Quantifying the impact of rail longitudinal level changes on dynamic load magnitudes through instrumented wheelset measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Track geometry significantly influences train-track dynamic interactions, primarily due to irregularities at the wheel-rail interface. These irregularities generate dynamic load excitations, leading to defects and damage. This study evaluates how track surface profile longitudinal level vertical changes affect vertical wheel-to-rail loads, quantified by the dynamic load factor (ϕ), due to the importance of ϕ in track design. A limitation of the existing studies is their focus on instrumented sections and numerical modellings without considering different track structures. This study conducted dynamic load measurements using two instrumented wheelsets (IWS) over a 340 km section operated by a North American Class 1 freight railway in the Canadian Prairies under various track structures and train speeds. Rail surface longitudinal level measurements were obtained as routine measurements through a track geometry car. The paper presents statistical distributions of rail longitudinal level across different track structures and evaluates two widely used and recently developed ϕ equations within the context of North American freight railways to quantify the impact of rail longitudinal level (i.e. profile) changes on dynamic load magnitudes. The study also evaluates regulated threshold values by considering observed trends in the measured data, which aims to quantify and compare these values with our current understanding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".