Railcar Operating Loads: Cargo Side Thrust Forces

  • Thread starter Thread starter Altai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces Thrust
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the terminology used to describe railcar operating loads, specifically "cargo side thrust forces." The term is debated, with suggestions to use "lateral loading" instead, as it may better encompass the forces exerted by cargo. It is noted that lateral loading can be expressed as total or average loads, depending on the context, and can result from both static and dynamic conditions. Additionally, the impact of hydrostatic loads from liquid or dry bulk cargo is highlighted, emphasizing the variability based on cargo height. Caution is advised when defining general stress, as different load and location combinations can lead to critical variations.
Altai
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Dear native English-speaking professionals!
I am making up an info table concerning railcar operating loads, and I’m a bit stuck with one term - I’m not sure if it sounds comprehensible enough to an Enflish speaking reader.
Here is the part I’m struggling over:

"Load description: cargo side thrust forces (N/mm2)"
"σ = stresses due to bulk cargo side thrust static pressure per unit area of carbody side, MPa."

What I’d like to know - is the phrase “cargo side thrust forces” comprehensible enough? Does it sound right? Or is there probably a better way to put it? Being no native English speaker, I’m not really sure...
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
I would use the term "lateral loading" rather than side thrust forces. Also, the lateral loading may be expressed as either a total load (n's) or an average load or pressure (n/m^2), depending upon how it is being applied/used. Lateral loadings may apply to both the cargo, or the car (empty or loaded) depending on what is being considered; the forces on the rails or the cargo restraints. Lateral loadings may come from transient or short term lateral dynamic actions due to track roughness or misalignment, or the longer term loadings due to curves.

If you are talking about liquid or dry bulk cargo, they will exert a hydrostatic load on the walls of the container. That loading will vary with height, so either a maximum or an average pressure would be applicable. Of course dynamic loading would also add to the hydrostatic loading.

Cargo loads are applied in all 3 directions, but generally due to different influences, and they can be transient or longer term. Typically maximum loadings are due to transient effects.

With respect to stresses, I would be cautious in defining a general stress as you've indicated. There are many load and location combinations that can be critical such that defining a kind of average stress may be misleading.

The above comments are coming from a design perspective, not from an operating instruction point of view. My rail background has been with passenger vehicles rather than freight, but I don't think that changes the design aspects that much.
 
Thank you very much for such a profound explanation! It really helps.
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
Thread 'How can I find the cleanout for my building drain?'
I am a long distance truck driver, but I recently completed a plumbing program with Stratford Career Institute. In the chapter of my textbook Repairing DWV Systems, the author says that if there is a clog in the building drain, one can clear out the clog by using a snake augur or maybe some other type of tool into the cleanout for the building drain. The author said that the cleanout for the building drain is usually near the stack. I live in a duplex townhouse. Just out of curiosity, I...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top