• Proceedings of the KSR Conference
• /
• 2007.11a
• /
• pp.517-528
• /
• 2007

Domestic or international existing researches regarding rail damage factors are focused on laying, vehicle conditions, driving speed and driving habits and overlook characteristics of track structure (elasticity, maintenance etc). Also in ballast track, as there is no special lateral spring stiffness of track also called as ballast lateral resistance in concrete track, generally, existing study shows concrete track has 2 time shorter life cycle for rail replacement than ballast track due to abrasion. As a result of domestic concrete track design and operation performance review, concrete track elasticity is lower than track elasticity of ballast track resulting higher damage on rail and tracks. Generally, concrete track has advantage in track elasticity adjustment than ballast track and in case of Europe, in concrete track design, it is recommended to have same or higher performance range of vertical elastic stiffness of ballast track but domestically or internationally review on lateral spring stiffness of track is very minimal. Therefore, through analysis of service line track on site measurement and analysis on performance of maintenance, in this research, dynamic characteristic behaviors of commonly used ballast and concrete track are studied to infer elasticity of service line track and experimentally prove effects of track lateral spring stiffness that influence curved rail damage as well as correlation between track elasticity by track system and rail damage to propose importance of appropriate elastic stiffness level for concrete and ballast track.

• Korean Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
• /
• v.30 no.5
• /
• pp.691-699
• /
• 1997

In order to find out the properties in flow resistance of trawlR=1.5R=1.5\;S\;v^{1.8}\;S\;v^{1.8} nets and the exact expression for the resistance R (kg) under the water flow of velocity v(m/sec), the experimental data on R obtained by other, investigators were pigeonholed into the form of $R=kSv^2$, where $k(kg{\cdot}sec^2/m^4)$ was the resistance coefficient and $S(m^2)$ the wall area of nets, and then k was analyzed by the resistance formular obtained in the previous paper. The analyzation produced the coefficient k expressed as $$k=4.5(\frac{S_n}{S_m})^{1.2}v^{-0.2}$$ in case of bottom trawl nets and as $$k=5.1\lambda^{-0.1}(\frac{S_n}{S_m})^{1.2}v^{-0.2}$$ in midwater trawl nets, where $S_m(m^2)$ was the cross-sectional area of net mouths, $S_n(m^2)$ the area of nets projected to the plane perpendicular to the water flow and $\lambda$ the representitive size of nettings given by ${\pi}d^2/2/sin2\varphi$ (d : twine diameter, 2l: mesh size, $2\varphi$ : angle between two adjacent bars). The value of $S_n/S_m$ could be calculated from the cone-shaped bag nets equal in S with the trawl nets. In the ordinary trawl nets generalized in the method of design, however, the flow resistance R (kg) could be expressed as $$R=1.5\;S\;v^{1.8}$$ in bottom trawl nets and $$R=0.7\;S\;v^{1.8}$$ in midwater trawl nets.