derailment behaviors. It would be
possible to predict well the derailment risk under actual operating conditions. It could be
used for setting suspensions or railway vehicle specifications in the initial design stage.
However, this formula has the disadvantage of being more complicated when compared to
the Nadal or Kunieda’s formula.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.K. (JunWoo Kim), I.S. and J.K. (JeongSeo Koo); method-
ology J.K. (JunWoo Kim), I.S. and J.K. (JeongSeo Koo); software J.K. (JunWoo Kim) and I.S.; validation
J.K. (JunWoo Kim); writing—review and editing, J.K. (JunWoo Kim) and I.S.; supervision, J.K. (Jun-
Woo Kim); project administration, J.K. (JeongSeo Koo); funding acquisition, J.K. (JeongSeo Koo). All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This study was supported by the Research Program funded by SeoulTech (Seoul National
University of Science and Technology).
Data Availability Statement: The data of the rolling stock used to support findings of this study
have been stated in the references [19,21–23].
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 20 of 21

References
1. Deng, Y.; Xiao, X. Effect of Cross-Wind on High-Speed Vehicle Dynamic Derailment. Logistics 2009, 5, 2287–2293.
2. Gerd, M.; Peter, D.; Burkhard, S.-W. Effects of Strong Cross Winds on High-Speed Trains: A Methodology for Risk Assessment and
Development of Countermeasures; Deutsche Bahn AG Research & Technology Center: Berlin, Germany, 2001; pp. 1–15.
3. Bae, H.U.; Min, K.H.; Go, Y.S.; Cheon, H.S.; Lim, N.H. Collision Behavior Analysis between Derailed Train and Structure
According to Collision Analysis Condition. J. Korean Soc. Hazard Mitig. 2017, 17, 45–54. [CrossRef]
4. Tamura, Y. Wind-induced damage to buildings and disaster risk reduction. In Proceedings of the APCWE-VII, Taipei, Taiwan,
8–12 November 2009.
5. Zhai, W.; Yang, J.; Li, Z.; Han, H. Dynamics of high-speed train in crosswinds based on an air-train- track interaction model. Wind
Struct. 2015, 20, 143–168. [CrossRef]
6. DB Netz AG. Ausgewählte Maßnahmen und Anforderungen an das Gesamtsystem Fahrweg/Fahrzeug-Aerodynamik/Seitenwind; DB Netz
AG: Frankfurt, Germany, 2006.
7. Baker, C.; Cheli, F.; Orellano, A. Nicolas Paradot, Carsten Proppe and Daniele Rocchi, “Cross-wind effects on road and rail
vehicles”. Veh. Syst. Dyn. 2009, 47, 983–1022. [CrossRef]
8. European Committee for Standardization. EN 14067-5, Railway Applications—Aerodynamics—Part 5: Requirements and Test
Procedures for Aerodynamics in Tunnels; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2010.
9. European Committee for Standardization. EN 14067-6, Railway Applications—Aerodynamics—Part 6: Requirements and Test
Procedures of Cross Wind Assessment; European Committee for Standardization: Brussels, Belgium, 2016.
10. Kunieda, M. Theoretical Study on the Mechanics of Overturn of Rail Rolling Stock. Rtri Railw. Tech. Res. Rep. 1972, 793, 173–186.
11. Sun, Z.; Dai, H.; Hemida, H.; Li, T.; Huang, C. Safety of High-Speed Train Passing by Windbreak Breach with Different Sizes. Veh.
Syst. Dyn. 2020, 58, 1935–1952. [CrossRef]
12. Biadgo Asress, M.; Svorcan, J. Numerical investigation on the aerodynamic characteristics of high-speed train under turbulent
crosswind. J. Mod. Transp. 2014, 22, 225–234. [CrossRef]
13. Giappino, S.; Rocchi, D.; Schito, P.; Tomasini, G. Cross wind and rollover risk on lightweight railway vehicles. J. Wind Eng. Ind.
Aerodyn. 2016, 153, 106–112. [CrossRef]
14. Yu, M.; Jiang, R.; Zhang, Q.; Zhang, J. Crosswind stability evaluation of high-speed train using different wind models. Chin. J.
Mech. Eng. 2019, 32, 1–13. [CrossRef]
15. Hosoi, T.; Tanifuji, K. Effect of Crosswind on Derailment of Railway Vehicles Running on Curved Track at Low Speed. Int. J.
Railw. 2012, 5, 93–101. [CrossRef]
16. Baker, C.; Hemida, H.; Iwnicki, S.; Xie, G.; Ongaro, D. Integration of Crosswind Forces into Train Dynamic Modelling. Proc. Inst.
Mech. Eng. Part F J. Rail Rapid Transit 2011, 225, 154–164. [CrossRef]
17. Yu, H.; Shimomura, T.; Tanifuji, K. Full-scale experiment on the behavior of a railway vehicle being subjected to lateral force.
J. Mech. Syst. Transp. Logist. 2010, 3, 35–43.
18. Yu, H.; Misu, Y.; Kurihara, T. Atsushi Moriyama and Makoto Shimamura, Study of New Methods for Train Operation Control in
Strong. Wind. Jr East Tech. Rev. 2011, 19, 31–36.
19. Nam, S.W. Theoretical Analysis on Overturn Safety of Train affected by Wind Pressure. J. Korean Soc. Railw. 2012, 15, 537–542.
[CrossRef]
20. Xiao, X.B.; Ling, L.; Xiong, J.Y.; Zhou, L.; Jin, X.S. Study on the safety of operating high-speed railway vehicles subjected to
crosswinds. J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. A 2014, 15, 694–710. [CrossRef]
21. Hong, T.D. A Study on the Improvement of KTX Bogie Instability. Master’s Thesis, University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea, 2006;
pp. 1–88.
22. Eom, B.G.; Han, B.Y.; Kang, B.B.; Lee, H.S. A Study on 1/5 Scaled Bogie Design of KTX-Sancheon using Similarity Laws. In
Proceedings of the Korean Society for Railway Spring Conference, Korea, Mokpo, 17–19 May 2012; pp. 1772–1777.
23. Kim, M.S. A Study on Derailment Prediction of Railway Vehicle Due to Cross-Wind Using the Derailment Theory of Single
Wheelset. Master’s Thesis, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, Seoul, Korea, 2014; pp. 1–59.
24. Choi, J.H.; Park, T.W.; Sim, K.S.; Kwak, M.H.; Lee, D.H. Stability Evaluation on Aerodynamics of High Speed Railway Train.
Trans. Korean Soc. Noise Vib. Eng. 2012, 22, 244–252. [CrossRef]
25. Koo, J.S.; Choi, S.Y. Theoretical development of a simplified wheelset model to evaluate collision-induced derailments of rolling
stock. J. Sound Vib. 2012, 331, 3172–3198. [CrossRef]
26. Oh, H.S. A Study on Mechanical Parameters Influencing Derailment of a Wheelset. Master’s Thesis, Seoul National University of
Science & Technology, Seoul, Korea, 2013; pp. 1–51.
27. Kim, M.S.; Kim, G.Y.; Kim, H.T.; Koo, J.S. Theoretical cross-wind speed against rail vehicle derailment considering the cross-
running wind of trains and the dynamic wheel-rail effects. J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2016, 30, 3487–3498. [CrossRef]
28. Kim, G.Y.; Koo, J.S.; Rho, J.H. Theoretical Evaluation of Rollingstock Derailment Safety under Cyclical Crosswind Condition.
J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 2018, 42, 95–101.
29. Choi, S.Y. Development of a Wheelset Derailment Model for Prediction of Derailment Behavior after Train Collision. Master’s
Thesis, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, Seoul, Korea, 2011; pp. 1–54.
30. Dassault System Simulia Corp. Simpack Documentation; Dassault System Simulia Corp.: Velizy-Villacoublay, France, 2017.
Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 2947 21 of 21

31. Kwon, H.B.; You, W.H.; Cho, T.H. Measurement of Aerodynamic Loads on Railway Vehicles under Crosswind. Trans. Korean Soc.
Mech. Eng. A 2011, 35, 91–98. [CrossRef]
32. Yi, S. The Effect Law of the Curve Parameters of a High-Speed Railway on Vehicle-Line Dynamic Performance. Dyn. Anal.
High-Speed Railw. Alignment 2018, 73–108. [CrossRef]
33. Wang, P. Wheel-Rail Relation Design. Des. High-Speed Railw. Turnouts 2015, 97–162. [CrossRef]
34. Soper, D. The Aerodynamics of a Container Freight Train; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; pp. 10–32.
35. Official Journal of the European Union. COMMISSION DECISION of 21 February 2008 Concerning a Technical Specification for
Interoperability Relating to the ‘Rolling Stock’ Sub-System of the Trans-European High-Speed Rail System. Available online:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu (accessed on 26 March 2008).
36. Kim, J.C.; Ham, Y.S. Analysis on Running Safety for KTX Vehicle. Korean Soc. Railw. 2007, 10, 473–479.
37. Ham, Y.S. The Evaluation of Running Safety in the Double Connection Operation for KTX-Sancheon Train. In Proceedings of the
the Korean Society of Mechanical Engineers Autumn Conference, Jeju, Korea, 28–30 October 2010; pp. 155–156.
38. Sun, Z.; Dai, H.; Gao, H.; Li, T.; Song, C. Dynamic performance of high-speed train passing windbreak breach under unsteady
crosswind. Int. J. Veh. Mech. Mobil. 2018, 408–424. [CrossRef]
39. Inman, D.J. Engineering Vibrations; PEARSON: London, UK, 2012; pp. 109–121.