Computational & Technology Resources
an online resource for computational,
engineering & technology publications |
|
Civil-Comp Conferences
ISSN 2753-3239 CCC: 1
PROCEEDINGS OF THE FIFTH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RAILWAY TECHNOLOGY: RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND MAINTENANCE Edited by: J. Pombo
Paper 20.5
Rail pad stiffness estimation based in machine learning algorithms J.A. Sainz-Aja1, D. Ferreño1, I.A. Carrascal1, J. Pombo2,3, J.A. Casado1, S. Diego1 and M. Cuartas4
1Laboratory of Science and Engineering of Materials, University of Cantabria. E.T.S. de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos, Santander, Spain
J.A. Sainz-Aja, D. Ferreño, I.A. Carrascal, J. Pombo, J.A. Casado, S. Diego, M. Cuartas, "Rail pad stiffness estimation based in machine learning algorithms", in J. Pombo, (Editor), "Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Railway Technology: Research, Development and Maintenance",
Civil-Comp Press, Edinburgh, UK,
Online volume: CCC 1, Paper 20.5, 2022, doi:10.4203/ccc.1.20.5
Keywords: rail pad, machine learning, operational conditions, dynamic stiffness.
Abstract
Rail pads are interposed between the steel rails and the concrete sleepers on the railway lines to protect the latter from the impacts induced by the passage of the trains. They provide compliance to the track and play a fundamental role to maximize its durability and minimize the maintenance costs. Rail pads can be fabricated with different polymeric materials that display a non-linear mechanical behavior which strongly depends on the external conditions. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to estimate its mechanical properties, in particular its dynamic stiffness. In this work, several machine learning algorithms (multilinear regression, K nearest neighbors, regression tree, random forest, multi-layer perceptron and support vector machine) have been optimized to determine the dynamic stiffness of rail pads manufactured in EPDM, TPE or EVA, depending on the in-service conditions (temperature, frequency, axle load and toe load). A dataset consisting of 720 stiffness tests under different combinations of these variables was available for the training and testing of the models. The optimal algorithms for EPDM, TPE and EVA were, respectively, multi-layer perceptron (R2 of 0.990 and mean absolute percentage error of 6.51%), multilayer perceptron (0.994 and 2.32%) and random forest (0.968 and 4.91%).
download the full-text of this paper (PDF, 8 pages, 605 Kb)
go to the previous paper |
|