Comparison of numerical and computational aspects between two constraint-based contact methods in the description of wheel/rail contacts

Abstract The numerical and computation aspects of the Knife-edge Equivalent Contact ( KEC ) constraint lookup table LUT methods are compared in this paper. method implementation uses a penetration-based elastic contact model for flange constraint-based formulation at wheel tread. For method, where an infinitely narrow rail contacts equivalent wheel, regularization tread-flange transition is adopted to simultaneously account tread using constraints. A comparison between two carried out well-known integrators show applicability limitations both methods. Two fixed-step-size integrators, explicit Runge–Kutta (RK4) predictor–corrector Adam–Bashforth–Moulton (ABM) methods, variable-step-size Matlab built-in function $ode45$ o d e 45 implicit $ode15s$ 15 s , were applied get solutions dynamic problems study relative performance description To complete railway vehicle model, implemented multibody benchmark (the Manchester wagon 1). Numerical results obtained different tracks with without irregularities. Profiles S1002 LB-140-Area rail, which demonstrate two-point phenomenon, considered. Both validated against commercial simulation software. kinematic approaches good agreement, but was up 20% more efficient than regardless integrator used.