Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 16

Improved Brake Systems AAR SRI Project

Steve Belport AAR Brake Systems Committee

TTCI, a subsidiary of the AAR, 2010. p0

Improved Brake System Performance


Objective: Improve brake system performance by investigating the root causes of poor performance Demonstrate potential solutions End Product(s): Improved braking, improved brake shoe life, improved wheel life Major Tasks in 2010: Improved truck brake rigging Static and dynamic brake shoe force testing of improved designs Evaluate four candidate remote operated handbrake systems Monitor electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brake system performance and reliability

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p2

Improved Brake System Performance


Asymmetric wheel wear (SRI 2A):
Identified on 134 coal cars in fleet of Mitsui Rail Capital Associated with:
Truck & car body brake rigging asymmetries Asymmetric tread wear due to asymmetric location of the shoe on the tread & shoe contact Increase in brake forces? Seems to be endemic to NA fleet

Results in:
Reduced wheel life Possible increased track / rail forces / stresses Associated high conicity wheels

Suggested remedies:
Symmetric brake rigging Altered shoe shape

Tournay to make extended presentation by telecon to next BSC meeting

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p3

Improved Brake System Performance


Progress: Improved Truck Brake Rigging
Demonstrate designs that provide improved distribution of brake shoe forces TAG sourced for ideas and feedback Nine rigging designs for evaluation Tests include: Static shoe force tests conducted June 2010 (8 systems tested) Dynamic shoe force tests fall 2010 Instrumented brake shoes Standard 3-piece truck and M-976 truck Brakes applied/released in moving car
Apply brakes in tangent prior to curve, release brakes in tangent following curve Apply brakes in body of curve, release brakes in tangent following curve Apply brakes in tangent prior to curve, release brakes in body of curve

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p4

Rigging Designs
1. Base case: normal unit beams Sliding contact between beam and side frame Performance will be used to quantify any improvements in the other designs Commercially available

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p5

Rigging Designs
2. Modified unit beams Small tab welded to bottom of beam end extension Minimize reaction moment in side frame Design concept

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p6

Rigging Designs
3. Longer unit guide bracket and beam end extension Longer end extension reacts in line with brake force also limits beam droop and taper shoe wear Design concept

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p7

Rigging Designs
4. Unit beams with link brake system 4-bar linkage: Restricts beam pitch & lateral motion Reacts moments on beam Commercially available

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p8

Rigging Designs
5. Modified unit beams with link brake system 4-bar linkage: Restricts beam pitch and lateral motion Reacts moments on beam Design concept

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p9

Rigging Designs
6. Swing hanger beams with link brake system 4-bar linkage: Restricts beam pitch and lateral motion Reacts moments on beam Acts as a safety support for hanger beam Design concept

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p10

Rigging Designs
7. Swing hanger beams Supported from swing link to eliminate sliding friction No beam end extension Commercially available

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p11

Rigging Designs
8. Swing hanger beams with extension nubs End extension restricts lateral motion and acts as safety support device Design concept

Swing link fits here

Small end extension

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p12

Rigging Designs
9. Swing hanger beams with guides Designed to prevent wear or chatter as it engages Not available for testing by TTCI until September Design concept (US Patent 7,527,131 BI)

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p13

SRI 5A: Improved Brake System Performance


Preliminary static shoe force test results
Evaluation based even distribution of shoe forces Swing hangers (#7, #8) performed very well Unit beams (#1A&B, #2, #3) performed reasonably well (new condition) Link systems (#4, #5, #6) and were over-constrained in this test with bent truck levers have had much better results in past with straight levers
StaticShoeForceResults
1A.BaseCase A

StaticShoeForceResults
40%
1B.BaseCase B 1A.BaseCase A

25%

ShoeForceTotalPercentVariation

20%

ShoeForcePositiveandNegative PercentVariation

35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 0 20 40 60 80

15% 10% 5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 0 20 40 60 80

2.ModifiedUnitBeams 3.LongExtensions 4.UnitBeams wLink 5.ModifiedBeams wLink 6.SwingHangerwLink 7.SwingHanger 8.SwingHangerw/ Nubs AARCriteria(S401)

1B.BaseCase B 2.ModifiedUnitBeams 3.LongExtensions 4.UnitBeams wLink 5.ModifiedBeamswLink 6.SwingHangerwLink 7.SwingHanger 8.SwingHangerw/Nubs

BrakeCylinderPressure(psi)

BrakeCylinderPressure(psi)

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p14

SRI 5A: Improved Brake System Performance


Dynamic curving tests with instrumented brake shoes Fall 2010

Mini Load Cell x 2 Instrumented clevis pin

12,500 lbs capacity Friction retarding force

10,000 lbs capacity Normal force Top/Bottom force distribution


TTCI/AAR, 2010, p15

SRI 5A: Improved Brake System Performance


Path Forward
Improved truck brake rigging Conduct static testing on system #9 when it becomes available Calibrate instrumented brake shoes Conduct dynamic testing, fall 2010 Continue evaluation of four candidate remote operated handbrake systems at FAST Continue to monitor ECP brake system performance and reliability

TTCI/AAR, 2010, p16

Vous aimerez peut-être aussi