Going Beyond Conventional Problem Solving for Two Railroad Wheel Defects

Conventional problem solving is a time-honored and accepted methodology for solving many problems we encounter in our daily home and work lives. Thought processes can be linear (like a programmer) or non-linear and still use conventional problem solving skills. Conventional problem solving begins with a statement of the problem, accumulation of data, analysis of data and proposals of solutions to the problem, then testing of the hypotheses. Non-conventional problem solving often skips some of these steps, beginning with a statement of the problem and ending with possible solutions. The tools of conventional problem solving include “critical thinking”, Fool-proofing, “thinking outside the box” and Statistical techniques. Consider the first of our ancestors to figure out that harnessing fire would provide security from large predators, make food safer and easier to eat and make tools such as fire hardened tips on spears. Did all these inventions occur in one moment of genius, or did they take innumerable years to accomplish? Sometime in this process of non-conventional thinking our ancestors brought forth a new technology which ensured the survival of our species. So, how does non-conventional problem solving work? When current theory does not appear to work, then we look to the margins of our science to see if current theory continues to be ineffective. Most theories fail in the margins of the science. A classic example of conventional science failing in the margins is the general and special theory of relativity. Non-conventional problem solving offers greater opportunity for revolutionary rather than incremental, or evolutionary advancements to our science. Other examples are included in this paper. Two wheel related problems are also presented using non-conventional problem solving techniques to provide alternative solutions.

Effect of Vanadium Addition on the Surface Roughness and Fatigue Crack Propagation in a Railroad Wheel Using Twin Disc Wear Test

To verify the effect of 0.13 % vanadium addition (% in weight) on the wear resistance of a railroad wheel steel with 0.7 % carbon, twin-disc rolling-sliding test were performed. These two steels were named 7V and 7C. The test discs were analyzed to verify the superficial conditions and wear mechanisms using SEM (Scanning Electron Microscopy) and roughness measurements. After 100,000 cycles running it was concluded that without the presence of debris, the 7V steel presented a reduction in 35 % the mass loss compared to 7C steel. For the 7V steel, in the test without debris, the discs presented small cracks (10 μm long), very near (3 μm deep) the surface, but in the test with the presence of debris, the disc surfaces presented delaminated material and long cracks (100 μm long) faraway from surface (up to 72 μm deep). The presence of debris also increased the roughness parameters in 7V steel: average Rz jumped from near 6 μm in the steel without debris to near 26 μm in the steel with debris.

Effect of temperature on the performance of railroad wheels

Sliding and tread brake heating are known to alter microstructures and properties and show causal relationships with shelling and spalling. Temperature can also affect the performance of wheels in other ways: rolling contact forces depend on the size of the contact patch, which is affected by the elastic modulus, which in turn is affected by the tread temperature. Temperature differences from the rim to the remaining portion of the wheel may cause distortions, which may result in unfavorable contact between the wheel and the rail. Cold temperatures affect the fracture toughness and, in the presence of water, may cause wedging, which will accelerate the shelling process. Oxidation within a crack can also cause wedging, resulting in the propagation of thermal cracks. Changes in the residual stress due to brake heating can also affect shakedown. This study considers the many ways of how temperature can affect the performance of the railroad wheel of a freight car. Most of the author’s observations relate to the freight car service in North America and may not be applicable to other types of service in other parts of the world.

A Simple Procedure for the Solution of Three-Dimensional Wheel/Rail Conformal Contact Problem

This paper describes a simple and efficient procedure for the treatment of conformal contact conditions with special emphasis on railroad wheel/rail contacts. The general three-dimensional nonconformal contact conditions are briefly reviewed. These nonconformal contact conditions, which are widely used in many applications because of their generality, allow for predicting online one point of contact, provided that the two surfaces in contact satisfy certain geometric requirements. These nonconformal contact conditions fail when the solution is not unique as the result of using conformal surface profiles or surface flatness, situations often encountered in many applications including railroad wheel/rail contacts. In these cases, the Jacobian matrix obtained from the differentiation of the nonconformal contact conditions with respect to the surface parameters suffer from singularity that causes interruption of the computer simulations. The singularities and the fundamental issues that arise in the case of conformal contact are discussed, and a simple and computationally efficient procedure for avoiding such singularities in general multibody systems (MBS) algorithms is proposed. In order to demonstrate the use of the proposed procedure, the wheel climb of a wheelset as the result of an external lateral force is considered as an example. In this example, the wheel and rail profiles lead to conformal contact scenarios that could not be simulated using the nonconformal contact conditions.

Development of Railroad Wheel Rim Axial Residual Stress in Heavy Axle Load Service

Vertical split rim (VSR) failures remain a failure mode for wheels in North America, and are of concern to wheel manufacturers and railroads alike. Both forged and cast wheels have suffered VSRs in service. Extensive testing during the last several years, using x-ray diffraction techniques, has shown the axial residual stress pattern within the railroad wheel rim is significantly different for new AAR Class C wheels vs. AAR Class C wheels that have failed due to a VSR, and non-failed AAR Class C wheels that have been operating in service. VSRs almost always begin at areas of tread damage, resulting from shelling or spalling, and cracking propagates into the rim section under load. At the rim locations tested, the as-manufactured wheels have a relatively “flat” axial residual stress profile, compressive but near neutral, caused by the rim quenching operation, while wheels that have been in service have a layer of high axial compressive stress at the tread surface, and a balancing zone of axial tensile stress underneath. The magnitude and direction of this axial tensile stress is consistent with the crack propagation of a VSR failure. When cracks from tread surface damage propagate into this subsurface axial tensile zone, a VSR can occur under sufficient additional service loading, such as loads caused by in-service wheel/rail impacts from tread damage. Further, softer Class U (untreated) wheels, removed from service and tested, were found to have a balancing axial tensile stress layer deeper below the tread surface than that found in used Class C wheels. This paper describes recent x-ray diffraction testing to measure the axial residual stress profile in wheel rims operated in the Facility for Accelerated Service Testing (FAST) train at the Transportation Technology Center (TTC), in Pueblo, CO. The goal of the testing was to determine the development rate and magnitude of wheel rim axial residual stress, as a function of known load and service mileage. Four new Class C wheelsets and four new Class U wheelsets were placed in service under the FAST train, and these wheelsets were subsequently removed at various mileage levels for evaluation. Two radial rim slices were cut from each wheel at each mileage level, and x-ray diffraction was used to measure the axial residual stress within the wheel rim section. The last two Class C wheelsets and last two Class U wheelsets were also exposed to an extended drag braking event at FAST, where wheel treads were heated by tread braking. The authors describe the testing and discuss the axial residual stress results in detail, with emphasis on implications for service.