1、BSI Standards Publication WB11885_BSI_StandardCovs_2013_AW.indd 1 15/05/2013 15:06 Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures - Traffic Loads on Bridges - Track-Bridge Interaction PD CEN/TR 17231:2018 TECHNICAL REPORT RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT CEN/TR 17231 August 2018 ICS 91.010.30; 93.040 Englis
2、h Version Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures - Traffic Loads on Bridges - Track-Bridge Interaction Eurocode 1 : Actions sur les structures - Actions sur les ponts, dues au trafic - Interaction voie-pont Eurocode 1: Einwirkungen auf Tragwerke - Verkehrslasten auf Brcken - Gleis-Brcken Interaktion This
3、 Technical Report was approved by CEN on 16 April 2018. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 250. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France,
4、Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHE
5、S KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels 2018 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. CEN/TR 17231:2018 E National foreword This Published Document is the UK implementation of C
6、EN/TR 17231:2018. The UK participation in its preparation was entrusted to Technical Committee B/525/1, Actions (loadings) and basis of design. A list of organizations represented on this committee can be obtained on request to its secretary. This publication does not purport to include all the nece
7、ssary provisions of a contract. Users are responsible for its correct application. The British Standards Institution 2018 Published by BSI Standards Limited 2018 ISBN 978 0 580 93643 2 ICS 93.040; 91.010.30 Compliance with a British Standard cannot confer immunity from legal obligations. This Publis
8、hed Document was published under the authority of the Standards Policy and Strategy Committee on 31 August 2018. Amendments/corrigenda issued since publication Date Text affected PUBLISHED DOCUMENT PD CEN/TR 17231:2018 TECHNICAL REPORT RAPPORT TECHNIQUE TECHNISCHER BERICHT CEN/TR 17231 August 2018 I
9、CS 91.010.30; 93.040 English Version Eurocode 1: Actions on Structures - Traffic Loads on Bridges - Track-Bridge Interaction Eurocode 1 : Actions sur les structures - Actions sur les ponts, dues au trafic - Interaction voie-pont Eurocode 1: Einwirkungen auf Tragwerke - Verkehrslasten auf Brcken - Gl
10、eis-Brcken Interaktion This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 16 April 2018. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 250. CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Repu
11、blic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom. EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION COMIT EUROPEN
12、DE NORMALISATION EUROPISCHES KOMITEE FR NORMUNG CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels 2018 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members. Ref. No. CEN/TR 17231:2018 E PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:2018 (E) 2
13、Contents Page European foreword . 5 Introduction 6 1 Scope 7 2 Normative references 7 3 Terms and definitions . 7 4 Symbols and abbreviations . 9 5 Description of the Technical Issue . 10 5.1 General . 10 5.2 Axial effects 11 5.2.1 Origin of axial forces and displacements . 11 5.2.2 Force transfer b
14、etween track and deck ends . 11 5.2.3 Rail stresses . 11 5.2.4 Forces acting on the fixed point (e.g. Bearing forces) . 14 5.2.5 Interaction with sub-structure 14 5.3 Vertical effects . 15 5.3.1 Effect of vertical forces and displacements 15 5.3.2 Bridge deck end rotation . 15 5.4 Limits to the need
15、 for detailed calculations . 16 5.5 Calculation of multiple loading conditions . 17 5.6 Effect of bridge deformations 17 5.6.1 Effect on track geometry . 17 5.6.2 Effect on stability of ballasted track 18 5.6.3 Effect of ballast degradation over structural joints. 18 5.7 Effects on track constructio
16、n and maintenance activities 18 6 History and background 19 6.1 Existing codes and standards 19 6.2 Differences between national rules. 21 7 Case studies 21 7.1 Scheldt River Bridge (Belgium) 21 7.2 Dedicated high speed lines in France and Spain . 21 7.3 Olifants River Bridge (South Africa) 21 7.4 B
17、ridges on Denver RTD (USA) . 21 7.5 Historic bridges in central Europe . 22 7.6 Semi-integral bridges on German high speed lines . 22 8 Design considerations for track. . 23 8.1 Representation of axial behaviour of track. . 23 8.2 Understanding of ballast behaviour 24 8.2.1 Ballast properties. 24 8.
18、2.2 Importance of effective ballast retention 24 8.3 Description/ limitations of available track devices for mitigation of effects . 24 8.3.1 Principles 24 8.3.2 Practical solutions . 26 8.4 Description/ limitations of bridge design for mitigation of effects . 31 PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:201
19、8 (E) 3 8.4.1 General . 31 8.4.2 “Steering bars” and virtual fixed points. 31 8.4.3 Damper Systems 32 8.5 Effects of track curvature and switches and crossings . 32 9 Design criteria . 33 9.1 General . 33 9.1.1 Rail stress 33 9.1.2 Rail break containment 33 9.2 Displacement limits . 33 9.3 Different
20、iation between ultimate- and service-loading . 35 9.4 Safety factors 35 9.5 Differences between ballasted and ballastless tracks 35 9.6 Calculations for configurations with rail expansion devices 36 10 Calculation methods 36 10.1 Methods in EN 1991-2:2003 . 36 10.1.1 General . 36 10.1.2 Software bas
21、ed on UIC 774-3R . 38 10.1.3 Linear analysis with manual intervention (LAMI) . 38 10.2 Load configurations . 40 10.3 Sensitivity analysis . 40 10.4 Numerical comparisons of calculation methods . 41 11 Information and process management . 46 12 GUIDANCE Current best practice . 47 12.1 Bridge design p
22、rinciples 47 12.2 Track design principles 47 12.2.1 Ballasted track . 47 12.2.2 Ballastless track 47 12.2.3 Special rail fastening systems 48 12.2.4 Rail expansion devices 48 12.2.5 Derivation of the behaviour 48 13 Recommendations for future standards development . 49 14 Recommendations for future
23、research and development . 49 14.1 General . 49 14.2 Improved input data for existing calculation methods. 49 14.3 Extension of existing models to include other track configurations . 50 14.4 Collecting data for better verification of analytical models 50 14.5 Providing a basis for developing new, m
24、ore rigorous, models 50 Annex A (informative) Calculation of rail break gap 51 A.1 Rail break gap for track with conventional fastenings (not on a bridge) 51 A.2 Rail break gap for track on a bridge, with conventional fastenings . 52 A.3 Rail break gap for track with sliding (ZLR) fastenings . 54 A.
25、4 Limiting values of rail break gap 54 Annex B (informative) Algebraic studies of longitudinal track characteristics . 55 B.1 Algebraic representations of behaviour 55 B.1.1 Sliding action 55 B.1.2 The k-function 56 PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:2018 (E) 4 B.1.3 Temperature change . 57 B.1.4 Temp
26、erature gradients 67 B.1.5 Track springs . 67 B.1.6 Joint movements . 71 B.1.7 Track forces resulting from joint movements . 73 B.2 The Two Spreadsheet Method . 77 B.2.1 General . 77 B.2.2 The Temperature Stress Spreadsheet (TSS) 77 B.2.3 The Additional Stress Spreadsheet (ASS) 80 Annex C (informati
27、ve) Examples of Track-Bridge Interaction calculations 83 C.1 Introduction to calculation methods 83 C.2 Example 1: Simply supported deck with no rail expansion device 83 C.3 Example 2: Series of continuous decks with no rail expansion device . 85 C.4 Continuous deck with a rail expansion device 88 A
28、nnex D (informative) Alternative method for determining the combined response of a structure and track to variable actions 91 Annex E (informative) Proposed revision of EN 1991-2:2003, 6.5.4 92 E.1 General . 92 E.2 Combined response of structure and track to variable actions 92 E.2.1 General princip
29、les 92 E.2.2 Parameters affecting the combined response of the structure and track . 92 E.2.3 Actions to be considered . 95 E.2.4 Modelling and calculation of the combined track/structure system 95 E.2.5 Design criteria . 98 E.2.6 Calculation methods 100 Bibliography . 104 PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR
30、 17231:2018 (E) 5 European foreword This document (CEN/TR 17231:2018) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 250 “Structural Eurocodes”, the secretariat of which is held by BSI. Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent rig
31、hts. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights. PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:2018 (E) 6 Introduction The subject of Track-Bridge Interaction has become particularly important with respect to longer span bridges and viaducts supporting tracks, especially for
32、those carrying high speed trains. However, investigations which have been undertaken in order to address that specific issue have raised points which are relevant to all types of railway bridge. Consequently, the content of this Technical Report is intended to be applicable to all types of railway b
33、ridge, for both ballasted and ballastless track, and for all types of railway (e.g. conventional railways, metro and light rail systems, and high speed railways). It is also clear that the increased availability of computational methods of analysis, since the basis for existing codes was laid down i
34、n the 1990s, has made it possible to consider approaches to calculation of Track-Bridge Interaction effects which could not be expected to be used in routine procedures in the past. There are three principal outputs set out in the final sections of this Technical Report. They are as follows: 1) Guid
35、ance for designers and maintainers of railway track and structures to assist them in adopting current best practice in taking Track-Bridge Interaction effects into account (Clause 12 of this report). 2) Recommendations for future development of standards, especially the revision of the relevant sect
36、ion of the Eurocode EN 1991-2:2003 6.5.4 (Clause 13 and Annex E of this report). 3) Identification of areas in which new research and development is needed to make further improvements in approaches to Track-Bridge Interaction (Clause 14 of this report). PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:2018 (E) 7 1
37、 Scope This document reviews current practice with regard to designing, constructing and maintaining the parts of bridges and tracks where railway rails are installed across discontinuities in supporting structures. Current Standards and Codes of Practice are examined and some particular case histor
38、ies are reviewed. The document gives guidance with respect to current best practice and makes recommendations for future standards development and also identifies areas in which further research and development is needed. 2 Normative references There are no normative references in this document. 3 T
39、erms and definitions For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply. ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses: IEC Electropedia: available at http:/www.electropedia.org/ ISO Online browsing platform: available a
40、t http:/www.iso.org/obp 3.1 track-bridge interaction conditions under which forces and/or displacements in a railway track and its supporting bridge structure are influenced by the fact that rails span discontinuities in a bridge structure e.g. structural movement joints or bridge deck ends 3.2 addi
41、tional load load in an element of the track, (e.g. rail and rail fixing) on a bridge compared with what is expected in that element if the same track system were to be installed with the same loading actions away from any bridge Note 1 to entry The word additional is used in the same sense to descri
42、be additional stresses, additional forces and additional deformations. 3.3 thermal fixed point point in the structure of the bridge, without the track, which is assumed not to be displaced when there is a change in temperature. (Otherwise known as the “centre of thermal displacement” or “thermal cen
43、tre”) 3.4 deck length L D distance between structural movement joints in the bridge deck 3.5 span length L S distance between vertical supports, e.g. piers and abutments PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR 17231:2018 (E) 8 3.6 expansion length, L T of a deck distance between the thermal fixed point and the f
44、ree end of the deck Note 1 to entry: For bridge designs in which the thermal fixed point is neither at one end nor at the mid-point of the deck, the distance from the thermal fixed point to the further free end is taken to be L T. (See Figure1.) 3.7 effective expansion length, L J at a joint total o
45、f the distances from the joint to the thermal fixed point for the two bridge decks adjacent to the joint Note 1 to entry: See Figure 1. Key represents a fixed support represents a free support Figure 1 Examples of expansion lengths L J and L T 3.8 support stiffness longitudinal stiffness of a single
46、 pier given by = + ph F K Note 1 to entry: Depending on the type of bearings used, the tolerance of the bearing and the shear stiffness may have to be considered by calculating the longitudinal stiffness. Note 2 to entry: For the case represented in Figure 2 as an example. PD CEN/TR 17231:2018CEN/TR
47、 17231:2018 (E) 9 Key (1) bending of the pier (2) rotation of the foundation (3) displacement of the foundation (4) total displacement of the pier head Figure 2 Example of the determination of equivalent longitudinal stiffness at bearings 4 Symbols and abbreviations For the purposes of this document
48、, the following symbols and abbreviations apply. E elastic (“Youngs”) modulus. For rails, it is assumed that E = 210 GN/m. F longitudinal force K longitudinal stiffness at a single pier (see Clause 3 definition 7) L D deck length (see Clause 3 definition 4) L J effective expansion length at a joint
49、(see Clause 3 definition 6) L S span length (see Clause 3 definition 5) L T expansion length (see Clause 3 definition 4) SFT Stress Free Temperature. (Temperature at which the axial stress in the rail is zero for unloaded track) SLS Serviceabiity Limit State (see definition in EN 1990:2002 1 , 1.5.2.14) ULS Ultimate Limit State (see definition in EN 1990:2002 2 , 1.5.2.13) , thcoefficient of thermal expansion. For rails, it is assumed that = 1,2 10 5K -1 B axial displacement of the bridge deck due to traction or braking forces h l
