Page 311 - 360.revista de Alta Velocidad - Nº 5

Importance of vertical rail track stiffness on dynamic overloading: Limitations of the Eisenmann
formulation

Figure 4. Dynamic coefficient values C obtained with the Eisenmann and Prud’Homme formula
d
Source: Prepared by the authors, 2017

As observed in figure 4 the difference between the coefficient given by Prud’Homme and
Eisenmann is smaller as the quality of the high speed track increases.
The difference smaller as it increases the stiffness of the infrastructure, until they converge
around the 100 and 120kn/mm where they separate.
Eisenmann offers a superior value to the one of Prud’Homme. In the most flexible regions
whereas Prud’Homme occupies the part superior in the most rigid zone.
To determine the proportions on the basis of the criterion of Prud’Homme in the surroundings
from the 60 to the 90 kn/mm will help us to rationalize the infrastructure; whereas from the
100 kn/mm when using Eisenmann we would not remain the side of the security.

The values in which Eisenmann approach would correspond to the obtained ones in this paper
for the most rigid structures.

However, this infrastructure type is not the one that predominates in the high speed lines, it
corresponds to compositions in the zones of transition; reason why to use it is to determine the
proportions of the embankment of all the plan would be erroneous.

International Congress on High-speed Rail: Technologies and Long Term Impacts - Ciudad Real (Spain) - 25th anniversary Madrid-Sevilla corridor 309