The Fourth International

Heavy Haul Railway Conference 1989

Brisbane, 11 -15 September 1989

r
L.D. McNAUGHTON
Railtec International Consultancy

SUMMARY
Rail systems have a choice of a number of bogie types available for heavy haul operations, together with a
large number of add-on items, which can be retrofitted to existing 3 piece bogies.
This paper covers technical, operational economic aspects of the Goninan rigid frame bogie solution for new
purchase, and the Goninan/UTDC frame-braced solution for existing 3 piece bogies, to meet the challenge of
reducing costs for the haulage of coal in NSW.
INTRODUCTION different constructions, are equipped with
modified "National" 3 piece bogies (Figure 1).
The State Rail Authority of NSW operates 1865
coal wagons, of which 1348 are of the lOOt
type. Of the heavier wagons, 497 are equipped
with 3 piece bogies and 851 with "Gloucester"
type rigid frame bogies. It is these 25 tonne
axle load bogies which are the subject of this
paper.
Haulage of coal is a major area for train
operations in NSW, the longest train hauled
being 8400 tonnes, consisting of 84 wagons and
a length in the order of 1.5 kilometers. The
maximum demand for coal has been in excess of
36 million tonnes per annum. Most of this has
been for export and despatched through ports Figure 1
located at Newcastle and Port Kembla.
Some of these bogies have now been equipped
There are two major coal producing areas in with the Goninan/UTDC frame bracing system to
NSW, and these are located west of Sydney and improve their wheel wear performance.
the Blue Mountains, and north of Newcastle
(Hunter Valley). The Blue Mountains coal The wagons with longitudinal doors (Figure 2)
which is conveyed to Port Kembla, has to are carried on Gloucester rigid frame bogies
traverse a track with many grades and tight built in Australia by Goninan (Figure 3).
curves. The Hunter Valley coal which flows
out through Newcastle, generally has easier
gradients and shallower curves. The majority
of the Blue Mountains track is 53 Kg/m rail on
wooden sleepers and is well ballasted, where
as the Hunter Valley Track is undergoing
upgrading to 60 Kg/m rail on concrete sleepers.
Track construction, conditions and curvature
play an important part in the selection and
design of a suitable bogie for coal traffic,
and these are points that will be discussed in Figure 2
detail in this paper.
Wagon design is another major consideration
and this has been found to affect bogie
performance.
The 100 tonne wagons operating in coal traffic
are of two distinct types, the first having
traverse bottom dump doors, and the second
longitudinal (bomb-bay) doors.
The former wagons, which are of three
Figure 3

74
BACKGROUND
Three piece cast bogies are the cheapest type
that can be supplied and all rail systems tend
to consider this type first for any freight
bogie application. However, there are
limitations in connection with these bogies
and these are associated with relatively high
maintenance costs, instability, large dynamic
forces exerted on the track in the higher
speed range and excessive wheel wear.
So although this type of bogie is the
cheapest, the performance is the poorest
except at low speeds but even then, random
wear takes place due to construction
tolerances and lozenging.
The Government Rail Systems in Australia have
large numbers of 3 piece bogies in operation
and each system has imposed its own speed
limitations, wear standards and maintenance
periods for these.
In an attempt to standardise on speed and
reduce consequent track and bogie damage,
tests were conducted by Railways of Australia
at Dubbo in NSW for two years 1979 to 1981.
The final report from this study recommended
that 3 piece bogies on standard gauge track
should not operate at speeds above 80 km/hr in
loaded or empty condition for 19 tonne axle
loads.
Tests conducted at Hexham in NSW established
that the safe speed for the 25 tonne axle load
coal vehicle on 3 piece bogies was 50 km/hr.
Various modifications have been tried to
improve the performance of the 3 piece bogie,
but each had its limitations, and the bogies
have remained substantially the same as first
supplied.
Rigid Frame Bogies when introduced into New
South Wales were designed to reduce Wheel/rail
dynamic forces, to increase the speed of
freight vehicles, to reduce the incidence of
derailments and to reduce the damage to goods
in transit and to reduce wheel wear. In this
regard they have been remarkably successful,
and this is the type of bogie now preferred in
Nffil for heavy haul coal traffic, and for high
speed container trains. The cost of rigid
frame bogies is higher compared with 3 piece
bogies, however, this extra cost can be
justified when higher speeds are required,
such as 80/90 km/hr for 25 tonne axle load
vehicles and 115/130 krnlhr for 19/20 tonne
axle loads.
v'ilhen the 25 tonne axle load coal wagons were
first introduced in the Hunter Valley, a 3
piece bogie with softer springing was
purchased, and 1100 of these were placed into
service running at 50 km/hr maximum speed to
reduce track forces. Considerable track
damage resulted from the introduction of these
wagons working in unit trains, and wheel
flange wear was prevalent. When the next
build of coal wagons was considered the Civil
Engineers had a fair bit to say about the
track damage being experienced by the original
wagons, also the coal suppliers wanted reduced
transit times, so after initial testing, the
75
Gloucester rigid frame bogie was purchased,
and proved quite successful running at 80
km/hr.
Although originally purchased for the Hunter
Valley, it was not long before the stainless
steel coal wagons equipped with these bogies
entered service on the Blue Mountains, and a
high rate of wheel wear resulted. It was
found that the original design of the constant
contact side bearer was at fault. This was
thought to be aggravated by the stainless
steel construction of the wagon. Bogies
trialled under wagons of austen steel reduced
the wheel wear by about half. The stainless
steel wagons were of weak construction in the
torsion box area, and excess deflection was
thought to have caused inclination of the side
bearer seating on the wagon, resulting in
increase in rotational resistance of the
bogie.
When the wagon was rebuilt into a stiffer
construction, and the bogie side bearer was
modified then the wheel wear fell off
significantly, and was in the order of 2 to 1
improvement over that with the 3 piece bogie
in the same service. This was considered
satisfactory at this stage.
What this study of the Gloucester bogie wheel
wear pattern highlighted was the poor
performance of the 3 piece bogie, so
considerable investigation went into
modifications that could be applied to these
bogies to reduce the wear.
It was not until the advent of the
Goninan/UTDC frame - bracing system, which is
a low cost, add on item of low mass (115 kg),
that a satisfactory modification could be
considered for reducing wheel wear, and this
system is presently in service, with SRA, ANR
and V/Line, and is proving quite successful
(Figure 4).
Figure 4
Bogie Details
The 3 piece DBA bogies based on a "National"
design were built with AAR Journal centres to
enable them to meet the 100 tonne at rail
wagon load requirements. Because of the
concern for thermal. overheating on grades,
expecially with use of a high friction
non-metallic brake block, the wheel rims were
widened to 140mm. Axle boxes were used as it
was considered the design of the l30mm bearing
was more conservative than that with package
units. The spring-nest was softened by using
a 7 outer plus 4 inner spring combination
rather than the ANZR grouping.
The rigid frame DCA Gloucester bogies are of
fabricated construction and were the first
freight bogies of this type to be introduced
into NSW in large numbers. Testing and ~.
service experience on British Rail was taken
into account in assessing the suitability of
the DCA bogie for NSW conditions. After
trials in the Hunter Valley with a pair of
trial standard UK bogies, it was decided that
for the production run, the primary springs
should be softened to reduce vertical forces.
Essentially the same wheel set was used as for
the DBA bogies, but package units were fitted
as used on the UK design. 'The side bearer was
of a new design to suit NSH requirements, but
in service the construction of this proved too
weak and was then modified by Goninan, to a
more practical design suitable for the large
forces developed by the coal wagons.
The centre pivot liner was originally
asbestos, but prior to the main order, this
material was banned and a Nylatron liner was
fitted. Unfortunately, service experience
showed that coal dust was imbedding into the
surface of the liner, causing a breakdown of
the material. Several other materials were
trialled and Thordon is the present material
in use. This material, although satisfactory,
also has associated problems in this
application.
The DCA bogie has now been in service for six
years and has proved successful for coal
traffic purposes. The wear of the bogie
components is satisfactory, as is the
construction and design techniques used in
fabricating these bogies. Some bogies have
been involved in derailments, and only minor
damage was caused to the brakegear hanger
brackets.
Wheel/Rail Interaction
The requirement for the rigid frame DCA bogie
was that it should exert no higher P2 force at
80 km/hr than the 3 piece DBA bogie imposed on
the track at 50 km/hr. Fig 5 shows results of
a trial conducted at Hexham at a p2 force test
site, and shows that the above criteria was
met.
ISa COMPA~soN OF P.2
l<E'C.OIZ.DEt:> AT HEX \-lAM.
/10
l~tO--~2~O---~~--~6~o~--e~0~--,~oo--­
SPEED (J( ~)
Figure 5
This increase in speed for the DCA bogied
wagons allows for a greater rate of coal to
flow to the ports. It also allows loaded
wagons in the Blue Mountains traffic to run at
Suburban train speeds when travelling through
sydney on the way to Port Kembla, so improving
operating conditions and reducing transit
times.
The Hexham trial also concluded that these
bogies fitted with sprung side bearers were
immune from hunting instabilities,
irrespective of the condition of the wheel
profiles or loading, up to speeds of 100
km/hr. Empty wagons were therefore capable of
operating at this speed. Tests also confirmed
the superior riding qualities of the DCA bogie
compared with 3 piece DBA.
In NSH the P2 force generally sets the speed
at which vehicles can operate. It has been
found that track degradation will occur if set
dynamic force levels are exceeded, and by
loosening the vertical support of the track,
then the lateral stability of the track can
also be weakened, allowing misalignments to
occur. This then steers a bogie into a
hunting configuration, propagating the
alignment problem. This is especially true on
track having many tight curves where wagons
roll to one side exerting a very high vertical
load on one rail. This can lead to initiation
of track twist, and even larger forces being
imposed on the rail.
An approximate measure of the P2 force can be
calculated using the Jenkins formula:-
[ Mu ]
P2 Po + 2xV x [-------] 1/2
[Mu + Mt]
[ ct.lI ]
x [1- ----------- ]
[ 4Kt (Mu + Mt)]
x [ (Kt.MU)] 1/2
Where:- STATIC ylliEEL LOAD = Po
DYNAMIC RAIL FORCE = P2
VEHICLE SPEED =V
UNSPRUNG MASS PER \tlliEEL = Mu
TOTAL JOINT ANGLE =20(
TRACK STIFFNESS (equivalent) = Kt
TRACK DAMPING (equivalent) = ct
TRACK MASS (equivalent) = Mt
F'oRc:.E5.
Although it is recognised that this formula is
not dimensionally correct, the result does
give a reasonably accurate indication of the
P2 force generated for a particular track
angle and stiffness.
For the 25 tonne axle load wagons, the P2
force limit for Class 1 and 2 tracks in NSW is
230 KN for a joint angle of 0.014 radians.
Laterai forces will also distort the track, so
hunting of bogies, especially those of the 3
piece type having worn wheels, must be avoided
to minimise the force level and probability of
derailment.
76
The ROA tests at Dubbo found that for a
standard 3 piece bogie, the upper limit for
stability was 80 krn/hr for empty wagons and
110 km/hr for loaded.
This performance can be improved by fitting
the Goninan/UTDC frame bracing retrofit to the
bogies. This system achieves the required
interaxle stiffness by bracing of the frame
and provision of elastomatic constraint at the
axle-frame connection. The results obtained
by frame-bracing compare favourably with other
steering systems, is less expensive and is of
lighter mass.
For average track this system can only
marginally improve the speed of loaded wagons,
due to the P2 force exerted by the basic
bogie, but the speeds of empty wagons, which
are constrained by lateral stability of the
bogie, can be considerably increased, as the
frame-bracing controls hunting and reduces the
lateral forces and derailment potential.
Frame-bracing of the bogies would relieve the
necessity for heavy expenditure on grinding of
the rails to achieve steering of the bogies in
curves. It considerably reduces wheel
flanging, and therefore wear on the wheel and
the rail and in these respects, approaches the
performance of a rigid frame bogie. Figure 6
shows the forces exerted on the rail by a 3
piece bogie compared with a rigid frame. It
can be seen that as the curvature tightens,
the rigid frame bogie shows less gain. It is
at this point wheel set yaw must be allowed to
take place. On the frame-braced bogie the
elastomatic unit above the axle bearing allows
for this Y?H, and this solution is now under
consideration for the rigid frame bogie to
fUrther improve its performance.
50
COMPARISo>-J OF LAI~gAL
EETWEEN PCA & "DBA lSOG-IE:S
10
200 400 600 800 1000
CU!i:Ve: gADIUS. ('In)
Figure 6
vertical damping of a bogie has a marked
influence on vertical forces. If the damping
system cannot control spring resonance then
high vertical forces will be developed. Tests
conducted in NSW showed how three marginal
track top discrepancies, spaced at about equal
distance, when met by a 3 piece bogie
travelling at speed caused spring resonance
which the wedge damping could not control, and
accelerations well in excess of "gil resulted
on a loaded vehicle. The forces imposed on
the track must also have been of great
magnitude. Whether the wheel left the rail
could not be determined, but information does
exist on vehicles which have jumped the track
for no specific reason, and damping could have
been a contributing factor.
It is the practice in NSW to assess damping on
a national or ride control type 3 piece bogie,
by removing the bogie carrying springs, and to
ensure that the bolster can be supported by
the damping force throughout its vertical
travel. If this support is not sufficient and
the bolster drops, then the damping is
inadequate. This test has shown that even on
new bogies, manufacturing tolerances are such
that the bolster has been found to drop.
On the other hand, too high a damping force,
as can be associated with some rigid frame
bogies, can increase the vertical force
exerted on the track and the vehicle, for the
spring is prevented from fulfilling its
function. This overdamping will also inhibit
wheel yaw, and will increase wheel and rail
wear.
constant contact side bearers also have an
influence on rail forces. These are used to
control bogie rotation and hunting, but just
as important is vehicle roll stability. The
side bearer should slow a vehicle roll but not
prevent it. Roll to a vehicle is like a boxer
rolling with a punch to reduce the impact
force. Excessive roll can be damaging, as the
acceleration and deceleration rates will be
high, but controlled roll is a necessity,
especially on a system having many curves.
Tests have shown that for undamped roll, as
exists with a normal 3 piece bogie, roll
starts at about 24 km/hr and ends at 64 km/hr,
with resonance occurring at 43 km/hr when
violent roll is induced. with constant
contact side bearers the range of roll is
narrowed from 32 km/hr to 37 km/hr with
resonance occurring at 34 km/hr. The force
generated by controlled roll is about a
quarter of that with uncontrolled and is not
violent.
FOI<C.E!".
constant contact side bearers can therefore be
used to minimise the \veight transfer of wheel
forces on the rail in curves due to roll of
the vehicle, but these units must have
adequate deflection to ensure that there is
little variation in side bearer force level,
throughout roll travel range.
1200 14-00
The Gloucester DCA bogie is equipped with
constant contact side bearers, and the 20
tonne axle load low level version, the DEA
which is fitted under container wagons, has
proved to give good roll stability on these
wagons at speeds up to 130 km/hr.
Wheel ~vear
Lateral forces in curves do most to reduce
wheel and rail life, although bogie hunting
can cause wear problems on tangent track.
Both sets of forces can be controlled by
selection of the vehicle speed, type of bogie,
rail grinding and wheel profilling.
Introduction of wheel profiles is essentially
free of cost, as these can be introduced at
the time the wheel is machined after a period
in service, or when wheels are manufactured.
77
Rail grinding on the other hand is of high
additional cost, especially if equipment has
to be purchased. Rather than venturing on
this costly path, it could be more economic to
purchase a superior rigid frame bogie or
alternatively retrofit existing 3 piece bogies
with an inexpensive steering device such as
the Goninan/UTDC system.
It comes back to the point that any
comprehensive investigation to improve
wheel/rail performance in the most economical
manner, must be a joint effort with both
mechanical and civil disciplines involved.
Modelling techniques and Heumann diagrams can
be used to estimate forces and wear rates to
form the basis on which decisions can be
made. The introduction of 25 tonne axle load
wagons into NSW unit coal operations, combined
with a high percentage of low radius curves,
resulted in severe flange wear of the wheels
and the need for frequent machining. To
alleviate this flange wear, the wheel profile
developed for the XPT passenger train, amongst
other profiles, was trialled in the Blue
Mountains traffic, and was proved to give 100%
improvement. On the basis of this, all rigid
frame bogies were equipped with this wheel
profile.
Further studies into the problem of wheel wear
have indicated that a better profile can be
developed for heavy haul unit trains and this
is at present under extensive trial in the
Hunter Valley and results are promising.
Wheel hardness is another factor, but care
must be exercised in selecting a hardness
suitable for use with non-metallic brake
blocks, where these are in use, bearing in
mind the operational braking requirements. In
NSW due to the many curves and gradients on
the coal tracks, braking applications are
quite frequent and the heat build up with
non-metallic brake blocks can cause thermal
damage to the wheel tread surface. To obviate
this, NSW adopted a soft wheel of about 240 BN
hardness. In more recent times, the hardness
has been increased to 310 BN for the 25 tonne
axle load wagons, and investigations are in
progress to improve on this.
MAX. WHEEL WE/HZ. (otv\PAI<:\SoNS
_ WE'L.DED '" H EELS,-HU N~IC. VALLEY
ISO
XPT& MOD2. rRol=lI_€~- &S.4toB G.»C J:.
AA R GD 1? So TEEL W l-IE:EL <>
LIMIT Fo~
c::l
o shown savings of about 4% for rigid frame
1\1
DISTANC.E I~AVe:t..Le:D j(M )(1000
Figure 7
Typical results of use of wheel profile, and
hardness, for improving wheel wear, for the .
rigid frame DCA and frame braced DBA compared
with the DBA 3 piece bogies are shown in Fig
7. The latest practice in NSW is for wheel
flanges to be built up by welding and some of
the results shown were with welded wheels, but
generally the trend is clear, and shows the
large gains in wheel life that can be achieved
by selecting a suitable wheel profile,
hardness, and bogie type for heavy haul
operations.
Of major interest is the result given for the
frame braced bogie, and current information is
that this trend in low wheel wear is
continuing in the Hunter Valley Coal
Operation. This steering system is now being
trialled on the curvy tracks of the Blue
Mountains and it is anticipated that although
there will be an increase in wear of the wheel
flange, this will still be vastly superior to
that with the standard 3 piece bogie. Figure
8 shows the worst wheel on a frame-braced
bogie compared with that on a standard 3 piece
bogie for similar kilometage in service under
the same wagon. It is obvious that the wear
of the frame braced wheel is a marked
improvement to that of the standard bogie.
The worst wheel of each has been chosen, for
it is this which will dictate when a wheel set
is removed for profile attention.
STANDARO
~~~E~~ RA<:._ED_._W_O_R_S_I_ _
.... W_H_E._E_L
_ _ _ _- /
COMPARISON OF=' WHeEL Pl20F/LES
AFTEI':! 9b477 k, ....... IN SERVIc..E
Figure 8
other problems arise with the operation of the
3 piece bogie which to a large extent can be
eliminated by the use of rigid frame bogies or
the Goninan/UTDC frame bracing system, and
this is associated with the track. Besides
rail wear on curves, also on tangent track due
to bogies hunting, there is also the problem
of rail corrugations which have not been fully
explained. The general opinion of suspension
• designers is that this phenomenon, may be due
to poorly aligned wheel sets in 3 piece
bogies, and it is claimed that about 1500
passes will generate typical corrugation with
a depth of about 0.15mm. With unit train
operation it is possible to generate
corrugations quite quickly.
Fuel savings are considerable with correctly
tracking bogies. Tests conducted in NSW have
bogies compared with 3 piece in the Hunter
Valley, even with the former able to operate
at higher speeds, and claims of 10% savings
are made for the UTDC Frame-bracing system
operating in service in the USA.
78
cost Benefits
When new freight bogie or modification
requirements are considered, or a maintenance
strategy reviewed, then return on capital
invested is major importance. No decision
should be made on the selection of a suitable
bogie before all economic considerations have
been evaluated for a reasonable operating
period of say 10 years. This should cover the
following areas:
Design is technically acceptable and meets
specification requirements;
possible reduction in Rail and Track
maintenance, wheel wear, bogie maintenance,
vehicle downtime periods, transport costs
for components, fuel or electrical usage and;
Possible increase in traffic revenue.
For an operating Railway System, most of these
costs can be found or estimated from experiences
with other bogie designs and are based on the
reduction in bogie hunting, lateral curving
forces, vertical P2 force, yaw stiffness of the
wheel set and correction in alignment errors in
the bogie.
For bogie suppliers, then the dynamics of bogie
designs can be modelled, and reasonable
estimates made.
When the estimates in benefits or savings are
available, then these can be placed in the
following formula:-
[Annual Annual ]
[Costs Benefits]
[Inflation Rate]
x [ ]
[Interest Rate 1
Net Cash flow
The net cash flow is cumUlative over the
period of time considered, and will be shown
in present day costs. The payback period is
indicated when a profit starts being made on
the investment.
The R. Smith paper at the 1986 Heavy Haul
Conference gave an estimate of the payback
period for the UTDC frame bracing retrofit kit
applied to bogies in the USA. The paper
estimated that if the present wheel life is
160,900 km, a payback period of 5 years or
less is obtained, if the car annual
kilometerage is 37,007 km or more.
At 321,800 km, the payback is achieved at
67,578 km/year and if present wheel life is 5
years, then payback is obtained in this period
with an annual kilometerage of 90,104 km. The
assumptions used in this cost/benefit analysis
with regard to the benefits in wheel and rail
wear from frame braced trucks the other states
have been deliberately conservative.
A comprehensive cost benefit study was done
for the frame braced bogies operating in NSW
and this gave a payback period of 6 years for
79
1100 bogies with new wheels retrofitted over a
4 year period (2 years after last bogie was
modified) and 8 years for those with welded
wheels. The Gloucester rigid frame bogie
would further improve on the frame braced, as
it would be operating at a higher speed so
less wagons would be required for the same
duty.
Figure 9 shows an estimated comparison of
percentage costs for a fleet of wagons
required to convey 29 million tonnes per annum
over a 10 year period in the Hunter Valley.
If the fleet were equipped with 3 piece bogies
then 900 wagons are required, where as when
fitted with Gloucester rigid frame bogies,
this figure reduces to 730 due to the speed
advantage.
GLOUC.ESTER BOG-IE
~6VENUE
P~QFIT
61 %.
Figure 9
Conclusion
Enormous amounts of money can be expended if a
wrong type of freight bogie is purchased, and
much of this is hidden costs, as other
departmental areas are involved.
Railways have tended to purchase for the needs
of today, without considering how the market
may alter tomorrow. Certain bogie types have
little room to move when a more exacting task
such as higher speed running is required.
This is where add-on items come into their
own, and all do improve the bogie's
performance to some degree, but generally they
may not be good proposition for the money
expended.
Again the market may dry up in one area, and
the vehicles have to be used elsewhere, is the
bogie design adequate enough for the new task
becomes the question. The track people have
concerns too, and in this age of
enlightenment, they are also asking questions
regarding bogie performance and dynamic forces.
In this scenario is it not better to place
more money up front, and purchase a
technically superior bogie, which is adaptable
for many duties, including higher speed. This
is a major consideration that should corne into
any evaluation for new bogie purchase for rail
systems operating general traffic as well as
unit trains.
To put this differently, less expenditure can
be outlayed for new bogies, then enormous
amounts of money expended on fixing the
problems in the many areas associated with the
operation of these bogies, on the other hand
more expenditure at the start would mean less
in future years, and would give the additional
benefit of more flexibility in operational
service.
What of the trend for the future. There are
indications on the direction that operating
railway systems will take, and these fall into
three categories.
Those that can afford the costs, will upgrade
the track, conduct rail grinding, and operate
the cheapest and the simplest bogies in Unit
trains at a speed where dynamics are not a
problem, and the maintenanc~ costs retained.
other systems which cannot afford track
upgrading, will be looking towards fixing
undesirable performance characteristics of the
bogies they have, with add on items. The
danger here is that the true costs can be
mixed with maintenance costs and the picture
becomes confused on actual benefits obtained.
The other consideration is that the fix up may
be suitable for one particular operating area,
but run those vehicles elsewhere or at a
higher speed and other problems arise.
The final direction is where a system
purchases a technically superior bogie at the
high cost, spends less on track to achieve
higher speed running, hence increased traffic
revenue and retaining maintenance and running
costs to a minimum. When this operation has
been fine tuned by the optimisation of
wheel/rail profiles and hardness, then higher
carrying capacities can be considered.
It is feasible for the Gloucester bogie to
operate at 27 tonnes axleload, with increased
bearing and axle sizes, and this would
increase the traffic revenue by about 10%,
without significant increase in maintenance
costs. These are the trends, and it is up to
each railway to make its own choice, but it is
suggested that a full economic evaluation
should take place before decisions are made on
the choice of a bogie for a particular task.
For railways having general traffic duties, it
is suggested that the rigid frame bogie
solution is the most economic, flexible and
satisfies all operational requirements.
One other trend should be mentioned although
not directly connected with bogies but as a
means of replacing them, and that is the
development of single axle suspension
systems. Two such devices close to each other
80
and interconnected, would m:'gate the
requirement for a bogie frame, besides glvlng
better support to the wagon and allowing
reduction in wagon mass. In theory such
devices look good, but pratical requirements
such as soft YAW stiffness could cause
pratical problems. It would be wise for any
railway system to undertake considerable
development and field testing before venturing
on this path. Four wheel wagons, do not
require the same degree of your movement and
this is where single axle suspension units
give the most benefit at this stage but that
is another story.
Acknowledgements
The Author wishes to express his appreciation
to the Chief General Manager, A. Goninan and
Company, also the Chief Mechanical Engineer,
SRA of NSW for the use of information supplied
by their organisations.
REFERENCES
1. The Elements of Bogie Design for
Australian Conditions
H.E. Coxon & L.D. McNaughton I. Mech.E.
Sydney September 1971
2. Railways of Australia Vehicle/Track
Interaction Study No.1. Final Report
1981
3. Railways of Australia Vehicle/Track
Interaction Studies, Research and
Implementation I.M. Nibloe (of
Queensland Rail.) and M.D. O'Rourke
Heavy Haul Railway Conference.
Vancouver 1986.
4. The Effect of Track and Vehicle
Parameters on Wheel/Rail Vertical
Dynamic Forces.
H.H. Jenkins, J.E. Stephenson, C.A.
Clayton, G.W. Morland and D. Lyon.
REJ January 1974.
5. Wheel - Rail Contact Forces in curves
D.M.S. Fairweather
Heavy Haul Railways Conference Sydney
1978.
6. Conceptional alternatives to the 3 Piece
Truck for support of Railway freight
Vehicles ReE. smith
Heavy Haul Railway Conference Vancouver
1986
7. Goninan Reports 1 to 6 on performance of
frame-braced bogies in the Hunter Valley
L.D.McNaughton 1987/88.