两种铁路车轮疲劳分析评价方法的比较

Comparison of Two Fatigue Analysis and Evaluation Methods for Railway Car Wheels

比较了AAR S 669—2013和UIC 510—5—2007标准中的车轮辐板疲劳分析评价方法,并以某一特定车轮P3为例,按照2个标准进行了应力计算和疲劳分析。结果表明,AAR S 669的静强度评价较为保守,UIC 510—5的疲劳评价更为苛刻。对于P3车轮,按照AAR S 669得出的疲劳危险位置为外侧辐板与轮毂过渡圆弧部位,按照UIC510—5得出的疲劳危险位置为内侧辐板与轮毂过渡圆弧部位。造成这种差别的主要原因在于是否考虑了热处理残余应力的影响。

The evaluation methods for wheel web fatigue analysis in AAR S 669-2013 and UIC 510-5-2007 are compared. With a certain type of P3 wheels as the example, the stress calculation and fatigue analysis are made according to the two standards. The result shows that the static strength evaluation in AAR S 669 is fairly conservative,however,the fatigue evaluation in UIC 510-5 is more strict. As for the P3 wheels, the dangerous fatigue position according to AAR S 669 is the transition arc between the outside web and the wheel hub, and the dangerous fatigue position according to UIC 510-5 is the transition arc between the inside web and the wheel hub. The main cause to this difference is whether the effect of the residual stress of heat treatment is considered or not.