US20100313785A1

US20100313785A1 - safety-oriented rail car design

Info

Publication number: US20100313785A1
Application number: US12/863,414
Authority: US
Inventors: Louis Anselm D'Mello
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee: Individual
Priority date: 2008-01-17
Filing date: 2008-01-17
Publication date: 2010-12-16
Also published as: WO2009090659A1

Abstract

The proposed invention is a rail car design intended to reduce the impact of rail accidents by having 135 degree and 45 degree alignment of the front end and back end of the cars with respect to the rail. There is also crush zone provided at these angles, which can crush as an impact of a collision, reducing the effect on the rest of the train. In severe cases, the crush zone can derail the car to deflect the damaging waves. The points of contact of the cars, and the car and engine, where the impact is high, are provided with buffer to minimize the damage.

Description

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to a rail-car design, which places a premium on safety. Collisions are a reality in rail transport and circumventing these would be enabled by the design proposed in the present invention.

DISCUSSION OF PRIOR ART

Passenger rail cars built with conventional design metrics have approximately 800,000 lbs of minimum static-end strength. Consequently, a passenger rail car is able to support a longitudinal static compressive load equaling the same amount, when applied at the buff stops, without permanent deformation. Under dynamic loading conditions, a force of approximately 1.5 million pounds is required to cause the draft sill to buckle. Once the draft sill buckles in collision, the crushing action continues with a much-reduced force. Generally speaking, the point of impact absorbs the greatest amount of force, thereby being rendered the most damaged. The alternative to conventional designs are designs adhering to crash energy management (CEM), wherein occupied areas of the passenger car are better protected by distributing the crush to the ends of cars. Cars designed with CEM have several zones causing an accumulation of the crushing force at the ends of the cars. These crush zones are designed to crush the car by absorbing most of the force upfront, at the ends of the cars. This distribution of absorption helps in keeping the cars inline, rather than buckling laterally or vertically. Large amplitude buckling might cause more injury to passengers. The concept of CEM itself is not novel. During the 90s, the French and the British utilized this concept [1,2,3]. Trains in most parts of the world now share the railway lines with much heavier freight trains, cargo trains etc. This mix of traffic causes a new scenario and requires improved designs for efficient collision management.
KR20040037741 discloses a Safety device in getting off/on for electric rail car wherein passengers are protected from accidents by means of this device, which provides a safety step to passengers. KR20030008900 proposes a Safety footboard for electric rail car, which also provides a similar safety feature by means of a safety step. MXPA05002137 proposes a Rail car door closer which controls the speeds at which the rail car doors close, in order to prevent accidents. JP2003276602 proposes a Damper device between car bodies for railroad vehicle wherein the lateral displacement of rail car bodies are dampened by means of this device. This could foresee its application in collision prevention or control, however, the device of this invention uses fluid mechanics to achieve its objective. RU2218286 discloses the Front section of a rail car comprising longitudinal beams, coupler gear holders and buffer heads. The section is designed to maximize the safety of the vehicle, by means of reinforced plates replete with stiffeners to provide structural robustness in the case of an accident. JP3197270 proposes an Attachment structure of railway car with one or more bumper fenders duplicated in a vehicle, preventing collision damage.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The statistics of rail-car accidents are a surprisingly global one, including several incidents in India, the Hinton rail accident in Canada etc. Preventing these accidents includes ensuring that the impact due to the train colliding with any other structure, be dealt with by structural means. The present invention proposes a rail car designed to limit the damage due to collision with other bodies. The rail car of the present invention has an implicit crush zone, in the unit containing the engine of the rail car, wherein the impact of the collision is absorbed and stopped. This crush zone has several structural features, which provide safety to the passengers riding the rail car, including a collapsible design and a 135-degree orientation with the angle of the rail, in order to minimize damage. In addition to the unit where the engine is housed having this implicit crush zone, there is a specific structural means between the other rail cars, to reduce the collision impact. Thus, two structural features, the crush-zone in the unit containing the engine and the inter-rail-car collision impact absorption means, act in conjunction to provide the safety features of the present invention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 shows the latitudinal profile of the unit containing the engine.

FIG. 2 shows the side-view of the unit containing the engine.

FIG. 3 shows the latitudinal profile of the unit, containing the engine post-crash.

FIG. 4 illustrates the structural design of the inter-connection between all rail cars.

FIG. 5 shows the side-view of the interconnection between rail cars, indicating where the crush-absorption zones are.

FIG. 6 shows the side-view of the entire train, including the connection mechanism.

FIG. 7 illustrates the direction in which the collision impact travels amongst the units containing the engines, when two trains have a head-on collision.

FIG. 8 shows the direction in which the collision impact travels amongst the crush-zones in the interconnection structure between cars.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

FIG. 1 shows the latitudinal profile of the unit containing the engine 1, with an explicit, asymmetric crush-zone 4. The anterior of the unit containing the engine is at a 135-degree angle to the rail, in order to efficiently absorb shock. This layout reduces the collision impact on this and other rail cars that form the entire train. The crush-zone 4 of the engine will buckle, when the engine is in a collision and in severe cases, the crush-zone 4 is instrumental in derailing the engine, simultaneously deflecting the shock waves of the collision being transmitted to the rest of the train. FIG. 2 shows the side-view of the unit containing the engine 2 wherein the crush zone 5 mitigates the impact of a collision. FIG. 3 shows the latitudinal profile of the unit, containing the engine post-crash. As seen in this figure, the crash has its impact distributed across the points where the 45 degree 6 angled end absorbs most of the impact. The 135-degree 3 angled end also absorbs the impact, post-crash. FIG. 4 illustrates the structural design of the inter-connection between all rail cars. FIG. 5 shows the side-view of the interconnection between rail cars, indicating where the crush-absorption zones are. The crush zone is asymmetrically placed where the 135 degree 9 angled end alternates with the 45 degree 10 angled end, across subsequently placed rail-cars. The ridge along the width at the back of one car fits into the groove formed along the width of the other car. The buffer mechanism provided along this structure absorbs the vibrations. FIG. 6 shows the side-view of the entire train, including the connection mechanism. FIG. 7 illustrates the direction in which the collision impact travels amongst the units containing the engines, when two trains have a head-on collision. The crush-zones on the two colliding engines 11, 12 have the crush zones 13, 14 collapse and deflect away the shock waves 15, 16. Since the crush-zone has an asymmetric design with the 135 and 45-degree angles, as shown in FIG. 1, the rest of the train does not absorb the impact of the collision. This deflection 15, 16 of the impact, keeps the rest of the train take in only a fraction of the entire force of collision.
Furthermore, the crush zone can be reconstructed more easily than any other part of engine, which would have been damaged in absence of the crush zone. FIG. 8 shows the direction in which the collision impact travels amongst the crush-zones in the interconnection structure between cars. Once again, the interconnected cars 17, 18, have their crush- zones 19, 20 deflect the impact 21, 22 away from the main body of the cars.

Claims

1. A collision impact resistant rail car design for use in trains having a plurality of rail car units comprising:

a. An engine unit, whose anterior side has an asymmetric crush-zone, to deflect the impact of a collision away from the main body of the car containing the engine and the rest of the train; and

b. Rail car units having an interconnection mechanism with a built-in, asymmetrical crush-zone, to deflect the impact of a collision away from the main body of the units, safeguarding the contents of the car.

2. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone is aligned at a 135-degree angle to the rails on which the train is moving.

3. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone has an asymmetric design with one end aligning at 135 degrees to the rail and the other end aligning at 45 degrees to the rail.

4. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zones are present in the interconnection between rail cars such that the angles alternate amongst subsequent cars.

5. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone absorbs and deflects the impact of the collision away from the body of the car.

6. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone buckles upon impact.

7. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone de-rails the car upon impact.

8. A collision impact resistant rail car of claim 1 wherein the crush-zone absorbs the majority of the collision, rendering it the only portion of the car requiring re-construction, after impact.