TRACK-BRIDGE INTERACTION ON HIGH-SPEED RAILWAYS

Track-Bridge Interaction on
High-Speed Railways
Editors

Rui Calçada, Raimundo Delgado & António Campos e Matos

Department of Civil Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
University of Porto, Portugal

José Maria Goicolea & Felipe Gabaldón

Computational Mechanics Group, Department of Mechanics and Structures,
E.T.S. Ingenieros de Caminos, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
Taylor & Francis
Taylor & Francis Group
6000 Broken Sound Parkway NW, Suite 300
Boca Raton, FL 33487-2742
© 2008 by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
Taylor & Francis is an Informa business

No claim to original U.S. Government works

Version Date: 20130214

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-203-89539-9 (eBook - PDF)

This book contains information obtained from authentic and highly regarded sources. Reasonable efforts have been
made to publish reliable data and information, but the author and publisher cannot assume responsibility for the valid-
ity of all materials or the consequences of their use. The authors and publishers have attempted to trace the copyright
holders of all material reproduced in this publication and apologize to copyright holders if permission to publish in this
form has not been obtained. If any copyright material has not been acknowledged please write and let us know so we may
rectify in any future reprint.

Except as permitted under U.S. Copyright Law, no part of this book may be reprinted, reproduced, transmitted, or uti-
lized in any form by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopy-
ing, microfilming, and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the
publishers.

For permission to photocopy or use material electronically from this work, please access www.copyright.com (http://
www.copyright.com/) or contact the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc. (CCC), 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923,
978-750-8400. CCC is a not-for-profit organization that provides licenses and registration for a variety of users. For
organizations that have been granted a photocopy license by the CCC, a separate system of payment has been arranged.

Trademark Notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for
identification and explanation without intent to infringe.
Visit the Taylor & Francis Web site at
http://www.taylorandfrancis.com
and the CRC Press Web site at
http://www.crcpress.com
Table of Contents

Preface VII
List of Authors IX

1 New evolutions for high speed rail line bridge design criteria and corresponding
design procedures 1
D. Dutoit

2 Service limit states for railway bridges in new Design Codes IAPF and Eurocodes 7
J.M. Goicolea-Ruigómez

3 Track-bridge interaction problems in bridge design 19

A.M. Cutillas

4 Controlling track-structure interaction in seismic conditions 29

S.G. Davis

5 Track-structure interaction and seismic design of the bearings system for some
viaducts of Ankara-Istanbul HSRL project 37
F. Millanes Mato & M. Ortega Cornejo

6 Track structure interactions for the Taiwan High Speed Rail project 55
D. Fitzwilliam

7 Track-bridge interaction – the SNCF experience 63

P. Ramondenc, D. Martin & P. Schmitt

8 Some experiences on track-bridge interaction in Japan 77

N. Matsumoto & K. Asanuma

9 Numerical methods for the analysis of longitudinal interaction between

track and structure 95
M. Cuadrado Sanguino & P. González Requejo

10 Longitudinal track-bridge interaction for load-sequences 109

P. Ruge, D.R. Widarda & C. Birk

11 Structural analysis of high speed rail bridge substructures. Application to

three Spanish case studies 129
J.A. Sobrino & J. Murcia

12 The Italian experience: two case studies 139

M.P. Petrangeli

13 Rail expansion joints – the underestimated track work material? 149

J. Hess

V
VI Table of Contents

14 Dynamic aspects of the high-speed railway bridge across the Hollandsch Diep 165
J.T.F.M. Tünnissen

15 Track-structure interaction in long railway bridges 185

A.J. Reis, N.T. Lopes & D. Ribeiro

16 Track-bridge interaction in railway lines: Application to the study of the bridge over
the River Moros 201
R. Simões, R. Calçada & R. Delgado

Author index 211

Subject index 213
Preface

The construction of high-speed railways comprises a set of demands, from safety aspects to
new types of equipment and construction solutions, involving the most recent and sophisticated
technologies.
Among these, emphasis is given to the railway behaviour where the structural elements are of
great relevance. One of the relevant aspects concerns the effects of the track-bridge interaction,
which establishes restricted limits to the vibration and deformability of the structure in order to
control the acceleration, the stresses and the track deformations, so that the circulation safety is
satisfied, while strongly conditioning the structural design solutions for bridges.
The ability to address the multiple issues relevant to this process requires expertise and know-
how, which have been recently developed in this field, with repercussions in terms of the European
regulations in this domain.
The themes included in this book are mainly based on the papers presented at the workshop
“TRACK-BRIDGE INTERACTION ON HIGH-SPEED RAILWAYS” organised by the Faculdade
de Engenharia da Universidade do Porto (FEUP) and the Escuela Tecnica Superior de Ingenieros de
Caminos Canales y Puertos de Madrid (ETSICCyP). This book is included in a set of three books:
one with a more general thematic “BRIDGES FOR HIGH-SPEED RAILWAYS” and other with
a more focused thematic, such as the present book, “DYNAMICS OF HIGH-SPEED RAILWAY
BRIDGES”.
The editors would like to thank all those who contributed to this book, in particular our distin-
guished guest chapters’ authors who heightened, with their knowledge and expertise, to the present
interest and quality of the book, the support of the sponsors for the events which originated the
materials for this book, and the institutional support of the Faculty of Engineering of the University
of Porto and the RAVE – Rede Ferroviária de Alta Velocidade, S.A.
We hope this book will be helpful not only to those professionals involved in the design, construc-
tion or maintenance of high speed railway systems, but also to researchers and students working in
this field.

VII
List of Authors

Antonio Martínez Cutillas, UPM and CFCsl – Spain

António Reis, IST and GRID – Portugal
Carolin Birk, TU Dresden – Germany
Daniel Dutoit, SYSTRA – France
Daniel Fitzwilliam, TY Lin – USA
Daniel Ribeiro, GRID – Portugal
Didier Martin, SNCF – France
Dina Rubiana Widarda, TU Dresden – Germany
Francisco Millanes Mato, UPM and IDEAM – Spain
Joep Tünnissen, JTüDEC – The Netherlands
José Maria Goicolea- Ruigómez, UPM – Spain
Josef Heß, BWG GmbH – Germany
Juan A. Sobrino Almunia, Pedelta and UPC – Spain
Juan Murcia, UPC – Spain
Kiyoshi Asanuma, RTRI – Japan
Manuel Cuadrado Sanguino, Fundación Caminos de Hierro – Spain
Mario Paolo Petrangeli, Università Roma “La Sapienza” – Italy
Miguel Ortega Cornejo, IDEAM – Spain
Nobuyuki Matsumoto, RTRI – Japan
Nuno Lopes, GRID – Portugal
Patrice Schmitt, SNCF – France
Pedro González Requejo, Fundación Caminos de Hierro – Spain
Peter Ruge, TU Dresden – Germany
Philippe Ramondenc, SNCF – France
Raimundo Delgado, FEUP – Portugal
Romeu Simões, FEUP – Portugal
Rui Calçada, FEUP – Portugal
Stuart Davis, Mott MacDonald – United Kingdom

IX
CHAPTER 1

New evolutions for high speed rail line bridge design criteria and
corresponding design procedures

D. Dutoit
Systra, Paris, France

ABSTRACT: The high speed rail lines bridges have always had specific design criteria. Never-
theless, with the new development of the analysis of rail stresses due to rail structure interaction,
some of the initial criteria used in France can be replaced by limitation of the rail stresses, as
described for instance in the Eurocode. This can lead to significant savings, especially in highly
seismic zones.

1 MAIN SPECIFIC FEATURES OF HSR BRIDGES PROJECTS

1.1 Typefont, typesize and spacing

Historically, the developement of the High Speed Lines in France has been done step by step. Based
on actual measurements made of stress concentrations in the rail done on real sites, and based on
the experience of track stability and safety, rules were set-up to restrain specific features of the
supporting structures within empirial limits in order to provide for the track safety.
Usually, and as described today in Eurocode, UIC and present SNCF standards, the structures
carrying the long welded rails for high speed trains have specific limitations due to 3 sets of
phenomena:
• Long Welded rail
Rail structure interaction
◦ Additional rail stresses brought by R.S.I.
– Temperature variation maximum distance between based points
– Deck end rotations
– Braking & acceleration forces: maximum displacement under braking and acceleration
forces
◦ This controls
– The location of expansion joint
– The girder stiffness
– The support stiffnesses (piers, foundations, bearings)
• High speed vehicle
Structure dynamic response
The high speed rail supports vehicles travelling at high speed. This involves the analysis of
the structures dynamic response to address the following items
◦ Control of vertical load (impact at resonance)
◦ Control of acceleration at deck level
– Track stability: acceleration at deck level
– Rail/wheel contact: acceleration at deck level
– Rolling stock stability: acceleration at deck level
– Passenger comfort: vertical acceleration in the cars

1
2 Track-Bridge Interaction on High-Speed Railways

◦ Limit fatigue stresses. Rules of

• Seismic environment
High speed track geometry and stresses
In the case of seismic areas, there is the need of additional analysis for the safety of the traffic
during a potential earthquake.
◦ Problematic: Find the limits of rail deformation and stresses compatible with the rain full
speed operation under earthquake
◦ Steps of the analysis
– Life safety analysis (full speed operation compatible with which Service earthquake Peak
Ground acceleration?)
– Risk analysis (which track stresses and deformation criteria combined with other
concomitant sources of stresses?)
– Translated that into practical and simple High Speed Serviceability earthquake structure
design criteria
◦ Consequence on High Speed Operation
Train switch off at certain level of earthquake

2 EVOLUTION USING RAIL STRESSES COMPUTATIONS

In order to address the concerns described above, specific design criteria had been developed by
several national codes.
These specific criteria involved:
• A limitation of maximum distance between bridge expansion joints when using a continuous
welded rail, in order to limit the additional stress in the rail due to the difference of displacement
between the structure and the rail.
• A maximum rotation at bridge ends in order to limit the additional stress in the rail due to bridge
end displacement and the corresponding force transmitted by the elasticity of the ballast or of the
rail supports in the case of slab track and to ensure the stability of the ballast. This may control
the deck rigidity.
• A maximum displacement of the bridge when the maximum braking and acceleration force is
applied: this may control the foundation, pier and bearing design.
In the new evolution, instead of controlling the additional stresses in the rail by the above
mentioned limitations, a complete analysis of the additional stresses in the rail due to the bridges
supporting the track is limited to the followings


• 72 N/mm2 compression (Risk of track buckling in compression)
Ballasted track
• 92 N/mm2 tension

Slab track 92 N/mm2 tension and compression.

In addition, in case of the ballast track, other criteria shall be satisfied in order to ensure the
stability of the ballast (relative displacement of the deck under braking and acceleration, maximum
relative displacement of the expansion joint between two bridges under live loads, . . .).
This calculation is done by computing, on a computer model describing a significant length of
the line on each side of the considered structure:
• The foundations and the corresponding elasticities due to the soil – foundation interaction
• Pier flexibilities
• The bearings (fixed, sliding or its elasticity)
• The bridge superstructure
• The tracks, with the rail stiffnesses and the elasticities (horizontal) of the support between the
rail and the deck (ballast and ties, slab track, elastomeric pads underneath the rail)
• The rail expansion joints
 New evolutions for high speed rail line bridge design criteria 3

• The environmental conditions (temperature variations, gradients, . . .)

• The train characteristics
Based on the corresponding analysis, the piers and foundations can be optimized when compared
to the conventional HSR criteria (see example in part 4.1.).
In addition, it is also possible to identify critical points on the line where there are concentrations
of forces on the bearings and design the sub-structures in order to reduce this unfavourable effect
(see example in 4.2.). This cannot be done by using the simplified approach (without the rail
interaction analysis).
This new computerised method is therefore more economical and safer the simplified one.

3 MAIN CONSEQUENCES

These new design procedures can induce a significant saving in the substructures (foundation,
piers). These savings may be magnified in seismic areas. Since the loads applied by a given
earthquake increase with the substructure rigidity, the additional elasticity of the substructure due
to the new HSR service load criteria will also induce a significant saving in the seismic analysis
of the structure.

4 EXAMPLES OF RAIL-STRESSES COMPUTATION

The following examples show that the simplified method (no track structure interaction modelled)
used to avoid computerised calculation (track structure interaction modelled) is generally too con-
servative and cannot identify the critical points on the line where very high bearing reactions can
occur.
In the following examples, we compare the simplified method and the computerised method on
a simple case:
• Train type UIC 71
• Ballasted track
• Straight track
• Double track
• Rail type UIC 60
• Succession of 30 m simply supported spans.

4.1 Comparison between the simplified method and the computerised method – optimisation of
the pier and foundation
(a) Simplified method:
In the case of a succession of simply supported spans, the braking and acceleration forces applied
on one span are fully transmitted to the bearings of the span.
In the case of a 30 m simple span, the longitudinal braking and acceleration forces are:

F = 33 kN/m × 30 m + 20 kN/m × 30 m = 1590 kN (1)

The bearing reaction under temperature effect is calculated using the formula 8 × L (L is the
length of the span). It can be estimated at 8 kN/m × 30 m = 240 kN.
The maximum allowable relative displacement under braking and acceleration forces between
two decks is δ = 5 mm. Therefore, the minimum stiffness of the pier and foundation is:
F
K= = 318000 kN/m (2)
δ
Each pier and foundation shall have a stiffness higher than 318000 kN/m.
4 Track-Bridge Interaction on High-Speed Railways

(b) Computerised method (including rail structure interaction):

25 spans are modelled. The pier stiffness is the one calculated using the simplified method (see
above). We study here the span located at the center of the computer model. The results of the
calculations are the following.

25 Spans (30 m long)

Figure 1. Scheme of the computer model.

Figure 2. Stresses in the rails under Temperature, braking/acceleration and live loads.

The stresses in the rail is between −25 MPa and +30 MPa.

Figure 3. Relative displacement between two decks under braking/acceleration.

 New evolutions for high speed rail line bridge design criteria 5

The maximum relative displacement between two decks is below 2 mm.

Figure 4. Bearing reactions under braking/acceleration and live loads.

The maximum bearing reaction is 1019 kN. This represents only 64% of the value given by the
simplified method (1590 kN).
It can also be noticed that the bearing reaction under temperature effect is almost zero compared
to 240 kN calculated by the simplified method.
(c) Analysis of the results:
The table below shows the results of the computerised calculations.
Table 1.
Results Allowable limits Ratio

Tensile stress 25 MPa 92 MPa 27%

Compression stress 30 MPa 72 MPa 42%
Relative displacement 2 mm 5 mm 40%

In addition, the bearing reaction under temperature, braking/acceleration and live loads is only
56% of the value given by the simplified method.
(d) Conclusion:
It is therefore possible to optimise the piers and foundation. Additional calculations show that even
if the pier stiffness is reduced by more than 2, the safety of the track is still ensured.
The bearing reactions calculated by the computerised method are also around half of the value
calculated by the simplified method.

4.2 Comparison between the simplified method and the computerised method – Identification
of the critical points on the line
Due to the link between adjacent girder created by the track, a force applied on one span is
transmitted to the adjacent spans.
6 Track-Bridge Interaction on High-Speed Railways

In some case, where there is a sudden variation of pier stiffness, a bearing reaction may be higher
than the one calculated using the simplified method (see 4.1.a). The simplified method is, in these
cases, too favourable.
The case studied here is the same than the previous one (pier stiffness equal to 318000 kN/m),
but one pier has a stiffness much higher than the other (due for example to a sudden variation of the
ground level). We study in detail the bearing reactions on this pier under braking and acceleration
forces.

25 span (30 m)

Very stiff pier

Figure 5. Scheme of the computer model.

Figure 6. Maximum bearing reactions under braking/acceleration and live loads.

The maximum bearing reaction is 2036 kN.

Conclusion
The maximum bearing reaction is 2036 kN, which is 128% of the value calculated using the
simplified method (1590 kN – see 4.1.a).
Additional calculations shows that, in case of slab track, it is even more unfavourable. The
maximum bearing reaction is then 155% of the value calculated using the simplified method.
The new computarised method allows therefore a better identification of the overstressed areas,
and allows to make the required changes necessary to have a safer track.
References

2 CHAPTER 2. Service limit states for

railway bridges in new Design Codes IAPF
and Eurocodes

Domínguez, J. (2001). Dinámica de puentes de ferrocarril

para alta velocidad: métodos de cálculo y estudio de la
resonancia. Tesis Doctoral. Escuela Técnica Superior de
Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos de Madrid (UPM),
2001. Publicada por la Asociación Nacional de Constructores
Independientes (ANCI).

EC (2002). TSI-HS2002: Technical specification for

Interoperability relating to the infrastructure subsystem
of the trans-European high-speed rail system. Commission
decision 2002/732/EC 20 may 2002, 2002. Official journal of
the European Communities OJ L 12/9/2002.

EN1991-2 (2003). European Committee for Standardization.

EN1991-2: EUROCODE 1 – Actions on structures, Part 2:
Traffic loads on bridges. European Union, 2003.

EN1990-A1 (2005). European Committee for Standardization.

{EN1990-A1}: EUROCODE 0 – Basis of Structural Design,
Amendment A1: Annex {A2}, Application for bridges. European
Union, 2005.

ERRI D214 (2002). Utilisation de convois universels pour le

dimensionnement dynamique de ponts-rails. Synthèse des
résultats du D214.2 (Rapport final). European Rail Research
Institute (ERRI).

ERRI D214 RP9 (1998). European Railway Research Institute

subcommitee D214. Design of Railway Bridges for Speed up to
350 km/h; Dynamic loading effects including resonance.
Final report, November 1998.

FS (1997). Ferrovie dello Stato; Sovraccarichi per il

calcolo dei ponti ferroviari.

Fryba, L. (1972).Vibration of solids and structures under

moving loads. Academia, Noordhoff, 1972.

Goicolea, J.M. (2004). Dynamic loads in new engineering

codes for railway bridges in Europe and Spain. Workshop on
Bridges for High Speed Railways, Porto 3–4 June 2004,
Faculty of Engineering, University of Porto.

IAPF (2007). Instrucción de acciones a considerar en el

proyecto de puentes de ferrocarril. Ministerio de Fomento
de España, Dirección General de Ferrocarriles. Oct 2007.

MFOM (1996). Dirección general de ferrocarriles y

transporte∼por carretera. Viaducto sobre el río tajo, línea
ave Madrid-Sevilla, ensayos dinámicos. Technical report,
Ministerio de Fomento de España, 1996.

Nasarre, J. (2004). Estados límite de servicio en relación

con los puentes de ferrocarril. In A. Campos R. Delgado, R.
Calçada, editor, Bridges for High-Speed Railways, pages
237–250. Civil Engineering Dept., Faculty of Engineering of
the University of Porto, 2004.

Sanz, B. (2005). Proyecto de viaducto para el ferrocarril

de alta velocidad sobre el arroyo del salado. Master
thesis, Escuela de Ingenieros de Caminos, UPM, 2005.

UIC (1999). Code UIC 774-3R Interaction voie/ouvrages

d’art, Recommandations pour les calculs. UIC, Union
Internationale des Chemins de Fer, Feb1999.

UIC (2006). Leaflet UIC 776-1R: Charges a prendre en

consideration dans le calcul des ponts-rails. UIC, Union
Internationale des Chemins de Fer, 2006. 5 ed, Aug 2006.
3 CHAPTER 3. Track-bridge interaction
problems in bridge design

ENV 1991-3:1995. Eurocode 1. Basis of design and actions on

structures. Part 3. Traffic loads on bridges.

Manterola, J., Astiz, M.A., Martínez, A. Puentes de

ferrocarril de alta velocidad Revista de Obras Públicas n ◦
3386 pp. 43–77 Abril (1999).

ManterolaArmisén, J.; Martínez Cutillas,A. Prestressed

concrete railways bridgesWorkshop Bridges for high speed
railways. Oporto (2004).
4 CHAPTER 4. Controlling track-structure
interaction in seismic conditions

“Track-Structure Interaction on theTaiwan High Speed

RailViaducts”, Place, J.D., Davis, S.G. and Barron, M.
Paper presented at the IABSE Symposium ‘Structures for High
Speed Railway Transportation’, Antwerp, August 2003.

“Bridges for High Speed Railways – Special Considerations”,

Davis, S.G. and Wilkins, A.G. Paper presented at the
Institution of Civil Engineers Conference ‘Current and
FutureTrends in Bridge Design, Construction and
Maintenance’, Kuala Lumpur, October 2005.
5 CHAPTER 5. Track-structure interaction
and seismic design of the bearings system
for some viaducts of Ankara-Istanbul HSRL
project

[1] Eurocode 1, part 2: Traffic loads on Bridges.

(EN-1991-2:2003)

[2] American Association of State Highway and

Transportation officials. (AASHTO-1994)

[3] Eurocode 8: Design provisions for earthquake resistance

– Part 2: Bridges. (ENV 1998-2:1994)

[4] Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake

resistance – Part 2: Bridges. (prEN 1998-2. April 2004
(Draft))

[5] Structural Bearings. Part 1: General design rules. (EN

1337-1:2000)
7 CHAPTER 7. Track–bridge interaction –
the SNCF experience

ERRI D 213, European Rail Research Institute, 1999.

Etude générale de la répartition des efforts longitudinaux

sur les ponts-rails, SNCF, 1990.

Etude de l’interaction voie-ouvrages d’art dans le cas

d’ouvrages longs constitués d’ouvrages unitaires, SNCF,
1993.

UIC 774-3 leaflet “Track/bridge interaction –

recommendations for calculations”.

EN1991-2: Eurocode 1 “Actions on structures – Part 2:

Traffic loads on bridges”.
8 CHAPTER 8. Some experiences on
track-bridge interaction in Japan

Asanuma, K., Matsumoto, N.&Wakui, H. 2002. Behavior

ofNewlyDevelopedFloatingLadderTrackBridging Structure
Boundaries Subjected to Temperature Changes, Proceedings of
Railway Mechanics, No.6, Japan Society of Civil Engineers:
7–11 (in Japanese).

Fukazawa, Y. & Onishi, A. 1962. A Very Long Rail Laid on

Bridge, Quarterly Report of RTRI, Vol.3, No.1: 26–31.

Hashimoto, K., Miyoshi, K. & Fujita, R. 1975.

RunningVibration Test of Series 961 Shinkansen Test
Vehicle, Railway Technical Research Pre-Report, No.75–11,
RTRI. (in Japanese).

Ikeda, M., Toyooka, A., Murata, K., Yanagawa, H., Kataoka,

H. & Iemura, H. 2005. The Effects of the Track Structures
on the Seismic Behavior of Isolation System Bridges, RTRI
Report, Vol.19, No.3: 23–28. (in Japanese).

Ishiguro,Y.&Matsuura,A. 1988. Constructions

ofHonshu-ShikokuBridges andSeto-OhashiBridge, Japanese
Railway Engineering, No.106: 19–24.

Itoh, F., Okuda, T., Hirata, G., Arai S. & Fujita R. 1972.
Runnning Safety Test of Car against Derailment over an
Angular Bend, Quarterly Report of RTRI, Vol.13, No.2:
70–76.

Iwata, J., Miura, S. & Ando, K. 1988. Several Track Test

Conducted at Opening of Seto Bridge Line, Journal of Japan
Railway Engineering Association, Vol.31, No.12: 18–21. (in
Japanese).

Matsumoto, N., Wakui, H., Sogabe, M., Okano, M., Ohuchi, H.

& Tanabe, M. 2003. Design Concept and Practice Ensure
Running Safety at Earthquake, IABSE Sympoium Report-Antwerp
2003, Structures for High Speed Railway Transportation,
Vol.87, International Association for Bridge and Structural
Engineering: 46–47 on book and ANT129 on CD.

Matsumoto, N., Tanabe, M.Wakui, H. & Sogabe, M.

2007.ADynamic InteractionAnalysisModel for Railway Vehicles
and Structures Which Takes Into Account Non-linear
Response, Journal of Structural Mechanics and Earthquake
Engineering, Vol.63, No.3, Japan Society of Civil
Engineers: 533–551.
Matsuura, A. &Wakui, H. 1979. Allowable Bent-Angle of
Long-Spanned Suspension Bridges Determined by Running
Property of Railway Cars, Quarterly Report of RTRI, Vol.20,
No.3: 106–111.

Matsuura, A. 1998. Simulation for Analyzing Direct

Derailment Limit of Running Vehicle on Oscillating Tracks,
Journal of Structural Mechanics and Earthquake Engineering,
Vol.15, No.1, JSCE: 63–72.

Miyai, T. 1976. Theoretical Study of the Long Welded Rail

Continuously Laid on Equally Spanned Bridges, Railway
Technical Research Report, No.991. (in Japanese).

Miyamoto T., Matsumoto, N., Sogabe, M., Shimomura, T.,

Nishiyama, Y. & Matsuo, M. 2004. Railway Vehicle Dynamic
Behavior against Large-Amplitude Track Vibration, Quarterly
Report of RTRI, Vol.45, No.3: 111–115.

Nishioka, T. 1969. A Theoretical Study on the Behavior of

Railway Vehicles Considering Vibration of Track, Journal of
the Japan Society of Civil Engineer, No.172, Japan Society
of Civil Engineers: 43–57. (in Japanese).

Nishioka, T. & Hashimoto, S. 1980. Running Stability of

Two-Axle Freight Car on Bridges at Lateral Earthquake
Shock, Journal of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers,
No.296, Japan Society of Civil Engineers: 61–72. (in
Japanese).

Okuda, H., Asanuma, K., Matsumoto, N. & Wakui, H. 2003.

Environmental Performance Improvement of Railway Structural
System, IABSE Sympoium Report-Antwerp 2003, Structures for
High Speed Railway Transportation, Vol.87, International
Association for Bridge and Structural Engineering: 242–243.

Railway Technical Research Institute (ed.) 1992. Design

Standard for Railway Structures and Commentary (Steel and
Composite Structures). Tokyo: Maruzen. (in Japanese).

Railway Technical Research Institute (ed.) 1999. Design

Standard for Railway Structures and Commentary (Seismic
Design). Tokyo: Maruzen. (in Japanese).

Railway Technical Research Institute (ed.) 2006. Design

Standard for Railway Structures and Commentary (Deflection
Limits). Tokyo: Maruzen. (in Japanese).

Terashima, M. & Hiraoka, S. 1997. Support Arrangement of

Bridges to be Installed CWR, Structure Design Documents,
No.51, Japan Railway Civil Engineering Association: 2–6.

Wakui, H.,Matsumoto, N.& Inoue, H. 1996. LadderSleeper

andNewTrackStructuresDevelopment, Quarterly Report of RTRI,
Vol.37, No.3: 110–111.
9 CHAPTER 9. Numerical methods for the
analysis of longitudinal interaction
between track and structure

[1] Comisión redactora IAPF. 2006. Borrador de Instrucción

de acciones a considerar en el proyecto de puentes de
ferrocarril.

[2] Cuadrado, M. & González, P. 2000. Interacción entre

carril continuo y tablero de puente. Calibrado del modelo
de cálculo según la Ficha UIC 774-3.

[3] Cuadrado, M. & González, P. 2004. Consideración de las

deformaciones por retracción y fluencia en el estudio del
fenómeno de interacción vía -tablero en el proyecto de
puentes ferroviarios. Revista de Obras Públicas.

[4] Eurocódigo EN 1991-2. 2003. Acciones en estructuras.

Parte 2: Cargas de tráfico en puentes.

[5] Fryba, L. 1985. Thermal interaction of long welded

rails with railway bridges. Rail International. 3, pp.
5–24.

[6] Fryba, L. 1997. Continuous welded rail on railway

bridges. World Congress on Railway Research. Firenze.

[7] González, P., Cuadrado, M., Nasarre, J. & Romo, E.

2002. Alta velocidad: fenómeno de interacción vía-tablero
en puentes. Revista de Obras Públicas.

[8] González, P., Cuadrado, M. & Romo, E. IABSE. 2002.

Consideración del fenómeno de interacción víatablero en el
proyecto de puentes ferroviarios. Congreso puentes de
ferrocarril: Proyecto construcción y conservación. Madrid.

[9] González, P. & Cuadrado, M. 2000. Apoyo a la Dirección

de los Proyectos de la Línea de alta velocidad ente Córdoba
y Málaga. Plataforma. Informe sobre trabajos específicos
adicionales: Interacción entre carriles continuos y
tableros de viaductos ferroviarios o plataforma.
Metodología y criterios de dimensionamiento de aparatos de
dilatación de vía.

[10] Ministerio de Fomento. 1999. EHE. Instrucción de

Hormigón Estructural.

[11] Ramondenc, P. Track/Bridge interaction. 1997. World

Congress on Railway Research. Firenze.
[12] Union Internationale des Chemins de fer. 1999. Fiche
UIC 774-3R. Interaction voie-ouvrages d’art.
Recommendations pour les calculs.
10 CHAPTER 10. Longitudinal track-bridge
interaction for load-sequences

EN9 (2003). Eurocode 1, Part 2 (EN 1991–2). Actions on

Structures; Traffic loads on bridges. European Committee
for Standardization (CEN), Brussels.

DIN (2003). DIN-Fachbericht 101. Einwirkungen auf Brücken.

Berlin.

Esveld, C. (2001). Modern Railway Track. Zaltbommel: MRT

Production.

Fryba, L. (1996). Dynamics of railway bridges. London:

Thomas Telford.

Ruge, P. and Birk, C. (2006). Longitudinal forces in

continuously welded rails on bridgedecks due to nonlinear
track-bridge interaction. Computer & Structures,
85:458–475.

Ruge, P., Birk, C., Muncke, M., and Schmälzlin, G. (2005a).

Schienenlängskräfte auf Brücken bei nichtlinearer
überlagerung der Lastfälle Temperatur, Tragwerksbiegung,
Bremsen. Bautechnik, 82:818–825.

Ruge, P., Schmälzlin, G., and Trinks, C. (2005b).

Schienenlängskräfte auf Brücken infolge Biegung.
Bautechnik, 82:69–80.

Ruge, P., Trinks, C., Muncke, M., and Schmälzlin, G.

(2004). Längskraftbeanspruchung von durchgehend
geschweißten Schienen auf Brücken für Lastkombinationen.
Bautechnik, 81:537–548.
11 CHAPTER 11. Structural analysis of
high speed rail bridge substructures.
Application to three Spanish case studies

[1] “Strategic infrastructures and transport plan”,

Ministry of public works, 2005.

[2] “Code IAP – Actions on railway bridges”, Ministry of

public works, 1972 (in Spanish).

[3] “Code RPX – Composite bridge Code”, Ministry of public

works, 1995 (in Spanish).

[4] EN 1991-2 “Eurocode 1: Actions on structures. Part 2

Traffic loads on bridges”.

[5] EN 1990 PrAnnex A2 “Eurocode: Basis of design. Annex 2:

Application for bridges”, 2002.

[6] UIC, Leaflet-774-3 Track/bridge interaction

Reccomendations for calculations, 2nd edition. 2003.

[7] Manterola, J.; Astiz, M.A.; Martínez, A. Puentes de

Ferrocarril de Alta Velocidad, Revista de Obras Públicas N
o 3386, abril 2000 (in Spanish).

[8] González Requejo, P; et al. Alta velocidad: El fenómeno

de interacción víatablero en puentes. Revista de Obras
Públicas N o 3418., Febrero 2002 (in Spanish).

[9] Cuadrado Sanguino, M.; González Requejo, P.

Consideración de las deformaciones por retracción y
fluencia en el estudio del fenómeno de interacción
vía-tablero en el proyecto de puentes ferroviarios. Revista
de Obras Públicas, N o 3446, Julio-Agosto 2004 (in
Spanish).
12 CHAPTER 12. The Italian experience:
two case studies

Della Vedova M., Evangelista L., Petrangeli M.P., Prevedini

C. 2006. “The Stays of the Cable-stayed Bridge over Po
River: Design, Testing and Technological Choices”. ID 14-24
(Vol. 2 – pagg 434–435) – Session 14 Reinforcing and
prestressing materials and systems – 2 ◦ FIB Congress –
Naples, 5–8 June 2006

EN1991-2: Actions on structuresPart 2: Traffic loads on

bridges EN 1991-2

Ferrovie dello Stato 1995. Sovraccarichi per il calcolo dei

ponti ferroviari – Istruzioni per la progettazione,
esecuzione e il collaudo Istruzione n.1/SC/PS-OM/2298 del
2.06.95 agg.13.01.97

Ferrovie dello Stato 1996. Istruzioni tecniche permanufatti

sotto binario da costruire in zona sismica. Istruzione 44B
del 14.11.96

Petrangeli, M.P. 1991. A railway bridge over the Arno river

near Arezzo for the Rome-Florence high speed line,
Industria Italiana del Cemento N. 657 Luglio-Agosto 1991

Petrangeli, M.P. & Polastri, A. 2004 Prove a fatica su un

concio di torre del nuovo ponte strallato sul Po
Costruzioni Metalliche N. 4 Luglio-Agosto 2004

Petrangeli, M.P. 2006. Cable Stayed Bridge over river Po.

Special issue on Italian concrete structures for the Second
fib Congress – Naples, June 5–8 2006 of Industria Italiana
del Cemento 820
13 CHAPTER 13. Rail expansion joints –
the underestimated track work material?

Bringfried Belter, Peter Ablinger, Josef Hess, Gilbert

Waldmann Railway Track at the High Speed Line Cologne –
Rhine (Main – Slab Track) Eisenbahn-Ingenieurkalender – EIK
– 2002

Systematical Decision Ballasted Track or Slab Track Report

to results of the analysis and examination within the scope
of the project “Fahrbahnstrategie SMP-T”, published by ifv
Bahntechnik (Project team Fahrbahnstrategie,
DBSystemtechnik, Strategy Consultancy Fontin & Company, ibt
Dr. Ablinger)

Special constructions of Rail Expansion Joints Report about

development and adaption of Rail Expansion Joint SAV60 –
1200 and Elastic Ribbed Base Plates for the Bridge
Hollandsch Deep in the course of High Speed Line HSL Zuid,
The Netherlands EI – Eisenbahningenieur (57) 4/2006

Johannes Rohlmann, Josef Hess New standard for turnouts and

rail expansion joints for high-speed traffic – installation
in a high-speed track in Taiwan Track System Development,
Engineering – Construction – Experiences RTR Special SLAB
TRACK, 09/2006

Johannes Rohlmann, Josef HessNew standard for turnouts and

rail expansion joints for high speed traffic with large
scale operation in Taiwan Eisenbahntechnische Rundschau –
ETR, 07+08/2007

Stephan Gerke, Jürgen Haase, Josef Hess Development and

construction of turnouts VDV Schriftenreihe Band 26
Gleisbau: Planung – Bau – Vermessung

Jürgen Haase, Josef Hess, René Brehm Turnouts in High Speed

Applications RTR Special – The German High Speed Rail
System, Evolution • Quality • Track construction, 03/2008
14 CHAPTER 14. Dynamic aspects of the
high-speed railway bridge across the
Hollandsch Diep

High Speed Line – South project guidelines HSL600E “Loads

and Deformations on HS-structures”, 1999.

EN 1991-2: Eurocode 1, “Actions on structures – Part 2:

Traffic loads on bridges”, 2003.

“Dynamics of Railway Bridges”, Ladislav Fryba (ISBN:

0-7277-2044-9), 1996.

“Structural Dynamics by Finite Elements”, William Weaver

Jr., Paul R. Johnston (ISBN: 0-13-853508-6), 1987.

“Finite Element Procedures”, Klaus-Jürgen Bathe (ISBN:

0-13-301458-4), 1996.
15 CHAPTER 15. Track-structure
interaction in long railway bridges

EN1991-2, Actions on structures – Part 2: General actions –

Traffic Loads on Bridges, European Committee for
standardization, CEN (2003).

UIC Code 774-3-R, “Track/bridge interaction –

Recommendations for calculations”, 2nd edition, October
2001, Union International des Chemins de Fer, UIC, 2001.
16 CHAPTER 16. Track-bridge interaction
in railway lines: Application to the
study of the bridge over the River Moros

[1] UIC Code 774-3-R, “Track/bridge interaction –

Recommendations for calculations”, 2nd edition, Union
Internationale des Chemins de Fer, UIC, 2001.

[2] Parra, F., “Proyecto de una puente de alta velocidad”,

E.T.S. Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos,
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 2005.

[3] Simões, R., “Interacção via-estrutura em pontes

ferroviárias em linhas de alta velocidade”, Tese de
Mestrado, FEUP, Porto, Portugal, 2006 (to be submitted).

[4] EN1991-2, Actions on structures – Part 2: General

actions – Traffic Loads on Bridges, European Committee for
standardization, CEN, 2003.

[5] EN1991-1-5, Actions on structures – Part 1-5: General

actions – Thermal actions, European Committee for
standardization, CEN (2003).

[6] EN1990-A2, Basis of Structural Design

–AnnexA2:Application for bridges (normative), Final PT
Draft, European Committee for standardization, CEN (2005).