2012 MScThesis PAntunes

Development of Multibody Pantograph and Finite
Element Catenary Models for Application to High-speed

Railway Operations
Pedro Cabao Antunes

Thesis to obtain the Master of Science Degree in
Mechanical Engineering
Examination Committee
Chairperson:
Prof. Lus Manuel Varejo de Oliveira Faria
Supervisor:
Prof. Jorge Alberto Cadete Ambrsio
Co- Supervisor:
Prof. Joo Carlos Eli de Jesus Pombo
Member of the Committee:
Prof. Manuel Frederico Oom de Seabra Pereira
October 2012
Acknowledgements
I especially want to thank, Prof. Manuel Seabra Pereira, for his guidance during this
work. His energy and enthusiasm in research have motivated me as all his advices. In addition,
he was always accessible and willing to help, for that I wish to express my gratitude.
To my advisor, Prof. Jorge Ambrsio, a very special thanks. His work discipline and
commitment have inspired me. For his close attention to my thesis and all the teachings that
came along the way I leave my grateful acknowledgment.
My thanks to my co-adviser, Prof. Joo Pombo, for the given dedication and help on the
work here presented. I would like also to express my thanks for his given encouragement that
always left me with desire to do more.
For last but not the least on my personal acknowledgments, I leave my thanks to my
parents and brother who provided the support only family can give. Even on the toughest
moments they gave me the care and moral support needed to soldier on.
The work reported here has been developed in the course of several national and
international projects. Among these, two national projects funded by FCT (Portuguese
Foundation for Science and Technology); SMARTRACK (contract no. PTDC/EMEPME/101419/2008) and WEARWHEEL (contract no. PTDC/EME-PME/115491/2009), and
also the European Project PANTOTRAIN, funded by the EC in the FP7 Program with the
contract SC8-GA-2009-234015 coordinated by UNIFE.
I also want to thank Frederico Rauter (Siemens Portugal), Stefano Bruni, Alan Facchinetti
and Andrea Colina (Politecnico di Milano) and Jean-Pierre Massat (SNCF), whose discussions
and recommendations were important to achieve some of the developments reported here.
ii
Resumo
Nos comboios de alta velocidade a captao de energia elctrica para os motores
assegurada pelo sistema pantgrafo-catenria, o qual alvo de apertados requisitos funcionais
para garantir a sua fiabilidade e controlo dos perodos de manuteno que necessitam de ser
aumentados. A necessidade de garantir a interoperabilidade entre pantgrafos e diferentes
sistemas de catenria, quer existentes quer em projecto, coloca um maior nvel de exigncia
sobre a capacidade de controlar os seus comportamentos dinmicos. tambm vital assegurar a
qualidade da captao de energia por forma a evitar perdas de contacto entre o pantgrafo e a
catenria, com consequente arqueamento elctrico. Este factor no s limita a velocidade
mxima dos comboios como tambm conduz degradao das condies funcionais dos
elementos mecnicos destes equipamentos. Para abordar estes aspectos, de importncia para
projecto e anlise do sistema de pantgrafo-catenria, necessrio desenvolver procedimentos
computacionais que sejam fiveis, eficientes e precisos de forma a ser possvel capturar todas as
caractersticas relevantes de seu comportamento dinmico. Este trabalho apresenta uma
metodologia de modelao capaz de lidar com a dinmica envolvida na interaco pantgrafocatenria utilizando uma abordagem totalmente tridimensional e a sua implementao numa
ferramenta computacional. Com o fim de explorar as vantagens da utilizao de uma
formulao multicorpo para modelar o pantgrafo, um processo de co-simulao especializado
foi desenvolvido para permitir a comunicao entre o modelo multicorpo e um modelo de
elementos finitos da catenria. De forma a modelar a interaco entre o pantgrafo e a catenria
a fora de contacto descrita por um mtodo de penalidades. Os mtodos e metodologias aqui
desenvolvidos so usados em condies de operao realistas para comboios de alta velocidade.
Uma srie de estudos sobre o comportamento dinmico do sistema pantgrafo-catenria
apresentada incluindo catenrias com dados geomtricos adquiridos experimentalmente em
cenrios de operao com pantgrafos mltiplos e seces de interseco de catenria a fim de
aceder s condies que limitam o aumento da velocidade das composies.
Palavras-Chave
Dinmica ferroviria;
Interaco pantgrafo-catenrio;
Elementos finitos;
Sistemas multi-corpo;
Mecnica do contacto;
Co-simulao.
iii
iv
Abstract
High-speed railway overhead systems are subjected to tight functional requirements to
deliver electrical energy to trains engines, in order to ensure their reliability and to control their
maintenance periods. The quest for interoperability of different pantographs, in existing and
projected catenary systems, puts an extra demand on the ability to control their dynamic
behaviour. The quality of the current collection is of fundamental importance as the loss of
contact and consequent arching, not only limit the top velocity of high-speed trains but also
imply the deterioration of the functional conditions of these mechanical equipments. To address
such important aspects for the design and analysis of the pantograph-catenary system, it is
necessary to develop reliable, efficient and accurate computational procedures that allow
capturing all the relevant features of their dynamic behaviour. This work presents a
computational tool and a modelling methodology able to handle the dynamics of pantographcatenary interaction using a fully three-dimensional methodology. In order to exploit the
advantages of using a multibody formulation to model the pantograph, a high-speed cosimulation procedure is setup in order to allow the communication between the multibody
model and the finite element catenary model. A contact model, based on a penalty formulation,
is selected to represent the interaction between the two modelling procedures. The methods and
approaches developed here are used in realistic operation conditions for high speed trains. A
series of studies of the dynamic behaviour of the pantograph-catenary system is presented,
including experimental catenary models with single and multiple pantograph operation
scenarios and overlap catenary sections, in order to access the conditions that limit the increase
of the trainset speed.
Keywords
Railway dynamics;
Pantograph-Catenary interaction;
Finite elements;
Multibody systems;
Contact mechanics;
Co-simulation.
vi
Contents
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................................ i
Resumo ......................................................................................................................................... iii
Palavras-Chave ............................................................................................................................. iii
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... v
Keywords ...................................................................................................................................... v
Contents....................................................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures .............................................................................................................................. ix
List of Tables.............................................................................................................................. xiii
1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
2 Catenary Dynamic Analysis and Modelling ........................................................................... 9
2.1 Characteristics of Current High-Speed Catenaries ....................................................... 10
2.2 Catenary Modelling ...................................................................................................... 13
2.3 The Finite Element Method on the Pantograph-Catenary System................................ 15
2.3.1
Dynamic Analysis of Catenaries Using Linear FEM ........................................ 16
2.3.2
FEM Catenary Models ...................................................................................... 19
2.3.3
Lumped
Mass
Application
2.3.4
Pantograph
Dynamic
Analysis
in
Finite
Elements
................................................................................................. 22
Time integration method ................................................................................... 24
3 General Pantograph Dynamic Analysis and Modelling ......................................................... 27

3.1 Characteristics of High-Speed Pantographs ................................................................. 27
3.2 Multibody Dynamic Analysis of Pantographs .............................................................. 27
3.3 Multibody Pantograph Models ..................................................................................... 30
3.4 Lumped Mass Pantograph Model ................................................................................. 33
4 Pantograph-Catenary Interaction ........................................................................................... 35
4.1 Contact Modelling ........................................................................................................ 35
4.1.1
Geometric Conditions for Contact .................................................................... 36
4.1.2
Continuous Contact Force Model ..................................................................... 38
vii
4.2 Co-Simulation of Multibody and Finite Elements ........................................................ 39

4.2.1
Co-Simulation Procedure .................................................................................. 39
4.2.2
Communication Protocol .................................................................................. 41
4.2.3
Data Exchange Methodology ............................................................................ 42
5 Applications to Overhead Current Collecting Systems.......................................................... 45

5.1 Pantograph-catenary pairs in current operation ............................................................ 45
5.2 Analysis of existing pantograph-catenary national pairs .............................................. 51
5.3 Multiple Pantograph Operation .................................................................................... 60
5.4 Pantograph-Catenary performance with overlap sections ............................................ 66
6 Conclusions and Future Development ................................................................................... 77
References ................................................................................................................................... 80
viii
List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Detail of the pantograph catenary contact, during the operation of a high-speed train,
with the occurrence of dropper slacking and arcing. ................................................. 1
Figure 1.2: Different high-speed catenary types: The French Southeast LN1 (a), and the German
Re330 (b) are Stitch wire catenaries; The French Atlantic LN2 (c) is a Simple
catenary; Japanese Shinkansen (d) is a compound catenary...................................... 3
Figure 1.3: Different high-speed railway vehicles roof pantographs: a) Faiveley CX; b)
Stemman DSA380; c) Stemman ASP400; d) Contact ATR95. ................................. 4
Figure 2.1: General structural and functional elements in a high speed catenary. ........................ 9
Figure 2.2: Representation of the functional elements of the catenary geometry ......................... 9
Figure 2.3: LN1 catenary with stitch wire in use in the Southeast TGV line.............................. 11
Figure 2.4: LN2 catenary, without stitch wire, in use in the Atlantic TGV line. ........................ 11
Figure 2.5: Re330 catenary, with stitch wire, in use in the German ICE lines. .......................... 12
Figure 2.6: Japanese compound catenary for the Shinkansen lines. ........................................... 12
Figure 2.7: Photo of a weights line tensioning system; Photo: Rainer Knpper, Freenbsp;
Art License (http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en) ......................................................... 14
Figure 2.8 Dropper slacking for the same operation scenario: (a) pantograph-catenary contact is
maintained, (b) loss of contact with arcing .............................................................. 15
Figure 2.9: Finite element model of a generic catenary with the sag highlighted....................... 21
Figure 2.10: Representation of the constraints applied on a general catenary model ................. 21
Figure 2.11: Representation of the pantograph lumped mass model .......................................... 22
Figure 2.12: Flowchart of the integration algorithm steps as each time step .............................. 26
Figure 3.1: Generic multibody system. ....................................................................................... 28
Figure 3.2: Flowchart with the forward dynamic analysis of a multibody system ..................... 29
Figure 3.3: (a) Pantograph model; (b) Roof mounted pantograph on the vehicle guided on the
track; (c) Pantograph with prescribed base motion ................................................. 30
Figure 3.4: The pantograph system: (a) Complete pantograph; (b) Base; (c) Lower arm; (d)
Upper arm; (e) Lower link; (f) Upper link; (g) Head support; (h) Bow .................. 31
Figure 3.5: Lumped mass pantograph model: (a) Laboratory parameter identification procedure;
(b) Three stage lumped mass model; (c) Parameter values ..................................... 33
Figure 3.6: Test rig for the experimental identification of the lumped mass pantograph, courtesy
of Politecnico di Milano (PoliMi)............................................................................ 34
Figure 4.1: Pantograph-catenary contact: (a) Pantograph bow and catenary contact wire; (b)
Cross-section of the contact wire; (c) Cross-section of the collector strip .............. 35
ix
Figure 4.2: Representation of the top view of a catenary contact wire element and a pantograph
registration strip ....................................................................................................... 36
Figure 4.3: Representation of the potential point of contact on the catenary contact wire element
................................................................................................................................. 38
Figure 4.4: Co-simulation flowchart between a finite element and a multibody code ................ 40
Figure 4.5: Initialization stage flowchart of the communication interface ................................. 41
Figure 4.6: Dynamic analysis stage flowchart of the communication interface ......................... 42
Figure 4.7: Representation of the data exchange procedure between applications using memory
mapped files ............................................................................................................. 43
Figure 5.1: Representation of the finite element model of the LN2 catenary with the static
deformation accounted for ....................................................................................... 48
Figure 5.2: Representation of the finite element model of the C270 catenary with the static
Figure 5.3: Representation of the finite element model of the Re330 catenary with the static
Figure 5.4: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair with different lumped mass
pantograph formulation, finite element formulation (FEM) and multibody
formulation (MB). ................................................................................................... 52
Figure 5.5: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair
with different lumped mass pantograph formulation, finite element formulation
(FEM) and multibody formulation (MB). ............................................................... 52
Figure 5.6: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the ATR95-C270 pair .................................. 54
Figure 5.7: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the ATR95-C270
pair ........................................................................................................................... 54
Figure 5.8: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the DSA800-Re330 pair .............................. 55
Figure 5.9: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the DSA800-R330
pair ........................................................................................................................... 55
Figure 5.10: Comparison of the statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force
between pairs .......................................................................................................... 56
Figure 5.11: Effort and lower node displacement of the first dropper on the span, (a), and other
at middle span, (b), registered on the CX-LN2 pair. .............................................. 58
at middle span, (b), registered on the CX-LN2 pair. .............................................. 58
at middle span, (b), registered on the DSA800-Re330 pair. ................................... 59
Figure 5.14: Multiple pantograph operations of high-speed trains with typical distances between
pantographs. ............................................................................................................ 60
x
Figure 5.15: Pantograph-catenary contact force for several pantograph separations in catenaries
with different proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275. ..................... 61
Figure 5.16: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force in catenaries with
different proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275. ............................. 62
Figure 5.17: Histograms of the pantograph-catenary contact force in catenaries with different
proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275. ............................................ 63
Figure 5.18: Typical steady-arm uplift in catenaries with different proportional damping for two
different separations of pantographs: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275. ..................... 64
Figure 5.19: Typical mid-span dropper forces in catenaries with different proportional damping
for two different separations of pantographs: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275. ........ 64
Figure 5.20: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force for a catenary with low
damping (=0.00275): (a) Leading pantographs; (b) Trailing pantographs. .......... 65
Figure 5.21: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force for a catenary with average
damping (=0.0275): (a) Leading pantographs; (b) Trailing pantographs. ............ 65
Figure 5.22: Schematic of a LN2 overlap section arrangement with projected views ................ 67
Figure 5.23: Representation of the finite element model of the LN2 catenary (TGV Atlantique
line) with the static deformation already accounted. .............................................. 68
Figure 5.24: Pantograph-catenary contact force for a single pantograph and multiple
pantographs with several separations in a regular catenary section ....................... 69
Figure 5.25: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force on a single
pantograph and multiple pantographs with several separations in a regular catenary
section ..................................................................................................................... 70
pantographs with several separations in a catenary overlap section ....................... 71
pantograph and multiple pantographs with several separations in a catenary overlap
section ..................................................................................................................... 72
Figure 5.28: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force between an overlap and a
normal section of the catenary system for different pantograph separations.......... 73
Figure 5.29: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force between single, leading and
trailing pantographs on a normal catenary section for different pantograph
separations .............................................................................................................. 74
trailing pantographs on a catenarys overlap section for different pantograph
separations .............................................................................................................. 75
xi
Figure 5.31: Discretized contact forces on the catenary overlap section for the leading (a); and
trailing pantograph (b), with 31 meters separation. ................................................ 76
xii
List of Tables
Table 2.1: Summary of the characteristics of different catenary systems [4, 5, 10]. Data for the
French catenaries is courtesy and property of SNCF .................................................. 13
Table 2.2: Number of elements and element type used to model each component of the catenary
model .......................................................................................................................... 19
Table 2.3: Geometric and material properties of a generic simple catenary ............................... 20
Table 3.1: Rigid body data of the pantograph multibody model ................................................. 31
Table 3.2: Kinematic joints used in the pantograph multibody model........................................ 32
Table 3.3: Linear force elements data used in the pantograph multibody model........................ 32
Table 5.1: Identified lumped mass model parameters for the CX, ATR95 and DSA800
pantographs ................................................................................................................. 46
Table 5.2: Geometric and material properties of the LN2 catenary ............................................ 46
Table 5.3: Geometric and material properties of the C270 catenary ........................................... 47
Table 5.4: Geometric and material properties of the Re330 catenary ......................................... 47
Table 5.5: Description of the intervals of interest for the reports of the dynamic analysis used for
each catenary model. ................................................................................................... 51
Table 5.6: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the CX-LN2 pair ................................... 53
Table 5.7: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair
for different lumped mass pantograph formulations and their absolute deviation ...... 53
Table 5.8: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the ATR95-C270 pair ............................ 55
Table 5.9: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the ATR95-C270 pair ............................ 56
Table 5.10: Description of the intervals of interest used for each catenary section .................... 67
Table 5.11: Geometric and material properties of the LN2 catenary (TGV Atlantique line) ..... 67
xiii
xiv
Introduction
The high speed railway systems are becoming key-players in worldwide transport policies. This
results from the rising oil prices and from the urgency for reduction of CO2 emissions, among
others. To improve the competitiveness and attractiveness of railway networks, the trains have
to travel faster, with improved safety and comfort conditions and with lower life cycle costs.
Furthermore, the railway operators are demanding reductions in the overall operational costs.
They put particular emphasis on the railway vehicles maintenance costs and on the
aggressiveness of rolling stock on the infrastructures. The quest for interoperability has in the
compatibility of different pantographs with existing and projected catenary systems puts an
extra level of demand on the ability to control their interface.
Within respect to other means of transportation, for short and medium distances, modern
high speed trains are able to compete with air transportation, having the advantage of presenting
better energy efficiency and causing less pollution. For longer distances the railway system is
still the most economical mean for transportation of goods and starts to have a competitive edge
in the transport of passengers.
As railway vehicles with electrical traction are, today, the most economical, ecological
and safe means of transportation the energy collection of the pantograph on the catenary is a
crucial element for their reliable running. A limitation on the velocity of high-speed trains
concerns the ability to supply the proper amount of energy required to run the engines, through
the catenary-pantograph interface [1]. Due to the loss of contact not only the energy supply is
interrupted but also arcing between the collector bow of the pantograph and the contact wire of
the catenary occurs, as depicted in Figure 1.1, leading to the deterioration of the functional
conditions of the two systems.
Figure 1.1: Detail of the pantograph catenary contact, during the operation of a high-speed train,
with the occurrence of dropper slacking and arcing.
The increase of the average contact force would improve the energy collecting
capabilities with less incidents of loss of contact but would also lead to higher wear of the
catenary contact wire and pantograph collector strip [2, 3]. A balance between contact force
characteristics and wear of the energy collection system is the objective of improving contact
quality. Even in normal operating conditions, a control on the catenary-pantograph contact force
is required to ensure longer maintenance cycles and a better reliability of the systems.
The quest for higher speeds for train operations in lines that were designed for lower
speed requires changes in the catenaries, pantographs and eventually in the vehicles. By
decreasing the weight per unit of length of the contact wire and increasing its tension higher
operation speeds are allowed in the same line due to the higher wave propagation speed. For
instance, in order to achieve the world record of 574.8 km/h by French high-speed train, the
contact wire used is made of copper with a cross-section of 150 mm2, the axial tension of the
contact wire increased from the current 26KN to 40N, being the voltage increased from 25 kV
to 31 kV [4]. In any case, the total tension in the overhead system must remain unchanged if the
changes that lead to a speed increase are to be implemented in an existing line [5, 6]. For
instance, to allow for the Shinkansen to operate at 360 km/h, in lines that were designed for
operations up to 240 km/h not only the tension of the contact wire is increased from 14.6 KN to
19.6 KN but the tension on the messenger and auxiliary wires also changed in order to maintain
the total tension at 53.9 KN [5]. Certainly the technological means of tensioning the catenary
wires and to maintain it regardless of temperature variations and material degradation is
important to guarantee the quality of the catenary-pantograph interface [7]. With standard
balance-weighted systems variations of 10% on the contact wire tension can be observed in just
few hours [8].
Another important aspect of the catenary design is to maintain the stiffness of the contact
wire to transversal loading by the pantograph as constant as possible [8, 9]. Different types of
catenaries exist, as seen in Figure 1.2, with alternative topological arrangements. The compound
catenary, commonly used in the Japanese Shinkansen, guarantees an almost uniform stiffness
while maintaining the contact wire at constant height, without requiring pre-sag, i.e., without
requiring the height of the contact wire to be lower at the middle of the span [10]. Catenaries,
such as the French LN1 and the German Re330, use the stitch wire to improve the uniformity of
stiffness around the steady-arms while in the simple catenaries, such as the French LN2 or
Italian C270, the stiffness is controlled via the dropper distance around the steady-arms. For
both stitch and simple catenary types there is a pre-sag of 1/1000 of the span to further improve
the uniformity of the stiffness [8, 10]. Due to less costly new designs that allow a better stiffness
uniformity simple catenaries are being preferred over compound and stitch wire catenaries in
new high speed line implementations [9, 11, 12].
a)
b)
c)
d)
Figure 1.2: Different high-speed catenary types: The French Southeast LN1 (a), and the German
Re330 (b) are Stitch wire catenaries; The French Atlantic LN2 (c) is a Simple catenary;
Japanese Shinkansen (d) is a compound catenary.
The catenary system dynamics exhibits small displacements about the static equilibrium
position. The only source of nonlinearity results from the slacking of the droppers. Therefore,
the linear finite element method has all features necessary to the modelling of this type of
systems, provided that the nonlinear effects are suitably modelled as nonlinear forces, in this
case, the dropper slacking can be handled by adding corrective terms to the system force vector.
The overhead catenary system is a very lightly damped structure in which the damping
characterization is important, in particular when the trains are equipped with multiple
pantographs [8]. The introduction of damping devices in the droppers of the catenary has been
attempted to better control the contact wire vibrations [11]. Different studies show that the
evaluation of the pantograph-catenary contact quality is highly dependent on the amount of
structural damping considered for the catenary structural elements [13]. However, it is also
recognized that the estimation of the structural damping of the catenary is still a technological
challenge.
The aerodynamic forces due to the direct effects of the wind on the overhead contact line
and on the pantograph components and indirect effect due to the additional motion of the
carbody imparted to the base of the pantograph influence the dynamics of the pantograph and
catenary [8, 14]. Apart from the consideration of a mean wind speed for the design of catenary
and its supporting structure, according to wind maps [15], investigations have been carried out
3
for the consideration of galloping instability of catenary wires motion, due to wind action in
particularly exposed areas. Mitigations of such phenomena, based on wind shield or increase
damping of catenary have been considered[16]. The problem of characterizing and controlling
the pantograph aerodynamics, although addressed in several technological projects, is still an
open issue for research [14, 17].
Different pantographs are currently used in train vehicles in the World, among which
some of the pantographs in operation in Europe are depicted in Figure 1.3. With the exception
of the Shinkansen 500 series telescopic pantograph, all other current collectors are of the two
stage type. The topology of a pantograph must address three ranges of its operation: lift the pan
head to the contact wire height and compensate for spans with lower catenary heights, generally
with frequencies of 1-2 Hz; handle the displacements with middle range frequencies associated
to steady-arms passage, up to 10 Hz; deal with the higher frequency but low amplitude events
[8]. Typically the pantograph head, with its suspension, is responsible for handling the highfrequency excitations, up to 20 Hz, while the lower stage, including the pneumatic bellow, deal
with the low frequency excitations, below 5 Hz. Some other effects such as the pantograph bow
flexibility and aerodynamics may result in the contact force to exhibit frequency contents over
20 Hz [18].
a)
b)
c)
d)
Figure 1.3: Different high-speed railway vehicles roof pantographs: a) Faiveley CX; b)
Stemman DSA380; c) Stemman ASP400; d) Contact ATR95.
A large majority of the pantographs in operation have been developed with particular
catenary systems in mind, forming national pantograph-catenary pairs such as the CX-LN2,
DSA380-Re330 and ATR95-C270 pairs. However, present trends for interoperability result in
new pantograph design requirements allowing operations in different catenary systems. It is
accepted that the improvement of the current collection capabilities, in the pantograph side,
require lighter bows, which in turn suggest the use of new materials and construction concepts
and that the head suspension is adjusted accordingly [19]. The need for the pantographs to have
low aerodynamic drag and noise emission and to be compatible for cross-border operation sets
some of the development directions for improved collectors [8]. Due to the range of motion of
4
the pantograph mechanical components and to the nonlinear elements present on its
construction, multibody methods are well suited to handle the pantograph dynamics [14].
Special models based on the use of lumped masses can still be used in the framework of linear
finite element methods [1], however, the use of multibody methods ensure that both lumped
mass and detailed nonlinear pantograph models still be used in the analysis of the pantographcatenary interaction problem. Hybrid methodologies in which the catenary dynamics is
evaluated using a linear finite element model and the pantograph dynamics is obtained using a
real prototype in a test bench are hardware-in-the-loop alternatives to fully computational
oriented approaches [20].
The interaction of the pantograph and catenary is achieved through the contact of the
pantograph collector strip on the catenary contact wire. The ability of collecting reliable data on
the contact forces to allow not only monitoring the operating conditions of the overhead system
but also to allow for the validation of numerical models is one of the important key issues of the
pantograph/catenary dynamics [8, 17]. Different experimental approaches have been proposed
and are now implemented by operators, manufacturers and infrastructure owners that allow for
the acquisition of reliable and complete data sets [21-23] . The norm EN50317 specifies the
requirements for the measurement systems to be used [24]. In face of the ability to correctly
measure the contact forces the use of the statistical occurrence of contact losses has been
replaced by the statistical parameters extracted from the contact force to the measure for the
contact quality. The norm EN50367 specifies the technical criteria for the interaction between
pantograph and overhead line [25]. The experimental data on the contact force allows obtaining
the most important parameters required to evaluate the quality of the contact, i.e., mean contact
force, standard deviation of the contact force, maximum contact force, minimum contact force,
maximum and minimum statistical contact forces, histogram of the forces, number of contact
losses, duration of the contact losses and uplifts of the registration arms. The norm EN50367
specifies the following thresholds for pantograph acceptance:
Mean contact force (Fm)
Fm=0.00097 v2+70 N
Standard deviation (max)
max<0.3 Fm
Maximum contact force(Fmax)
Fmax<350 N
Maximum CW uplift at steady-arm (dup)
dup120 mm
Maximum pantograph vertical amplitude(z)
z80 mm
Percentage of real arcing (NQ)
NQ0.2%
The complete study of design and operational alternatives for the mechanics of the
overhead electrical system require that the dynamics of the pantograph-catenary are properly
modelled and that software, used for analysis, design or maintenance support, is not only
accurate and efficient but also allows for the modelling of all relevant details to the train
overhead energy collector system. Most of the software tools used for the simulation of the
pantograph-catenary interaction is based in the finite element method and on multibody
dynamic procedures [26-29]. However, in what the catenary modelling is concerned, the use of
the finite difference method and of modal analysis is also reported [8]. The modelling of contact
between the pantograph collector strip and the catenary contact wire can be done using
unilateral kinematic constraints [28, 30], which does not require the estimation of any contact
law parameter but prevents any loss of contact to be detected. Alternatively, penalty
formulations can be used
[19, 26] with no limitations on how contact may develop but
requiring that the penalty terms of the contact law are estimated. In any case, the use of different
methods to handle the dynamics of the catenary and pantograph requires that either a single
code in which both methods are implemented is developed or that a co-simulation strategy
between the two codes is implemented [29, 31] . The contact modelling plays a central role in
the establishment of the co-simulation strategies [31].
The development of computer resources led simulations to be an essential part of the
design process of railway systems. Moreover, the increasing demands for network capacity,
either by increasing the traffic speed or the axle loads, put pressure on the existing
infrastructures and the effects of these changes have to be carefully considered. The European
Strategic Rail Research Agenda [32] and the European Commission White Paper for Transports
[33] have identified key scientific and technological priorities for rail transport over the next 20
years. One of the points emphasized is the need to reduce the cost of approval for new vehicles
and infrastructure products with the introduction of virtual certification. Also, an important
issue arising during the design phase of new trains is the improvement of its dynamic
performance. The concurrent use of different computational tools allows carrying out several
simulations, under various scenarios, in order to reach an optimized design. In this way, studies
to evaluate the impact of design changes or failure modes risks can be performed in a much
faster and less costly way than the physical implementation and test of those changes in real
prototypes. Due to their multidisciplinary, all the issues involving railway systems are complex.
Therefore, the use of computational tools that represent the state of the art and that are able to
characterize the modern designs and predict their dynamic behaviour by using validated
mathematical models is essential. Recent computer codes for railway applications use specific
methodologies that, in general, only allow studying each particular phenomenon at a time. By
analysing such phenomena independently, it is not possible to capture all the dynamics of the
complete railway system and relevant coupling effects. However, developing innovative and
more complex methodologies in a co-simulation environment allow, not only to integrate all
physical phenomena, but also to assess the cross influence between them.
6
The work presented here follows this trend and proposes a modelling approach and a
computational methodology gathered in a software tool that enables the dynamic analysis of
pantograph-catenary interaction. The finite element method is used for the dynamic analysis of
the catenary and a multibody dynamics approach is used for the dynamic analysis of the
pantographs, regardless of being lumped or multibody models. A co-simulation environment is
setup to run interference between the independent catenary and pantograph dynamic analyses.
The methods proposed in this work are demonstrated in the framework of the application of the
regulation EN50367 to three case studies. One of the case studies is composed by a comparison
between three pantograph-catenary pairs that are currently operating in Europe. On another case
it is presented the analysis of multiple pantograph operation in high-speed trains between
realistic catenary and a high speed pantograph models. This case addresses one of the limiting
factors in high-speed railway operation that is the need to use more than a single pantograph for
current collection. As the overlap section represents a critical zone on the contact quality,
having the responsibility to provide a smooth transition between subsequent catenaries, in the
final case study, an analysis on catenary overlap section is presented with comparison to a
normal section of the same catenary system
Catenary Dynamic Analysis and Modelling
High-speed railway catenaries are periodic structures that ensure the availability of electrical
energy for the train vehicles running under them. A typical construction, such as the one
presented in Figure 2.1, includes the masts (support, stay and console), serving as support for
the registration arms and messenger wire, the steady arms, which not only support the contact
wire but also ensure the correct stagger, the messenger wire, the droppers, the contact wire and,
eventually, the stitch wire. Furthermore the functionality of the catenaries impose that spans
have limited length, to allow for curve insertion and that the contact and messenger wires are
not longer than 1.5 Km, depending each particular network. As shown on Figure 2.2 the
catenary geometry requires overlaps between the starting and ending spans of different sections.
Messenger wire
Stay
Support
Stitch wire
Console
Dropper
Contact wire
Steady arm
Registration arm
Figure 2.1: General structural and functional elements in a high speed catenary.
span
overlap section
Figure 2.2: Representation of the functional elements of the catenary geometry

9
Depending on the catenary system installed in a particular high-speed railway all the
elements or only some of them may be implemented. However, in all cases both messenger and
contact wires are tensioned with high axial forces not only to ensure the correct geometry, i. e.,
to limit the sag, guarantee the appropriate smoothness of the pantograph contact and ensure the
stagger of the contact and messenger wires, but also to allow for the correct wave travelling
speed to develop.
2.1
Characteristics of Current High-Speed Catenaries
The types of high-speed catenaries existing today in the different countries are either simple,
stich wire or compound catenaries. The trend of new implementations of high-speed lines is to
use simple catenaries. In any case, the need for increasing the train operating velocities not only
forces the catenary designs to present a smoother geometry of the contact wire, while
maintaining a flexibility as constant as possible, but also to withstand higher tension forces on
the messenger and contact wires.
One of the critical parameters that limits the operational velocity of the trains is the wave
propagation velocity on the contact wire, C, which is given by [34]
C
2 EI F
L2
(2.1)
where F is the tension of the contact wire, is the contact wire mass per length unit, EI is the
beam bending stiffness and L is the beam length. When the train speeds approach the wave
propagation velocity of the contact wire, called critical velocity, the contact between the
pantograph and the catenary is harder to maintain due to increase in the amplitude of the
catenary oscillations and bending effects. In order to avoid this deterioration of the contact
quality the train speed should not exceed 70-80% of the contact wire wave propagation speed
[1]. For safety the maximum train operating speed, V, is set to be V=0.7C.
The high-speed railway line catenaries in use in France are depicted in Figure 2.3, for the
Southeast TGV line, and Figure 2.4, for the Atlantique TGV. The Southeast TGV line catenary,
built in 1980, was the first high-speed line built in Europe. The catenary is of the stitch wire
type being the registration wires supported by droppers and pinned to the console. In order to
allow the increase of the operating speed and to overcome some problems experienced with the
LN1 catenary, the Atlantique TGV line catenary LN2, built in 1990, is a simple catenary, with
the registration arms fixed to the console, and has a higher contact wire tension than the LN1.
10
F = 14 kN
F = 14 kN
F = 15 kN
F = 15 kN
stagger
stagger
Figure 2.3: LN1 catenary with stitch wire in use in the Southeast TGV line.
F = 14 kN
F = 14 kN
F = 20 kN
F = 20 kN
stagger
stagger
Figure 2.4: LN2 catenary, without stitch wire, in use in the Atlantic TGV line.
The German high-speed line catenary Re330 is of the stitch wire type, as presented in
Figure 2.5. Due to the very high tension of the contact wire this catenary has the maximum
critical speed in the commercial catenaries.
11
F = 21 kN
F = 21 kN
F = 27 kN
F = 27 kN
stagger
stagger
Figure 2.5: Re330 catenary, with stitch wire, in use in the German ICE lines.
The catenary used in the Japanese Shinkansen, depicted by Figure 2.6, is of the
compound type to provide a more constant flexibility for the pantograph contact. The catenary
suffered an evolution since it first started in operation, in 1964, until now to allow for an
increase of the contact wire tension. In the new Japanese high-speed lines the compound
catenary type is being abandoned being the simple type of catenary used instead.
F = 21.6 kN
F = 21.6 kN
F = 12.7 kN
F = 12.7 kN
F = 19.6 kN
F = 19.6 kN
stagger
stagger
Figure 2.6: Japanese compound catenary for the Shinkansen lines.

A summary of the main characteristics of the current catenaries is provided in Table 2.1.
It should be noticed that due to the research for higher critical speeds of the catenaries some of
the characteristics listed may change, especially in what the wire materials, cross-section and
tension is concerned.
12
Catenary type
Std. span (m)
Std. wire height from
TOR (m)
Stagger (mm)
Section (mm2)
Messenger
Mass (kg/m)
wire
Tension (N)
Section (mm2)
Stitch
Mass (kg/m)
wire
Tension (N)
Section (mm2)
Contact
Mass (kg/m)
wire
Tension (N)
Wave velocity (km/h)
Max operat. speed (km/h)
Train speed (km/h)
Pre-sag
France
(LN6)
France
(LN2)
Germany
(Re330)
Italy
(C270)
Japan
(Shinkansen)
Simple
54
Simple
54
Stitched
65
Simple
57
Compound
50
5.08
5.08
5.3
5.3
5.0
200
117
1.038
20000
200
117
1.038
16000
200
117
1.038
16000
150
1.334
26000
503
350
320
1/2000
150
1.334
20000
441
350
300
1/1000
300
120
1.068
21000
35
0.312
3500
120
1.075
27000
572
350
330
1/1000
100
180
1.450
21600
150
1.375
12700
110
0.936
19600
521
150
1.335
20000
441
350
300
1/1000
330
none
Table 2.1: Summary of the characteristics of different catenary systems [4, 5, 10]. Data for the
French catenaries is courtesy and property of SNCF
Many new high-speed lines are being planned and built around the World. China, Korea,
India, Brazil, United States of America, Morocco, Russia, and Portugal are some of the
countries that exemplify this trend. It is noticed that the majority of these lines are selecting
catenaries of the simple type for their networks, with some design variations. The software
analysis tools for the pantograph-catenary interaction must be able not only to allow the
implementation in the models of the relevant design characteristics of the catenaries but also be
fitted with numerical methods that allow obtaining the sensitivity of the dynamic response of
the system to design features.
2.2
Catenary Modelling
When modelling catenary systems, two main concerns need to be addressed, the line tensioning
and the dropper slacking. The line tension on a catenary is often employed by means of weights
or occasionally by hydraulic tensioners. In either case the method ensures that the line tension
on the catenary wires, respectively the contact wire and the messenger wire, are kept under a
constant tension as much as possible considering temperature changes. To apply the tension on
the wires by weights a pulley system is mounted on both end supports of the catenary where the
wires meet and a set of weights hangs as represented on Figure 2.7.
13
Figure 2.7: Photo of a weights line tensioning system; Photo: Rainer Knpper, Freenbsp;
Art License (http://artlibre.org/licence/lal/en)
As already pointed out in section 2.1, the wires are kept under mechanical tension so that
the oscillations on the wire due to pantograph-catenary contact have a wave propagation speed
faster than the train. This avoids the increase in the amplitude of the catenary oscillations and
bending effects that would otherwise not only introduce more disturbances on the contact but
also cause excessive wear and possible wire breakage. Also the line tensioning has a direct
effect on the contact wire sag. With no tensioning the sag is much more accentuated and would
not represent the catenary accurately. Evidently the more sag is present in a contact wire the less
constant the contact force will be as more perturbation is introduced on the contact. Because of
the influence of line tension on the wave propagation speed and on the wire sag, it is than
understandable that to correctly capture the dynamic behaviour of the pantograph-catenary
interaction it is important to take the wire tension into account when constructing catenary
system models.
The dropper slacking is also an important nonlinear behaviour that is necessary to
consider in any catenary dynamic analysis tool. This phenomenon is shown in Figure 2.8 for a
normal operation on a high-speed train.
14
(a)
(b)
Figure 2.8 Dropper slacking for the same operation scenario: (a) pantograph-catenary contact is
maintained, (b) loss of contact with arcing
When supporting the contact wire, the dropper is in a tension stress state. However when
the pantograph passes under the dropper, it is compressed and its tension vanishes. As the
dropper is a braided cable, which does not offer any compressive resistance, it slacks
transmitting no reaction forces to the rest of the catenary system. This occurrence represents a
nonlinearity when modelling the dynamic behaviour of the catenary. Nonlinear problems
usually require more complex numerical methodologies that lead to bring larger computational
cost. However this nonlinearity is well localized and its implied behaviour is known. So it is
possible that by adding corrective measures on the numerical solution of the problem a linear
methodology can still be used, thus avoiding the use of more complex methodologies and
saving valued computational time.
2.3
The Finite Element Method on the Pantograph-Catenary System
The motion of the catenary is characterized by small rotations and small deformations, in which
the only nonlinear effect is the slacking of the droppers. The axial tension on the contact, stitch
and messenger wire is constant and must be considered in the analysis. Therefore, the catenary
system is typically modelled with linear finite elements in which the dropper slacking
compensating forces, pantograph contact and gravitational forces are included in the force
vector.
To capture the dynamic behaviour of the catenary, an integration algorithm was
implemented based on the implicit Newmarks trapezoidal rule but taking into account specific
modelling needs of the dynamics of the catenary model. Besides the integration algorithm
accuracy and stability a other aspect that is crucial to consider is its effectiveness, especially
when considering computational costs.
15
2.3.1
Dynamic Analysis of Catenaries Using Linear FEM
Using the finite element method, the dynamic equilibrium equations for the catenary structural
system are assembled as [35, 36],
(2.2)
Ma Cv K d f
where M, C and K are the finite element global mass, damping and stiffness matrices of the
finite element model of the catenary. The accelerations, velocities and displacements vector are
represented respectively as a, v and d while the sum of all external applied forces is depicted by
vector f. In order to represent accurately the stress stiffening of the catenary structure due to the
tension stress state caused by the line tensioning with high axial tension forces the beam finite
element used for the messenger, stitch and contact wire, designated as element i, is written as
K ie K eL F K Ge
(2.3)
in which KeL is the linear Euler-Bernoulli beam element, F is the axial tension and KeG is the
element geometric matrix. The droppers and the registration and steady arms are also modelled
with the same beam element but disregarding the geometric stiffening. The 3D linear EulerBernoulli beam element KeL, the element geometric matrix KeG plus the local mass matrix Me
are [35],
EA
l
e
KL
EA
12 EI z
l3
0
12 EI y
0
0
Symmetric
l3
GJ
l
6 EI y
l
4 EI y
l
6 EI z
l2
4 EI z
l
EA
l
12 EI z
l3
6 EI z
l2
12 EI z
l3
2 EI z
l
12 EI y
0
0
6 EI z
l2
l3
6 EI y
l
0
GJ
l
0
0
6 EI y
l2
0
2 EI y
l
0
6 EI z
l2
12 EI y
l3
0
6 EI y
GJ
l
4 EI y
l
0
4 EI z
l
(2.4)
16
0 6
5l
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 1
10
e
KG
0 0
6
0
l
5
0 0
0 0
0 0
1
0
10
1
3
0
M e lA
1
6
5l
0
1
0
10
2l
15
2l
15
0
6
5l
6
1
0
5l
10
0
0
0
l
1
0
10
30
10
6
5l
0
1
10
l
1
0
30
10
Symmetric
2l
0
15
2l
0
0
15
13
35
0
13
35
Symmetric
Jx
3A
11l
210
l2
105
11l
210
l2
105
1
3
9
70
13l
420
13
35
9
70
13l
420
13
35
Jx
6A
Jx
3A
13l
420
3l 2
420
11l
210
13
35
3l 2
420
11l
210
13l
420
(2.5)
13
35
(2.6)
In which E, is the Young modulus, G, is the modulus of rigidity ,l , is the element length, A, is
the cross section area, , is the material density, and Iy, Iz and Jx are the area moments of inertia
about the respective y, z, and x axis. The global stiffness and mass matrixes, K and M, are built
by assemblage of the matrices of the elements according to the catenary mesh. In order to model
the damping behaviour of the system, proportional damping, also known as Rayleigh damping
[36]. The global damping matrix C is evaluated as
17
C = +
(2.7)
were parameters and are defined to represent an adequate damping response of the system
with the reasoning of the overall stiffness and mass characteristics of the system. It is also
possible to implement a more particular approach of this method by evaluating a proper
damping matrix Ce for each element as
Ce = e e + e e
(2.8)
where e and e are proportionality factors associated with each type of catenary element e,
such as dropper, messenger wire, stitch wire and so on. In this case the global C matrix is
obtained by assemblage of the elements damping matrices.
The force vector, f, containing the sum of all external applied loads, is evaluated at
every time step of the time integration. For a time t+t the force vector is calculated as
ft t f g f t ftct ftdt
(2.9)
where the vector f g contains the gravitational forces of all elements and vector f t is made of
forces responsible for line tensioning the wires, i. e. , they model the weights installed in the
endings of the wires. Both f g and f t remain constant. The force vector f c represents the
pantograph contact forces being evaluated as,
ftc t B c fc i
(2.10)
where fc represents the equivalent forces and moments applied at appropriate nodes of the
contact wire element where a contact force, at time t+t, is to be applied. The matrix Bc means
the Boolean operation of assembling each contact force fc
in the global force vector. The
contact force value to be applied and its point of application are evaluated, at each integration
time step, by geometric interference and a proper contact modelling method, to be discussed on
section 4.1. The force vector ftdt contains dropper slacking compensating terms which need to
be corrected at each time step whenever a dropper gets slack. Otherwise this vector is null.
Although the droppers perform as bar elements during extension, which is most of the time,
their stiffness during compression is either null or about 1/100th of the extension stiffness. This
extent occurs when contact forces are applied in the vicinity of the dropper. As the droppers
stiffness is included in the stiffness matrix K as a bar element, anytime one of them is
compressed its contribution to the catenary stiffness has to be removed, or modified to include
the dropper slacking. In order to keep the dynamic analysis linear, the strategy pursued here is to
18
compensate the contributions of any compressed dropper, i, to the stiffness matrix. This is done
by adding the vector force ftdt , to the global vector f , equal to the bar compression force as
ftdt B d K ed d t t
i
(2.11)
where K ed is the dropper i element stiffness matrix and d t t is a close prediction of the dropper
node displacements. The Boolean matrix B d simply maps the global nodal coordinates into the
coordinates of the dropper element, having the same meaning as for the contact forces.
2.3.2
FEM Catenary Models

In this work, for the construction of finite element models of catenary systems, all
catenary elements are modelled with a 3D beam element based on Euler Bernoulli beam theory
[8]. This 3D beam element, which formulation is developed in [35] , is assumed to be a straight
beam of uniform cross section capable of resisting to axial forces, bending moments about the
two principal axes in the plane of its cross section and twisting moments about its centroid axis.
Also of importance about this 3D beam element is that it accounts for the stress stiffening on
bending which is critical when modelling the contact and messenger wires that are subject to
high tensioning. The one exception for the use of these beam elements are for modelling the
claws and clamps that hold the structure together on the dropper/contact-wire/messenger-wire
and steady-arm/contact-wire junctions; these are modelled as lumped masses.
In order to ensure the correct representation of the wave propagation 4 to 6 elements must
be used in between droppers to appropriately model the contact and messenger wires. There is
no special requirement on the number of elements required to model each dropper, registration
or steady-arm as shown on Table 2.2.
Component
Element Type
Number of Elements
contact wire
Euler Bernoulli Beam
6 between droppers
dropper
1 per each
messenger wire
6 between droppers
stich wire
1 between droppers
steady arm
1 per each
gramps/claws
lumped mass
Table 2.2: Number of elements and element type used to model each component of the catenary
model
19
The typical data required to model a catenary depends on the catenary type, among which
most of the high-speed catenaries used in operation today are of one of the types presented in
Figure 1.2. For a simple catenary, not necessarily reflecting any of the catenaries illustrated in
Figure 1.2, the typical data required to build a finite element model is presented in Table 2.3.
General
Catenary height [m]
Number of spans
N spans at C.W. height
Span length [m]
Damping
Material
Section [mm2]
Mass [kg/m]
Tension [N]
Claw with
Claw mass [kg]
Length [m]
Angle w/horiz.
1.4
25
20
50-54
0.027
Contact wire height [m]

Number of droppers/span
Inter-dropper distance [m]
Stagger [m]
Damping
5.08
8
6.75
0.20
0
Contact Wire
Messenger Wire
Droppers
Steady Arms
Cu
150
1.33
20000
dropper
0.195
-
Bz II (braided)
66
0.605
14000
dropper
0.165
-
Bz II (braided)
12
0.11
1.25-1.075
90
120
1.07
C.W.
0.200
1.24
-10
Table 2.3: Geometric and material properties of a generic simple catenary

Using the data contained in Table 2.3 a finite element model of the generic simple
catenary is obtained, being different views shown in Figure 2.9. Note that the initial and
terminal spans of the catenary have the contact wire in position for the initialization of the
contact with the pantograph. However, the length of these spans is fundamental in the dynamic
calculations due to the wave reflection.
To represent accurately the wire tensioning on the catenary system the axial tension is
added to the catenary by adding constant axial compressive forces, with value equal to the
applied line tensioning force, on each element of the contact, messenger and stich wire, while at
both end nodes of the contact and messenger wire a pinned point constraint is applied as
represented on Figure 2.10. Also a pinned point constraint is added to each end node of the
steady arm element and on the messenger wire node right above a roller constraint, which is free
to move along the catenary length. These boundary conditions not only allow to preserve the
stagger but also to represent the masts action on the catenary.
20
1.5
8
1
7.5
0.5
7
Z [m]
Y [m]
-0.5
6.5
-1
5.5
-1.5
-2
0
200
400
600
X [m]
800
1000
1200
200
400
600
X [m]
800
1000
1200
Z [m]
5
1.5
1200
1
1000
0.5
800
0
600
-0.5
400
-1
200
-1.5
Y [m]
X [m]
-2
Figure 2.9: Finite element model of a generic catenary with the sag highlighted.
Figure 2.10: Representation of the constraints applied on a general catenary model

21
Note that the data presented here for the catenaries is indicative. Due to confidentiality
reasons it is not possible to reproduce the exact data used for the catenary models developed in
this work [37].
2.3.3
Lumped Mass Pantograph Dynamic Analysis in Finite Elements Application

When using lumped mass pantograph models it is possible to use the same finite element
code to solve the equations of motion of both pantograph and catenary. For this purpose, the
pantograph is considered a linear system and its equations of motion must be assembled in the
same way as the catenary equations, expressed by equation (2.2). The contact forces developed
between the pantograph collector strip and the catenary contact wire are evaluated with the same
contact model used one the multibody pantograph, described on section 4.1, and applied both on
the appropriate beam element of the contact wire and the top mass of the pantograph. Notice
that in this case only a longitudinal velocity of the pantograph is prescribed and no other motion
between the masses occurs besides their expected vertical movement.
In order to produce the pantograph equations of motion, consider the representation of the
lumped mass pantograph model, in Figure 2.11, with three staged lumped masses (m1,m2,m3)
linked by spring/damper suspensions with correspondent model parameters (K1,K2,K3,C1,C2,C3).
Figure 2.11: Representation of the pantograph lumped mass model

The governing equations of motion are derived at each mass as
m3
y3 C3 ( y3 y 2 ) K 3 ( y3 y2 l03 ) m3 g Fc (t )
(2.12)
m2
y2 C3 ( y 2 y3 ) C2 ( y 2 y1 ) K 3 ( y2 y3 l03 ) K 2 ( y2 y1 l02 ) m2 g
(2.13)
m3
y3 C2 ( y1 y 2 ) C1 ( y1 y 0 ) K 2 ( y1 y2 l02 ) K 2 ( y1 y0 l01 ) m1 g Fstatic
(2.14)
22
being the following restriction used as a boundary condition.

y0 constant y 0
y0 0
(2.15)
In addition to the specific pantograph lumped mass model parameters, the equations of
motions involve the gravitation constant g, in the evocation of the weights due to the masses.
The spring free lengths, l01 ,l02, l03 are considered along with the ground height y0, relative to the
catenary model in order to adjust the lumped masses heights. Of importance is the top mass
height, with which contact force Fc(t) is evaluated at each time and applied back on the top
mass, m3. The static uplift force, Fstatic, of the pantograph model, applied on its lower mass,
provides a direct way to regulate the contact force magnitude and its mean value on a dynamic
analysis.
Equations (2.12) to (2.15) can be re-written in vector-matrix form in order to use the same
form as the catenary equations of motion,
m3
0
0
y3 C3
C3

0
y2 C3 C3 C2
m1
y1 0
C2
0
m2
0
0 y3 K3

C2 y 2 K3
C2 C1 y1 0
K3
K3 K 2
K2
0 y3
m3 g K3l03 Fc (t )
K 2 y2
m2 g K3l03 K 2 l02
K 2 K1 y1 m1 g K 2 l02 K1 (l01 y0 ) Fstatic
(2.16)
In this form the equations of motion of the pantograph can be solved in the finite element code
either by adding them to the catenary equations or by solving them separately in a different
finite element code. When the pantograph and catenary equations of motion are solved
independently, i. e. ,
M cat a + Ccat v + K cat d = fcat
(2.17)
pantograph dynamic equilibrium equation: Mpat

y + Cpat y + K pat y = fpat
(2.18)
catenary dynamic equilibrium equation:
being their interaction achieved via the contact force. When interpreted together, the completed
system of equation of motion are written as
M cat
0

0 a
+

y
M pat

Ccat
0

0 v
+

C pat y
K cat
0

0 d fcat
=

K pat y f pat
(2.19)
In addition to the developed methodology above for the integration of a lumped mass
pantograph model in the finite elements code of the catenary dynamic analysis, it must be noted
that this lumped mass pantograph model can also be easily integrated on a multibody
application. This issue is approached in Chapter 3 of this work.
23
2.3.4
Time integration method
The selection of a time integration numerical procedure to solve the governing dynamic
equilibrium equations of a system is usually decided by engineering judgement. Such decision
must take into account not only the stability and accuracy of the selected algorithm but also its
computer processing effort. The time integration method embraced for this specific
implementation is an implicit Newmark family integration algorithm [36, 38]. This particular
method was chosen due to its unconditional stability nature when used implicitly and its proven
robustness in FEM applications of the type of the ones demonstrated in this work.
To illustrate the developed integration algorithm consider the solution of the linear
dynamic equilibrium equation of the catenary system expressed by equations (2.2). For a given
time t and a fixed time step t the solution of the equilibrium equation for a forthcoming time
t+t is represented as
M at t C v t t K d t t ft t
(2.20)
Admitting that the solution of the dynamic equilibrium equation is known at time t, the
Newmark method leads to the displacements and velocities on time t+t obtained by
1
d t t d t v t t
2
a t a t t t
vt t vt 1 at at t t
(2.21)
(2.22)
The parameters and are determined in order to obtain integration accuracy and stability.
However when =1/4, =1/2 and the above stated assumptions are used implicitly to solve the
equilibrium equation this particulate application of the Newmark method is unconditionally
stable and known as trapezoidal rule. In order to solve the present system implicitly the
Newmark assumptions expressed in equations (2.21) and (2.22) are rearranged respectively for
at t and v t t in terms of dt t giving,
a t t
v t t
t 2
d t t d t
vt
1 at
2
d t t d t 1 v t 2 a t t
t
2
(2.23)
(2.24)
These two relations are then substituted into the equilibrium equation (2.20) which than can be
solved for the displacements dt t as,
Kd
t +t = f t +t
LUd t +t = ft +t
(2.25)
where,
24
Ka MaC
K
0
1
(2.26)
ft + t f t + t M a 0 d t a 2 v t a3 a t C a1d t a 4 v t a5 a t
(2.27)
and,
a0
1
;
t 2
a4 1;
a1
;
t
a2
t
a5 2 ;
2
1
;
t
a3
a6 t 1 ;
1
1;
2
(2.28)
a7 t
The notation LU is used in equation (2.25) to mean a factorization of the stiffness matrix in the
solution of the implied system of equations [39]. Afterwards the accelerations and velocities can
me calculated by using equation (2.23) and (2.24).
For the time integration of a linear system the matrix K is constant unless the time step
size changes. An important computational advantage can be taken out of this predicament in
integration algorithms, as the one implemented in this work, because the largest computation
cost that occurs at each integration time step is the solution of the system of linear equations
expressed on equation (2.25). More particularly when numerically solving this system, a
relevant part of the processing effort is strongly influenced by the numerical solver used and its
implicit matrix factorization algorithm [36, 40]. In this case a LU decomposition is selected.
Taking the advantage on the fact that the effective stiffness matrix K remains constant as also
its factorization products, the factorization is done only once and the same products are used on
the procedure at every time step. This method not only saves computational cost for the
dynamic analysis but also allows to treat the dropper nonlinearity as a compensating force in the
framework of a linear analysis rather than following a nonlinear dynamic analysis approach.
One other aspect of the integration algorithm involves the calculation of the effective
loads vector ft + t . As the external loads vector f , expressed in (2.9), is not constant in time the
effective loads vector must be calculated at every integration time step. Moreover the
calculation of the pantograph contact forces and dropper compensation forces, as expressed in
equations (2.10) and (2.11), depend on a close prediction of the node displacements, d t t , and
velocities, v t t ,that would belong to the solution of the dynamic equilibrium equations at time
t t . In order to be accurately close to this prediction, the approximation of the displacements

and velocities is evaluated iteratively within each time step of the integration algorithm. On the
first iteration the last time step displacements d t and v t are considered a close enough
prediction and used to form the effective loads vector and to evaluate the dynamic equilibrium
equations. The solution obtained is considered as the new displacements and velocities
prediction for the next iteration and so on. This correction procedure is done iteratively until a
25
good enough convergence is reached where, dt t d t t d and v t t v t t d , being d and
v user defined tolerances. The iterative process is represented in Figure 2.12 together with the
integration algorithm steps. Note that the criteria for convergence of the nodal displacements
and velocities must imply convergence of the force vector also, i.e., the balance of the
equilibrium equation right-hand side contribution of the dropper slacking compensation force
with the left-hand-side product of the dropper stiffness by the nodal displacements in equation
(2.20).
ftc t (d t t , v t t )
d t t d t
v t t v t
ft +t ft +t M a0 dt a2 v t a3at C a1d t a4 v t a5at

ftd t (d t t )
i0
LUd t +t = ft +t
at t
v t t
d t t dt t
v t t v t t
t 2
dt t dt
1 at
vt
2
dt t dt 1 vt 2 at t
t
2
d t t d t t d
i allowed iterations
i i 1
v t t v t t v
Figure 2.12: Flowchart of the integration algorithm steps as each time step
Experimenting with the computational implementation of the finite element procedure,
outlined here in the context of the catenary dynamic analysis, shows that the maximum number
of iterations allowed, for the correction process to be 4 or higher. If a maximum number of
iterations is set to be below 4 there is the danger that the droppers exhibit residual compression
forces during the dynamic analysis, with all implications that such error has over the evaluation
of the pantograph-catenary contact force.
26
General Pantograph Dynamic Analysis and Modelling
The railway roof pantographs are the systems responsible for collecting the energy from the
overhead line. In order to guarantee a smooth operation, without losing contact with the contact
wire or requiring an excessive contact force that, which lead not only to high wear but also large
uplifts of the steady arms, the pantographs must be dynamically responsive to the different
range of frequencies with which they are excited. Furthermore, the pantograph and catenary
must have characteristics that allow for multiple pantograph operation without the degradation
of the contact quality of any of the pantograph collector strips [41]. The use of active control
strategies for the pantograph may lead to an improvement of the pantograph contact, especially
for the trailing pantographs. However many of the prototypes are still experimental [42].
3.1
Characteristics of High-Speed Pantographs
The roof pantographs used in high-speed railway applications are of the type depicted in Figure
1.3. Mechanically they are characterized as mechanisms with three loops ensuring that the
trajectory of head, while lifting the pantograph, is in a straight line, perpendicular to the plane of
the base, while the pantograph head is maintained levelled. The pantographs are always
mounted in the train in a perfect vertical alignment with the centre of the boggies of the vehicle
in order to ensure that during curving the centre of the bow does not deviate from the centre of
the railroad, more than what is expected from the normal railway dynamics. The mechanical
system that guarantees the required characteristics of the trajectory of the pantograph head
during rising is generally made up by a four-bar linkage for the lower stage and another four-bar
linkage for the upper stage. Another linkage between the head and the upper stage of the
pantograph ensures that the bow is always levelled. In order to control the raise of the
pantograph one bar of the lower four-bar linkage is actuated upon by a pneumatic actuator.
The major differences between current pantographs reside not only on the raising
mechanism constituted by the actuator and the lower stage but also in the pantograph head and
its suspension. The numerical methods used to perform the dynamic analysis of the pantograph
must be able to represent the important details of the system, including mechanisms and
compliances and to evaluate their correct dynamics. Two different types of models are generally
used to represent pantographs: lumped mass and multibody. Each of them has advantages and
shortcomings in their use that are discussed hereafter.
3.2
Multibody Dynamic Analysis of Pantographs
A typical multibody model is defined as a collection of rigid or flexible bodies that have their
relative motion constrained by kinematic joints and is acted upon by external forces. The forces
applied over the system components may be the result of springs, dampers, actuators or external
27
applied forces describing gravitational, contact/impact or other forces. A wide variety of

mechanical systems can be modelled as the schematic system represented in Figure 3.1.
Revolute joint
body i
Spring
body n
Ball joint
body 2
External forces
body 3
body 1
Damper
Figure 3.1: Generic multibody system.

Let the configuration of the multibody system be described by n Cartesian coordinates q,
and a set of m algebraic kinematic independent holonomic constraints be written in a compact
form as [43].
q, t 0
(2.29)
Differentiating Equation (2.29) with respect to time yields the velocity constraint equation.
After a second differentiation with respect to time the acceleration constraint equation is
obtained
q q
(2.30)

q q
(2.31)
where q is the Jacobian matrix of the constraint equations, is the right side of velocity
equations, and is the right side of acceleration equations, which contains the terms that are
exclusively function of velocity, position and time.
The equations of motion for a constrained multibody system (MBS) of rigid bodies are
written as
g g(c)
Mq
(2.32)
where M is the system mass matrix, q is the vector that contains the state accelerations, g is the
generalized force vector, which contains all external forces and moments, and g(c) is the vector
of constraint reaction equations. The joint reaction forces can be expressed in terms of the
Jacobian matrix of the constraint equations and the vector of Lagrange multipliers
g ( c ) Tq
(2.33)
28
where is the vector that contains m unknown Lagrange multipliers associated with m
holonomic constraints. Substitution of Equation (2.33) in Equation (2.32) yields
(2.34)
Tq g
Mq
In dynamic analysis, a unique solution is obtained when the constraint equations are
considered simultaneously with the differential equations of motion with proper set of initial
conditions. Therefore, equation (2.31) is appended to equation (2.34), yielding a system of
differential algebraic equations that are solved for q and . This system is given by
M
r g
Tq q

0
(2.35)
In each integration time step, the accelerations vector, q , together with velocities vector,
q , are integrated in order to obtain the system velocities and positions at the next time step.
This procedure is repeated up to final time will be reached. The solution of the multibody
equations of motion and their integration in time is depicted in Figure 3.2. The set of differential
algebraic equations of motion, Equation (2.35) does not use explicitly the position and velocity
equations associated to the kinematic constraints, Equations (2.29) and (2.30), respectively.
Consequently, for moderate or long time simulations, the original constraint equations are rapidly
violated due to the integration process. Thus, in order to stabilize or keep under control the
constraints violation, Equation (2.35) is solved by using the Baumgarte Stabilization Method or
the augmented Lagrangean formulation and the integration process is performed using a
predictorcorrector algorithm with variable step and order. Due to the long simulations time
typically required for pantograph-catenary interaction analysis, it is also necessary to implement
constraint violations correction methods, or even the use of the coordinate partition method for
such purpose [43].
Initialize
i0
q*i q 0
q *i q 0
M; qT ;
g;
Build
Solve
Build
No
Correct?
q 0 ; q 0

qT q
0
q q
2
t
t
ri
q *
1 T
p i 2 L i i
Yes
Calculate
Factorize
(u,v,t ) 0
u u v v
LU R
q*
S D
Build
Integrate
i i 1
No
Yes
u
y
u
Form
Partition
u
y

u

u
u
*
q * ; q
v
v

Integrate
Constraints
Correct?
i i 1
q
y i
q i
ri
1 T
*
pi 2 Li i
q
T
1
)
p
i
4
Partition?
Yes
No
Form
q
y i
i
q
Figure 3.2: Flowchart with the forward dynamic analysis of a multibody system
29
Note that the numerical approach described implies the use of Cartesian coordinates. If
other types of coordinates are used, such as joint coordinates, the flowchart shown in Figure 3.2
must suffer the appropriate adaptations.
3.3
Multibody Pantograph Models
A pantograph consists of a collection of bodies and mechanical elements, as depicted in Figure

3.3(a), attached to a railway carbody that is moving along the track, as depicted in Figure 3.3(b).
Two modelling strategies can be used to define the reference motion of the pantograph: guide
the motion of the railway vehicle as a result of the rail-wheel contact and simply fix the
pantograph in the top of the train carbody, as implied in Figure 3.3(b), control the kinematics of
the pantograph base using a kinematic constraint, as specified in Figure 3.3(c) [44]. The first
strategy allows introducing in the pantograph-catenary contact the perturbation associated to the
dynamics of the vehicle and track interaction while the second strategy may include or not such
perturbations depending on how the trajectory associated to the guiding constraint is obtained.
In any case, once the kinematics of the pantograph is compatible with the geometries of the
catenary and railway both strategies are acceptable. In this work the motion of the base of the
pantograph is guided along a tangent track.
The rigid bodies that compose a particular pantograph system are presented in Figure 3.4.
Note that different pantographs may have different topologies, especially in what the head and
the lower stage raising mechanisms is concerned.
7
RJ-3
3
RJ-2
SJ-4
5
SJ-3
SJ-2
RJ-1
4
Z
Y
(b)
SJ-1
mstatic
(a)
(c)
Figure 3.3: (a) Pantograph model; (b) Roof mounted pantograph on the vehicle guided on the
track; (c) Pantograph with prescribed base motion
30
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Figure 3.4: The pantograph system: (a) Complete pantograph; (b) Base; (c) Lower arm; (d)
Upper arm; (e) Lower link; (f) Upper link; (g) Head support; (h) Bow
The data required for the multibody model of the pantograph concerns the mass, inertia,
initial positions and initial orientations of all bodies in the system, as shown in Table 3.1. The
type and location of all kinematic joints that connect the different bodies of the system, as
depicted by Table 3.2, and the force elements characteristics, i.e., springs, dampers and
actuators, must also be specified, as in Table 3.3.
ID Rigid Body
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Panto. Base
Lower Arm
Upper Arm
Lower Link
Upper Link
Stab. Arm
Panto. Head
Mass
[Kg]
32.65
32.18
15.60
3.10
4.51
4.67
7.80
Inertia [Kg.m2]
I / I / I
2.76/ 4.87/ 2.31
0.31/ 10.43/ 10.65
0.15/ 7.76/ 7.86
0.05/ 0.46/ 0.46
0.08/ 1.50/ 1.50
0.34/ 0.01/ 0.50
6.62/ 0.23/ 6.87
Initial Position [m]

x0 / y0 / z0
0.000/ 0.000/ 0.000
0.571/ 0.000/ 0.412
0.394/ 0.000/ 1.055
0.887/ 0.000/ 0.283
0.357/ 0.000/ 1.003
0.553/ 0.000/ 1.418
0.553/ 0.000/ 1.498
Initial Orientation
e1 / e2 / e3
0.00/ 0.00/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.17/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.18/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.21/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.16/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.00/ 0.00
0.00/ 0.00/ 0.00
Table 3.1: Rigid body data of the pantograph multibody model

31
ID
Kinematic Joint
Connected Bodies
i
j
1
2
Revolute joint
Revolute joint
Revolute joint
Spherical joint
Spherical joint
Spherical joint
Spherical joint
RevolutePrismatic joint
Attachment Points Local Coordinates [m]

Body i (j/j/)
Body j (j/j/j)
(0.820/0.000/0.000)P
(0.020/0.000/0.132)P
(0.020/1.000/0.132)Q (0.820/1.000/0.000)Q
(-0.820/0.000/0.000)P (-1.014/0.000/0.000)P
(-0.820/1.000/0.000)Q (-1.014/1.000/0.000)Q
(1.014/0.000/0.000)P
(0.000/0.000/0.000)P
(1.014/1.000/0.000)Q (0.000/1.000/0.000)Q
(-0.259/0.000/0.000)P (0.688/0.000/0.000)P
(-/-/-)Q
(-/-/-)Q
(-1.187/0.000/-0.126)P (-0.615/0.000/-0.025)P
(-/-/-)Q
(-/-/-)Q
(-0.780/0.000/0.000)P (-1.000/0.000/0.000)P
(-/-/-)Q
(-/-/-)Q
(0.962/0.000/0.000)P (0.000/0.000/-0.105)P
(-/-/-)Q
(-/-/-)Q
(0.000/0.000/0.000)P
(0.000/0.000/0.010)P
(1.000/0.000/0.010)Q (0.000/0.000/-1.000)Q
Table 3.2: Kinematic joints used in the pantograph multibody model

ID
1
2
3
4
Force
Element
Stiffness
[N/m]
Sp-Damp
2.00
Actuator
0
Sp-Damp 3000.00
Sp-Damp 3000.00
Undef. Damp.
Force
Length Coeffic.
[m]
[N.s/m] [N]
0.459
60.0
0
0
0
920
0.103
13.0
0
0.103
13.0
0
Bodies
i
1
1
6
6
Attach Pts Local Coord [m]
j Body i (I / I / i)
2 0.259/0.000/0.000
2 0.483/0.000/0.125
7 0.000/0.335/0.000
7 0.000/0.335/0.000
Body j (j / j / j)
0.870/0.000/-0.136
0.870/0.000/-0.136
0.000/ 0.335/0.010
0.000/ -0.335/0.010
Table 3.3: Linear force elements data used in the pantograph multibody model
It should be noted that the data provided for the pantograph model, in this work, which
closely matches the pantograph shown in Figure 3.4, is indicative of the configuration and
properties of a particular type of generic pantograph but that do not, necessarily, reflect any
existing pantograph. However, the data gathered ensures that the dynamic performance of the
model is realistic, but not necessarily validated. Note also that due to confidentiality reasons the
full spectrum of the pantograph data cannot be reported in this work [13].
One of the criticisms to this modelling procedure is that the multibody model of the
pantograph is made of rigid bodies connected by perfect kinematic joints, as the one presented
here. It only has 2 degrees-of-freedom, i.e., the raising of the pantograph and the head
suspension. In fact, laboratory dynamic analysis of real pantographs leads to frequency response
measurements in all pantographs that exhibit the presence of three resonances, implying that a
basic requirement for the pantograph models is to have three degrees of freedom, at least. The
third degree-of-freedom of the multibody pantograph may be associated with the clearance or
with bushings existing in the joints [45, 46] or even with the flexibility of one or more of the
bodies considered in this model [47, 48]. In any case, the minimal requirements for modelling
multibody pantographs that can have a realistic behaviour in the complete frequency range of
their operation, i.e. in the 0-20 Hz range, are still to be identified.
32
3.4
Lumped Mass Pantograph Model
Alternatively to a multi-body pantograph model another modelling method is commonly used

consisting on a lumped mass approach. The lumped mass pantograph model, depicted on Figure
3.5(b), is composed of a simple series of lumped masses linked consequently to a ground by
spring/damper elements. Although in the literature pantograph models are presented with two,
three of more mass stages, for high-speed train applications, there is a minimal requirement of
three stages to well represent the system [49].
Excitation barwith
prescribed motion
a)
Parameter
m1
m2
m3
k1
k2
k3
c1
c2
c3
Z(t)
b)
Value
4.5
6.3
7.8
62
8000
7000
54
0
30
c)
Figure 3.5: Lumped mass pantograph model: (a) Laboratory parameter identification procedure;
(b) Three stage lumped mass model; (c) Parameter values
While the multi-body pantograph models can be built with design data alone, for example
with data obtained from technical drawings complemented with measured physical
characteristics from selected components, the lumped mass pantograph model parameters, as the
ones presented on Figure 3.5(c), must be identified experimentally. In this sense, the lumped
mass pantograph model can be thought as a transfer function in which an experimental
procedure, represented on Figure 3.5 (a) is used. The test rig used for this procedure is also
presented in Figure 3.6. The idea is to excite the contact strips of the desired pantograph to
model with prescribed motions of known frequency and amplitude while measuring the
response of the pantograph namely the contact forces on the collector strip and positions,
velocities and accelerations at prescribed points of the mechanical pantograph. This acquired
data is then used to build the frequency response functions (FRF) of the pantograph. The
lumped mass model is built in such a way that the upper stage mass, m3, and suspension
characteristics, k3 and c3, match those of the prototype, while the intermediary and lower stage
parameters are identified in such way that the FRF of the model is matched to the
experimentally acquired FRF [50].
33
Figure 3.6: Test rig for the experimental identification of the lumped mass pantograph, courtesy
of Politecnico di Milano (PoliMi)
The structures of the lumped mass pantograph model, in the multibody framework,
include 4 rigid bodies connected by 3 translational joints, in the local z direction. In the same
direction, joining each body to another, there is as spring-damper element with the
characteristics depicted in Figure 3.5. A static force is applied to the mass m1 in order to ensure
a proper average contact force during the dynamic analysis.
It is important to note that in spite of the simplicity of their construction and fidelity of
their dynamic response, the lumped mass models are commonly used by operators,
manufacturers and homologation bodies instead of more complex models. The only part of the
lumped mass model that as a physical interpretation is the upper stage, which limits the use of
this type of models for any application that requires modifications on the pantographs structure
or mechanics. From this point of view, multibody pantograph models cannot be replaced
provided that they are able to adequately represent the dynamics of the implied system,
including a match with the FRF experimental data.
34
Pantograph-Catenary Interaction
The contact involved in the pantograph-catenary interaction involves the pantograph collector
strip and the catenary contact wire. The efficiency of the electrical current transmission and the
wear of the collector strip and of the contact wire are deeply influenced by the quality of the
contact. This implies that the correct modelling of the contact mechanics involved between
these two systems is crucial for its accurate and efficient evaluation. Furthermore, the catenary
finite element simulation software may also include a lumped mass pantograph model to
interact with the catenary, as described in 2.3.3, or in another approach communicate with a
multibody module that allows the simulation of a pantograph model. In this case, the contact
model is also used as a bridge in the co-simulation environment between the two distinct codes,
as described in section 4.2.
4.1
Contact Modelling
The contact between the collector strip of the pantograph and the contact wire of the catenary,
from the contact mechanics point of view, consists in the contact of a cylinder made of copper
with a flat surface made of carbon having their axis perpendicular as shown in Figure 4.1. The
contact problem can be treated either by a kinematic constraint between the collector strip and
the contact wire or by a penalty formulation of the contact force. In the first procedure the
contact force is simply the joint reaction force of the kinematic constraint [28, 30]. With the
second procedure the contact force defined in function of the relative penetration between the
two cylinders [45, 51]. The use of the kinematic constraint between contact wire and collector
strip forces these elements to be in permanent contact, being this approach valid only if no
contact loss exist. The use of the penalty formulation allows for the loss of contact and it is the
method of choice for what follows.
a)
b)
c)
Figure 4.1: Pantograph-catenary contact: (a) Pantograph bow and catenary contact wire; (b)
Cross-section of the contact wire; (c) Cross-section of the collector strip
35
4.1.1
Geometric Conditions for Contact

In order to model the contact force using a penalty formulation it is necessary to
geometrically access if there is contact and identify the contact location either on the pantograph
collector strip or on the catenary contact wire. Also it is necessary to calculate the relative
penetration of the contact. For this purpose a three step procedure is implemented at every time
step of the catenary integration algorithm and for each collector strip present on the considered
analysis. In the first step a contact wire finite element is evaluated to be a candidate for the
contact solution. The first element that starts to be evaluated is the one used for the contact on
the last time step. If the element is not eligible for contact the procedure restarts for the next
element on the contact wire. On the second stage, it is assumed that there is contact and by
geometric interference and use of the shape functions of the catenary finite element, the
potential points of contact on the contact wire and the collector strip are located. At the third
step the relative penetration of the contact is calculated and it is accessed if there is contact
indeed or there is contact loss.
To find the catenary element candidate for contact consider the representation of the top
view of a catenary contact wire element and a pantograph registration strip on Figure 4.2.
u IJ
IC
B
C
u AB
y
AC
x
Figure 4.2: Representation of the top view of a catenary contact wire element and a pantograph
registration strip
The nodes A and B represent the collector strip extremities and nodes I and J are the
contact wire element node positions at the actual time step in consideration. The node C
represents the intersection, on the xy plane, of two lines defined by de nodes A, B and nodes I, J.
It is possible relate the node C position with the other defined nodes by
rC rI u IJ IC
(2.36)
rC rA u AB AC
(2.37)
36
Where ri defines the vector position of a node i, IC and AC is the norm from node I to C and
MN is a versor of a generic vector that goes from node M to node N.

A to C respectively, and u
Decomposing the vector equations (2.36) and (2.37) on the x and y axes as,
xC xI u IJx IC
(2.38)
yC yI u IJy IC
(2.39)
xC xA uABx AC
(2.40)
yC y A u ABy AC
(2.41)
and equalling the expressions, it is possible to form the a equation system presented as
xI uIJx IC xA u ABx AC
yI uIJy IC y A u ABy AC
(2.42)
where the solution is IC and AC .

Assuming that there is contact and that the collector strip is a rigid body, its potential
point of contact, rpantograph , can be calculated as
rpantograph rA u AB AC
(2.43)
where if this position is between de nodes A and B positions then the contact wire element
candidate for contact is found. If not the procedure is restarted for the next element of the
contact wire and so on.
The potential contact position on the contact wire element can be calculated as
rcatenary ri N( )di
(2.44)
Where, as presented on Figure 4.3, ri , corresponds to the contact wire node I position but
without the deformation accounted for, the vector di contains the displacements of the node i
and the matrix N( ) contains the element shape functions [52] in order of , which is the local
element relative position of the contact point in its longitudinal direction defined as
IC
L
(2.45)
37
di
I
dj
J
potential point of contact
IC
on the catenary
Figure 4.3: Representation of the potential point of contact on the catenary contact wire element
Finally, to access if there in fact contact in, the relative penetration, , is calculated by
( z pantograph rpat ) ( zcateanry rcat )
(2.46)
where z pantograph and zcateanry are the position coordinates of the calculated potential points of
contact on the z axis, and rpat and rcat correspond to the contact wire and collector strip radius
of their considered circular cross section. If the relative penetration value is positive then there
is contact, if not or the value is null there is a contact loss at the time step taken into
consideration.
4.1.2
Continuous Contact Force Model

The continuous contact force model used here is based on a contact force model with
hysteresis damping for impact in multibody systems. In this work, the Hertzian type contact
force including internal damping can be written as [53]
3(1 e 2 )
FN K n 1
()
4

(2.47)
where K is the generalized stiffness contact, e is the restitution coefficient, is the relative
penetration velocity and () is the relative impact velocity. The proportionality factor K is
obtained from the Hertz contact theory as the external contact between two cylinders with
perpendicular axis. Note that the contact force model depicted by Equation (2.47) is one of the
different models that can be applied. Other continuous contact force models are presented in
references [54-56].
In the application that follows the contact is considered purely elastic, i.e., the restitution
coefficient e=1, the generalized stiffness defined to be K=20000 N/m and power of the
penetration is n=1. The relative penetration, , is evaluated taking into account the nodal
displacements of the beam finite element in which contact occurs and its shape functions. For
38
the efficiency of the computer code it is important that the numbers of the finite elements that
are in contact with each of the collector strips are kept track of so that unnecessary searches for
contact are avoided.
4.2
Co-Simulation of Multibody and Finite Elements
The interaction between the multibody pantograph and the finite elements catenary systems
represents a coupled problem where the pantograph is a nonlinear dynamic system handled with
variable time step and multi-order integrator, while the catenary is modelled as a dynamic linear
system integrated with a Newmark family numerical integrator using a fixed time step.
Generally the dynamic analysis of pantograph-catenary systems is done with both models
using the same formulation, as in the case of the FEM lumped mass pantograph model.
However, if it is expected the pantograph exhibits large displacements and rotations during its
operation it is not advisable to model this system with finite elements method. Nonlinear finite
elements in dynamic analysis of nonlinear systems when compared to multibody methodology
lead to larger computational time costs. Also, in spite of being possible to build a catenary
model in multibody formulation there is no reliable model that can handle all its complex
details. Furthermore the modelling of catenary systems using finite element formulation is
nowadays used by the railways industry, with validated results. For the mentioned reasons, in
the development of this work, both systems are then modelled using distinct formulations, i. e. ,
pantograph multibody models and catenary finite element models.
The analysis of pantograph-catenary interaction is done by two stand-alone and
independent codes, the multibody pantograph and the finite elements catenary, running in a cosimulation environment. A procedure to run simultaneously a multibody code and a finite
elements code in a co-simulation environment, enabling real-time simulation of the pantograph
catenary interaction is proposed here.
4.2.1
Co-Simulation Procedure
The structure of the communication between the pantograph and the catenary codes is shown in
Figure 4.4. The multibody pantograph code (PAT) provides the catenary finite element code
(CAT) with the positions and velocities of the pantograph collector strip A and B nodes. These
nodes correspond to the collector strip extremities. With the information provided, the CAT
code calculates the position of the point of contact between the pantograph collector strip and
the catenary contact wire by geometric interference and the contact force using an appropriate
contact model, as described in section 4.1. Following these calculations the CAT code
communicates to the PAT code a point, C, position correspondent to contact point position and
the contact force, Fc. Each code handles independently their equations of motion of their
39
referred sub-system and applies the contact force on the contact point both shared between
them.
Figure 4.4: Co-simulation flowchart between a finite element and a multibody code
The catenary is modelled as a dynamic linear system with its state variable integrated
with a Newmark family numerical integrator [38] using a fixed time step where a prediction of
the positions and velocities of the catenary but also the pantograph are needed. The multibody
pantograph code integration procedure is based on a predictor-corrector algorithm with variable
time step, which in order to proceed with its dynamic analysis needs the contact force and its
application point at different time instants during the integration period. Therefore, one of the
codes has to make a prediction to a forthcoming time, before advancing to a new time step.
Either the PAT predicts a contact point and a force of contact or the CAT predicts the collector
strip position and velocity. In this work it is chosen the PAT code to predict the contact position
and contact force using a simple linear extrapolation based on stored data of the contact force
history during the previous time steps. The reason for being the PAT code to make a prediction
is that PAT code uses a variable time step and an extrapolation/interpolation algorithm that is
already used to estimate the contact position and force on a forthcoming or past time instant that
is not multiple of the fixed CAT code time step.
The compatibility between the two integration algorithms imposes that the state variables
of the two sub-systems are readily available during the integration time and also that a reliable
prediction of the contact forces is available at any given time step. The accuracy of this
prediction relies on having small enough time steps either of the fixed CAT code time step or
the maximum allowed PAT code time step. Also, it is necessary to ensure that the multibody
code variable time step is never larger than the catenary CAT code time step. Accordingly to
these basic rules, a fully integrated communication protocol between CAT and PAT codes is
developed, and its structure is presented in section 4.2.2.
40
4.2.2
Communication Protocol
The interface between the catenary finite elements code and the pantograph multibody code is
built upon the use of two communication files. They not only serve as communication channels
between the two applications but also are the means for their synchronization. The two files
consist of a communication of the collector strip position and velocity (PAT2CAT) from the
multibody pantograph code to the finite elements catenary code and a communication to deliver
the point of contact and contact force (CAT2PAT) from the catenary code to the pantograph
code. Each of this communication files also include a flag that controls the progress of the
integration algorithms so that they stay synchronized.
There are occasions in which one of the algorithms has to wait for other and vice-versa.
The developed communication interface is composed of two stages. In the first stage, the
initialization stage shown in Figure 4.5, the codes exchange input data necessary to their own
initialization procedures. No contact at the catenary is implied or allowed at the start time. In
second stage, depicted in Figure 4.6, data is shared between codes to preform dynamic analysis
using the communication files previously described.
Figure 4.5: Initialization stage flowchart of the communication interface

41
Figure 4.6: Dynamic analysis stage flowchart of the communication interface

4.2.3
Data Exchange Methodology
One of the most critical issues of using co-simulation procedures is the added computational
cost due to data exchange between codes, especially when this data is large or, as is this case of
pantograph-catenary co-simulation, it is accessed frequently. The time spent on data exchange
between applications must be negligible compared to the computation time costs of the two
analyses. The use of physical data files for information exchange, also known as file
input/output, is a robust, well known and very popular methodology. However, for either a
recursive use or for large data sets it leads to slow data exchange when compared to the use of
virtual memory sharing. The data exchange between codes using virtual memory is not
42
straightforward as the codes may be developed in different languages and run in different
computer systems giving rise to memory access issues.
One form of sharing memory between multiple processes is by the use of a memory
mapped file methodology. A memory mapped file is a segment of computer virtual memory
which is mapped in order to have a direct byte-for-byte assignment to a hard disk file or other
resource that the operating system can reference with. Once this correlation is established, or
using a proper term mapped, the memory mapped file can be accessed by multiple processes
for reading and writing directly on the virtual memory. The primary benefit of memory mapping
is the increase of input/output performance enabling multiple applications to access
simultaneously a file in the same way they access virtual memory making file reading and
writing much faster.
In this work the memory mapped file mapping, reading and writing is entrusted to an
object oriented class of MATLAB [57] which enables the use of memory mapped files either
directly on a MATLAB application or indirectly on an another language application via a call to
a compatible MATLAB engine [58]. The implementation of the data exchange method on the
work using memory mapping is represented in Figure 4.7. The catenary analysis application is
implemented in MATLAB while the pantograph analysis is developed using FORTRAN. At the
start of a data exchange any of the MATLAB application or engine creates a file and maps it to
virtual memory while the other waits for the file creation. Whenever such file is found, it is
mapped. Having both applications mapped the same file in virtual memory they can
communicate between each other using their common memory mapped file. Note that the
created file only serves has a point of reference for both applications to map the same file in the
virtual memory. Furthermore, during the communication, only the memory mapped files are
changed, the created file is not used further.
Figure 4.7: Representation of the data exchange procedure between applications using memory
mapped files
43
44
Applications to Overhead Current Collecting Systems

The computational analysis methodologies developed in this work are implemented in a
software tool that handles the catenary dynamics and its interaction with the pantograph. With
this tool, many scenarios can be built in order produce a wide range of simulations to reach any
particular study of interest. These studies can be applied from operational acceptance to design
optimization and analysis of the dynamic response of a specific system either on the catenary or
on the pantograph or both. With the use of this computer analysis tool, different simulation
scenarios are studied [59-63].
Three case studies, each with its specific interest, were selected to be analysed and
presented on this work. One case addresses a comparison between three pantograph-catenary
pairs that are currently operating in Europe. Another case presents the analysis of multiple
pantograph operation in high-speed trains involving a realistic catenary and a high speed
pantograph model. A final case involves an analysis on a catenary with an overlap section in
order to emphasize the transition between different sections of a catenary.
The case studies evaluated here are analysed in the framework of the application of the
European regulation EN50367 and EN50317 [24, 25] which specify not only the basis for the
data processing but also the rules for pantograph-catenary acceptance.. In particular, it is
specified that the contact force time histories are filtered with a cut-off frequency of 20 Hz
before being post-processed.
As in all other simulation codes, the initial conditions of the analysis must be such that
pantograph and catenary are out of contact. Then, in the initial part of the analysis the
pantographs are raised until their bows touch the contact wire. In order to disregard this
transient part of the dynamic response, only the contact forces developed in a specific interval of
interest are taken into analysis, ensuring in this form that only the steady state of the
pantograph-catenary contact problem is studied
5.1
Pantograph-catenary pairs in current operation

A large majority of the railway lines in current operation have been developed with a
particular pantograph-catenary couple in mind, forming what is called here a national pair. In
high speed networks in Europe, there are among others, the CX-LN2 pair in France, the
ATR95-C270 pair in Italy and the DSA380Re330 in Germany. All these catenary systems
have different structural characteristics and operate on different settings. On Table 5.2 trough
Table 5.4 the geometric and material characteristics of the LN2, C270 and Re330 catenaries can
be found, being their geometry depicted in Figure 5.1 trough Figure 5.3 with a representation of
their respective finite element models. The pantograph models, in spite of their mechanic
assembly being quite similar at first sight, they have particular differences that influence their
45
dynamic response. The values of these parameters for the lumped mass models are presented on
Table 5.1, showing a considerable difference between pantographs. Its understandable that to
achieve the best contact quality possible it is important for the catenary and pantograph models
of each pair to fit their counterpart as much as possible.
L. M. Pantograph
parameters
units
Faiveley
CX
Contact
ATR95
Stemman
DSA380
m1
Kg
5.58
10.14
m2
Kg
8.78
13.05
11
m3
Kg
7.75
9.45
10.5
k1
N/m
178.45
7247.6
65.7
k2
N/m
15487
30274
6700
k3
N/m
7000
7978.7
20000
c1
N s/m
108.39
225.33
500
c2
N s/m
0.009
0.01
c3
N s/m
45.85
87.74
200
Table 5.1: Identified lumped mass model parameters for the CX, ATR95 and DSA800
pantographs
LN2
Catenary length [m]
Number of spans
Span length [m]
Damping
2
Section [mm ]
Mass [kg/m]
Young modulus [GPa]
Tension [N]
Claw with
Claw mass [kg]
Length [m]
Angle w/horiz.
1138
24
20
45-49.5
0.0272

Stagger [m]
Damping
5.08
7-8
4-6.75
0.40
0
Contact Wire
Messenger Wire
Droppers
Steady Arms
150
1.334
120
20000
dropper
0.195
-
65.5
0.605
84.7
14000
dropper
0.165
-
12
0.11
84.7
1.25-1.075
90
120
1.07
84.7
C.W.
0.200
1.22
-10
Table 5.2: Geometric and material properties of the LN2 catenary

46
C270
Catenary length [m]
Number of spans
Span length [m]
Damping
2
Section [mm ]
Mass [kg/m]
Young modulus [GPa]
Tension [N]
Claw with
Claw mass [kg]
Length [m]
Angle w/horiz.
1425
25
21
57
0.0272

Stagger [m]
Damping
5.3
9
5.1-6
0.40
0
Contact Wire
Messenger Wire
Droppers
Steady Arms
150
1.335
100
20000
dropper
0.195
-
117
1.0378
96.8
16000
dropper
0.165
-
12.6
0.1173
15.9
1.035-0.555
90
134
1.42
84.7
C.W.
0.200
1.02
-11
Table 5.3: Geometric and material properties of the C270 catenary
Re330
Catenary length [m]
Number of spans
Span length [m]
Damping
Contact Wire
Messenger Wire
Stich Wire
Dropper
Steady Arm
Section [mm2]
Mass [kg/m]
Young modulus [GPa]
Tension [N]
Claw with
Claw mass [kg]
Length [m]
Angle w/horiz.
1057
17
11
51-65

Stagger [m]
Damping
Contact Wire.
Messenger Wire
Stich Wire
Dropper
Steady Arm
7.5E-7
5E-3
5E-3
1E-5
1
5.3
9
5-6.85
0.6
0
0
0
0
0
Contact
Wire
Messenger
Wire
Stich
Wire
Droppers
Steady
Arms
120
1.075
120
27000
dropper
0.25
-
120
1.068
84.7
21000
dropper
0.25
-
35
0.3115
84.7
3500
m. wire
0.25
-
10
0.089
84.7
1.25-1.075
90
120
1.07
84.7
c. wire
0.25
0.65
6
Table 5.4: Geometric and material properties of the Re330 catenary
47
Figure 5.1: Representation of the finite element model of the LN2 catenary with the static
deformation accounted for
48
Figure 5.2: Representation of the finite element model of the C270 catenary with the static
49
Figure 5.3: Representation of the finite element model of the Re330 catenary with the static
50
5.2
Analysis of existing pantograph-catenary national pairs

In order to evaluate the contact quality between the pantograph-catenary pairs, using the
simulation tool developed on this work, a set of four simulations are defined. Two simulations
are assigned to the CX-LN2 pair where the only difference resides in the lumped mass model
formulation used, i. e. , finite element versus multibody models. In the first case, the lumped
mass model is run with the same finite element procedure of the catenary, described in section
2.3.3, and in the second case the same lumped mass model is used but within the multibody
dynamic analysis module setup to run in co-simulation with the finite element application, as
addressed in section 4.2. The other two simulations are assigned to the ATR95-C270 and
DSA380Re330 pairs. It is important to note that the finite element catenary models presented
here are set with their real specification data. The regular operating train speed on the pairs
taken into consideration is 300 Km/h for all and the set average contact force 157.5 N, as
specified by norm EN50367.
Catenaries are periodic structures and it can be considered that their repetition interval is
the span which contemplates the length between two supports of the catenary. For this reason,
the interval of interest for the analysis results reports chosen for each catenary is not length
based but span based. So, to have a clear picture of each catenary dynamic response and be able
to have a just comparison among them, an interval of interest containing 5 spans of each
catenary is selected. The intervals of interest for the reports on the dynamic analysis are
described in Table 5.5.
Interval of interest
Start [m]
End [m]
Length [m]
LN2
551
798
247
C270
798
1083
285
RE330
496
821
325
Table 5.5: Description of the intervals of interest for the reports of the dynamic analysis used for
each catenary model.
The contact force results along the catenary for the LN2 are presented on Figure 5.4
showing the results obtained for the finite element pantograph model alongside the multibody
lumped mass pantograph model.
51
Figure 5.4: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair with different lumped mass
pantograph formulation, finite element formulation (FEM) and multibody formulation (MB).
These results show a very distinctive similarity among the two simulations. The peaks presented
on the graph actually coincide with the pantograph passage on the droppers for the lowest peaks
and on the steady arms of the support system for the larger peaks. In order to determine the
pantograph acceptance to this catenary and also conclude about the differences between the
finite element and the multibody modelling options a statistical analysis to the contact force
results is presented on Figure 5.5. The statistical values reposted are the maximum and the
minimum, the mean contact force, the standard deviations of the contact force and the statistical
minimum of the contact force.
Figure 5.5: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair
with different lumped mass pantograph formulation, finite element formulation (FEM) and
multibody formulation (MB).
The first observation is that both pantograph models lead to the same results. The second
observation is that in both simulations the pantographs pass on all the acceptance norms, as
listed in chapter 1. There is no loss of contact neither the uplift on the steady arms pass the 12
cm threshold. The maximum uplifts on each steady arm registered during the simulation are
shown on Table 5.6 .
52
CX-LN2 Steady Arm Uplifts

SA Number
10
11
Track Length [m]
86.9
132.2
177.7
222.7
267.7
312.7
357.7
402.7
452.2
501.7
551.2
Max Uplift [cm]
0.02
0.04
0.08
0.23
1.49
5.21
4.16
4.34
4.58
4.54
4.54
SA Number
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Track Length [m]
600.7
650.2
699.7
749.1
798.6
848.1
897.6
947.1
997.1
1046.9
Max Uplift [cm]
4.55
4.54
4.54
4.55
4.54
4.54
1.70
0.03
0.02
0.02
Table 5.6: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the CX-LN2 pair
It is important to gather about the difference on modelling the lumped mass pantograph
with a finite element formulation attached to the catenarys versus the multibody method with
the developed co-simulation procedure. On Figure 5.4 and Figure 5.5 it is observed a very close
resemblance between the results. To have a finer numeric comparison, Table 5.7 shows the
numeric values of the statistical analyses done to each simulation and the absolute deviation
among them. It is within good measure to assert that the contact force statistical results are very
good matches of each other. When looking through the maximum, mean and standard deviation
values, it can be reached that their absolute deviations account for less than 0,08 % of their
corresponded thresholds on the European norm for catenary acceptance at 300 Km/h. This gives
some confidence when accepting one pantograph with either formulation. It should also be
noted that the statistical data, used here to compare both models, result from the statistical
analysis of the contact forces which in turn passed through an independent fast Fourier
transform filtering process
Contact force [N]
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Maximum
Statistical
Minimum
CX-LN2 FEM
249.883
102.015
147.868
157.298
38.893
273.976
40.621
CX-LN2 MB
249.965
101.925
148.040
157.314
38.929
274.100
40.527
Absolute deviation
0.082
0.090
0.172
0.016
0.036
0.125
0.093
Table 5.7: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the CX-LN2 pair
for different lumped mass pantograph formulations and their absolute deviation
This particular study is of importance because not only shows a mutual agreement using
distinctive dynamic analysis formulations of the lumped mass pantograph but also, with the
most significance, stands for the accuracy of the developed high-speed co-simulation. So it is to
be expected that when a full multibody pantograph model is available the co-simulation
program works as swiftly as with the multibody lumped mass pantograph model. It is also
important to note that, for an additional computational cost, it is possible to have the results
even better correlated by reducing the maximum time step size of the multibody integration
procedure. As the catenary numerical procedure has the most dominant computation work load,
a reasonable tuning of the multibody time step does not interfere much with the overall
computational time as it would on the catenarys numerical integration procedure. Nevertheless
53
the selection of the integration time step for each of the models is of extreme importance to
obtain an accurate dynamic analysis of each one the systems independently.
The contact force results obtained from the ATR95/C270 pair are presented in Figure 5.6.
Though the contact force periodicity along the catenary spans can be easily observed, the results
show a fair distinction from the CX-LN2 pair. The peaks of the contact force due to the
pantograph passage under the droppers and steady arms are less obvious in the case of this pair.
Not much more can be gathered about the pantograph-catenary contact force presented results,
this is the reason why the European norms rely on thresholds based on statistical quantities
hidden within the contact forces developed along the catenary. The statistical evaluation of these
contact forces is then depicted on Figure 5.7.
Figure 5.6: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the ATR95-C270 pair
Figure 5.7: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the ATR95-C270
pair
A close look to the statistical analysis allows concluding of the acceptance of the
pantograph on this catenary. Furthermore, as it is also required by the norms there is no loss of
contact and the steady arm uplifts, presented on Table 5.8, are well inside their 12 cm
acceptance limit.
54
ATR95-C270 Steady Arm Uplifts

SA Number
10
11
Track Length [m]
114.0
171.0
228.0
285.0
342.0
399.0
456.0
513.0
570.0
627.0
684.0
Max Uplift [cm]
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.03
0.10
0.74
5,35
4.34
4.54
4.52
SA Number
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Track Length [m]
741.0
798.0
855.0
911.9
968.9
1025.9
1082.9
1139.9
1196.9
1253.9
1310.9
Max Uplift [cm]
4.51
4.52
4.53
4.55
4.58
4.61
4.65
4.70
4.77
4.75
2.99
Table 5.8: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the ATR95-C270 pair
The contact force results of the DSA800-Re330 pair are show on Figure 5.8 . Once again
it can be reached by observation that the characteristics of the contact force are rather different
than those of the other pairs.
Figure 5.8: Pantograph-catenary contact force for the DSA800-Re330 pair

From the statistical analysis of the contact forces, presented on Figure 5.9, it can be observed
that DSA800 pantograph also passes on the norm requirements. The simulation results also
reveal no contact loss was registered and that the steady arm uplifts are within acceptance, being
their maximum values presented on Table 5.9. It is worth mentioning the very low standard
deviation of the contact force for this pair demonstrating in this form its superior contact
quality.
Figure 5.9: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force for the DSA800-R330
pair
55
DSA800-Re330 Steady Arm Uplifts

SA Number
Track length [m]
120.0
171.0
236.0
301.0
366.0
431.0
496.0
Max Uplift [cm]
0.35
0.62
1.55
5.84
6.01
5.92
5.99
SA Number
10
11
12
13
14
Track length [m]
561.0
626.0
691.0
756.0
821.0
886.0
937.0
Max Uplift [cm]
5.99
5.96
5.95
5.97
5.95
1.97
0.16
Table 5.9: Maximum steady arm uplifts registered on the ATR95-C270 pair
In order to make a clear comparison between the dynamic responses of the pantographcatenary pairs, the statistical results are gathered in Figure 5.10. Although all tested pair pass the
European norm for pantograph acceptance it is clear the DSA800-Re330 pair has a better
performance relatively to the other pairs. This can be concluded mainly by the lowest standard
deviation, lower maximum force and higher minimum contact force values of the stated pair.
Figure 5.10: Comparison of the statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force
between pairs
The standard deviation can be a good indicator of the level of wear enforced on the
catenarys contact wire and pantograph collector strip. A lower standard deviation means a
lower contact force variation which results not only in less wear but also guarantees the wear is
spread more evenly, avoiding localized damages on the equipment. Another statistical variable
of significance, that was not looked on until now is the statistical minimum. In spite of this
variable not being included on the norms it as practical importance. The statistical minimum is
defined as the mean contact force minus three times the standard deviations. Its physical
significance on this specific problem can be put into terms of possibility of occurring contact
loss. While in a scenario where there is no contact loss a tendency for its occurrence might
remain being the statistical minimum a good indicator for the eventuality. The DSA800-Re330
pair shows the most comforting results in which the statistical minimum is considered. In spite
of the ATR95-C270 pair having a slightly better performance than the CX-LN2 pairs, both of
56
them show a similar contact quality, although their contact force history along the catenary
show a distinct difference between them.
It is important to defer that the Re330 catenary is of the stich wire type and the LN2 and
C270 are of the simple type, being the deference on their performance clear. The Re330 shows
the best results, however the present trend on catenary construction is to build more of the
simple type. One possible reason for choosing such catenary type is economical, as the stich
catenary, is a more complex structure harder to mount and maintain. Its tolerance requirements
upon construction are much tighter and the maintenance cycles much shorter and more
demanding. This makes the stich wire catenaries much more costly than the simple type. Plus,
the simple type catenaries can still improve their contact quality efficiency on new designs by
adding more tension on the wires and developing better materials for them. Also it is important
to note that the contact quality not only depends on the catenary system but also on the
pantograph model and most importantly on their compatibly to one another. For these reasons it
is then worth concluding that there still is room for improvement on the present catenary
systems designs and their pantograph specific compatibility. A numeric simulation tool, like the
one developed on this work, should then be proven valuable to ease the design process of new
systems and help optimizing their interface.
To extent the comparison between the operating pairs a little further, an analysis on the
dropper action remains of interest. The droppers are designed to support the contact wire.
Ideally they would support it as evenly as possible along the catenary avoiding or reducing the
catenary sag as much as possible. In a general catenary span, the first and last droppers tend to
support more the catenary weight than the others, which is clear by exhibiting a higher tension
stress state then the rest. Figure 5.12 shows, for two droppers on the CX-LN2 pair, the resulting
tension effort applied in the dropper and also its lower node displacement along time. The
chosen droppers are located at the start of the span and at middle span. It is noticeable that the
droppers at rest have a distinct stress state among them exhibiting different tension efforts. As
the pantograph passes under each dropper they change their axial effort and the displacement of
the node that connects to the contact wire is very noticeable. Also evident is the disturbance on
the dropper tension stress state as the pantograph move away. It is interesting to note that in this
catenary system the dropper slacking is sporadic and, when it occurs, it is very residual. On the
other hand, by observing Figure 5.12 similar results are obtained for the ATR95-C270 pair. The
dropper slacking of the first and last droppers on the span is evident and no other dropper
slacking is observed. While at rest it is noticeable the difference on their tension state. This
shows that the contact wire is supported differently on each pair, even though both LN2 and
C270 are catenaries of the simple type. In spite of the noticed differences between catenary pairs
it is very interesting to observe the similarity of the dynamic response of the droppers after the
pantograph passage as they both recuperate in a similar fashion and present similar amplitudes
57
of the wire vibrations. This behaviour is related to their damping, as both catenaries are
modelled with the same Rayleigh damping parameter values.
(a)
(b)
at middle span, (b), registered on the CX-LN2 pair.
(a)
(b)
at middle span, (b), registered on the CX-LN2 pair.
58
By observing the dropper results for the DSA800-Re330 pair in Figure 5.13, a very
distinct difference of their behaviour can be observed. In fact for the considered pantographcatenary pair, all droppers slack regardless of being on the start, end or middle of the span.
Besides slacking, they also present a more aggressive recovery with a very noticeable peak on
their tension effort.
The entire dropper results presented for all catenary allow concluding that the dynamic
response of each catenary and their pantograph pair is different. This can be related to the
several catenary structural differences and involves not only their geometry and material
properties but also their characteristic damping behaviour. The number of droppers in each span
and their specific locations and spacing effect on how the contact wire weight is supported,
which ultimately as impact in the contact quality.
It is also clear that the catenary systems are very complex structures and their dynamic
response can be greatly modified by changing each of the modelling parameters. Furthermore it
is important to note that the contact quality on a catenary cannot be analysed independently of
the specific pantograph model and its dynamic response must always be accounted when
analysing this structures.
(a)
(b)
at middle span, (b), registered on the DSA800-Re330 pair.
59
5.3
Multiple Pantograph Operation

In high- speed railway vehicles a limiting factor on the operational speed is the current
collection as there is the need to operate with multiple pantographs. However, the contact
quality of the pantograph-catenary interaction is perturbed due to the mutual influence of the
leading and trailing pantographs in each other. In this case, the operation of multiple
pantographs in catenaries with low and moderate damping is considered. Different vehicles of
high-speed trains have different lengths and, consequently, the separation distance between
pantographs may change accordingly. The typical separations between pantographs shown in
Figure 5.14 reflect how multiple train units operate and constitute the scenarios to which the
methodologies proposed in this work are applied.
Figure 5.14: Multiple pantograph operations of high-speed trains with typical distances between
pantographs.
Using the data contained in Table 2.3, but allowing the damping factor to be 0.0027 or
0.027, finite element models of a generic simple catenary are obtained, being different views of
their static geometry shown in Figure 2.9. Note that, although the catenary model used is a
generic model of a catenary, the data is realistic. Furthermore, several models of the same
catenary are developed with different proportional damping factors to allow studying the
variation of the pantograph-catenary contact quality in face of the structural energy dissipation
of the catenary. The pantograph chosen to interact with this catenary is the Faiveley CX,
presented on Table 5.1.
In all scenarios, considered here, the pantographs move along the catenary in a tangent
track with a velocity of 300 km/h. In the initial part of the analysis the pantographs are raised
until their bows touch the contact wire. In order to disregard this transient part of the dynamic
response, only the contact forces that develop in the pantograph between 400 and 800 m, and
the droppers and steady arms that exist in this range are used in the analysis of results. Figure
60
5.15 shows the characteristics of the contact forces that develop between the pantographs and
catenaries, with different proportional damping.
300
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
Contact Force [N] (filtered 0-20 Hz)
300
200
150
100
50
0
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
200
150
100
50
0
454
508
562
616
670
454
508
Track Lenght [m]
300
616
670
300
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
250
Contact Force [N] (f iltered 0-20 Hz)
562
Track Lenght [m]
200
150
100
50
0
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
250
200
150
100
50
0
454
508
562
616
670
454
Track Lenght [m]
(a)
508
562
616
670
Track Lenght [m]
(b)
Figure 5.15: Pantograph-catenary contact force for several pantograph separations in catenaries
with different proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275.
The results show that the amplitude of the contact forces in the trailing pantographs is
always larger than what the leading pantographs exhibit, being that difference higher for lightly
damped catenaries. The contact force results, as shown in Figure 5.15, hide some of the
important results of the analysis that are used in design and in homologation of pantographs. In
Figure 5.16 the statistic values of the contact force are overviewed for the different pantograph
separations, running in the two catenaries considered before.
The first important observation of statistical quantities depicted in Figure 5.16 is that the
standard deviation of the contact force for all pantographs, running on the lightly damped
catenary, is always larger than 30% of the mean contact force. These values imply that the trains
using these pantographs would not be allowed to run at a speed of 300 km/h in the catenary
system. However, the pantographs can be used, with the current operational setup, in the
catenary with normal damping. In both cases, the multiple pantograph operation with a
separation of 200 m shows the worst contact force characteristics for the trailing pantograph,
i.e., the trailing pantograph exhibits larger maximum forces, lower minimum forces and larger
standard deviations. None of the pantographs exhibits any contact loss.
61
300
300
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
Contact Force [N]
Contact Force [N]
200
150
100
50
200
150
100
50
0
-50
0
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
300
300
Leading (100 m)
Trailing (100 m)
250
Leading (100 m)
Trailing (100 m)
250
Contact Force [N]
Contact Force [N]
200
150
100
50
200
150
100
50
0
-50
0
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Maximum
Statistical
Minimum
350
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
300
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
300
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
250
Contact Force [N]
Contact Force [N]
250
200
150
100
200
150
100
50
50
0
-50
0
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
(a)
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
(b)
Figure 5.16: Statistical quantities of the pantograph-catenary contact force in catenaries with
different proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275.
Another characteristic of the contact force that is worth being analysed is its histogram.
Figure 5.17 presents the histograms of all pantographs for all separations considered in this
work. The histograms show that for a lightly damped catenary the contact forces not only have
large variations, as observed also in Figure 5.15, but also that the number of occurrences of
contact forces in each range considered is high, i.e., even away from the mean contact force the
existence of higher or lower contact forces is not sporadic. For a catenary with average damping
the contact force magnitude is closer to the mean contact force. In all cases considered, the
mean contact force is always 150 N, which satisfies the regulations.
62
18
30
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
25
14
Relative Frequency [Hz]
16
12
10
8
6
4
20
15
10
5
2
0
0
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
25
50
75
100
Contact Force [N]
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
30
20
Leading (100 m)
Trailing (100 m)
18
Leading (100 m)
Trailing (100 m)
25
16
125
Contact Force [N]
14
12
10
8
6
4
20
15
10
5
2
0
0
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
25
50
75
100
Contact Force [N]

16
150
175
200
225
250
275
300
275
300
30
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
14
Leading (200 m)
Trailing (200 m)
25
12
125
Contact Force [N]
10
8
6
4
20
15
10
5
2
0
0
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
Contact Force [N]
(a)
200
225
250
275
300
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
Contact Force [N]
(b)
Figure 5.17: Histograms of the pantograph-catenary contact force in catenaries with different
proportional damping: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275.
One of the reasons why the contact force characteristics has to stay inside a limited range
concerns the potential interference between the pantograph head and the catenary mechanical
components. The steady-arm uplift, shown in Figure 5.18, and the dropper axial force, depicted
in Figure 5.19, are measures of the catenary performance and of its compatibility with the
running pantographs.
63
0.07
0.05
0.05
Support Uplift [m]
Support Uplift [m]
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.01
-0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.03
0
4
Time [s]
0.07
0.07
0.05
0.05
Support Uplif t [m]
Support Uplif t [m]
0.03
0.03
0.01
-0.01
4
Time [s]
4
Time [s]
0.03
0.01
-0.01
-0.03
-0.03
0
4
Time [s]
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.18: Typical steady-arm uplift in catenaries with different proportional damping for two
90
90
80
80
70
70
Dropper's Ef fort [N]
different separations of pantographs: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275.
60
50
40
30
20
10
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
4
Time [s]
90
90
80
80
70
70
60
60
50
40
30
20
10
4
Time [s]
4
Time [s]
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0
4
Time [s]
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.19: Typical mid-span dropper forces in catenaries with different proportional damping
for two different separations of pantographs: (a) =0.00275; (b) =0.0275.
The steady-arm uplift is lower than 7 cm in all cases depicted in Figure 5.18. Although
not represented, the maximum uplift of all steady arms of the catenary is also lower than the 12
cm limit allowed for the type of catenary used. The droppers exhibit slacking for the lightly
64
damped catenary, as seen for the axial forces shown in Figure 5.19. For the catenary with
average damping, only the passage of the trailing pantograph, when the separation is 200m, has
some slacking. It is interesting to notice that the position of the contact wire of the catenary is
disturbed even before the pantograph bow passes. This is because the traveling wave speed is
higher than the train speed. For lightly damped catenaries this disturbance is higher. For longer
catenary sections, it is expected that the trailing pantograph may affect the contact of the leading
pantograph due to the wave traveling speed of the contact wire.
The mutual influence of the pantographs in each others contact quality is better
understood when displaying the contact force characteristics as shown in Figure 5.20, for the
lightly damped catenary and Figure 5.21, for the average damped one. In both cases the
statistical values of the contact force of a single pantograph operation are also presented to
better understand the problem.
350
350
Leading (Single)
300
Trailing (Single)
300
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
Leading (100 m)
Leading (200 m)
200
150
100
Contact Force [N]
Contact Force [N]
250
50
Trailing (100 m)
Trailing (200 m)
200
150
100
50
-50
-50
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
(a)
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
(b)
Figure 5.20: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force for a catenary with low
damping (=0.00275): (a) Leading pantographs; (b) Trailing pantographs.
350
350
Leading (Single)
300
Trailing (Single)
300
Leading (31 m)
Trailing (31 m)
250
Leading (100 m)
Leading (200 m)
200
150
100
Contact Force [N]
Contact Force [N]
250
Trailing (100 m)
Trailing (200 m)
200
150
100
50
50
0
-50
-50
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
(a)
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
Maximum
Minimum
Amplitude
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Statistical
Minimum
(b)
Figure 5.21: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force for a catenary with average
damping (=0.0275): (a) Leading pantographs; (b) Trailing pantographs.
For a lightly damped catenary the perturbation of the trailing pantograph over the leading
pantograph exist but are low. However, the trailing pantograph contact forces are clearly
affected by the leading pantograph, being the influence enhanced by the decrease of the
catenary damping. The tendency exhibited for the lightly damped catenary is the for a
65
pantograph separation of 31 m the trailing pantograph contact quality suffers, slightly, from the
existence of a trailing pantograph being this influence due to the wave traveling speed in the
contact wire. For a pantograph separation of 200 m the trailing pantograph contact quality is
clearly affected in both lightly and average damped catenaries. The results suggest that the
critical distance between pantographs, at least for the catenary design considered in this work, is
200m. These results are in agreement with the findings of Ikeda who studied the multiple
pantograph operation for the Japanese Shinkansen pantograph-catenary interaction and found
the same critical separation [5]. Thus it is suggested that regardless of the type of construction
of the catenary a critical separation distance between the pantographs exists and that the
distance is close to 200 m.
5.4
Pantograph-Catenary performance with overlap sections

The overlap section of a catenary refers to the spans of a catenary system where two
catenaries sections overlap. The need for overlap sections is due to the fact that the length of the
messenger and contact wires must be finite, in practice not longer than 1.5 Km. This section is
critical since the catenary transition must be as smooth as possible not disturbing the quality of
the current collection and must avoid any loss of contact. The most crucial part of the dynamic
behaviour happens in the transition when the collector strip of the pantograph meets the new
catenary, establishing two contacts on the same strip.
In order to analyse the effect of the overlap section a modelling scenario is built using a
realistic model of the LN2 catenary (TGV Atlantique line). To pair with the catenary the
Faiveley CX pantograph is selected which is modelled as the lumped mass pantograph
represented on Table 5.1.
The method to build a finite element catenary model of two catenary sections with an
overlap section is exactly the same used to build simple section catenaries. The two catenaries
are modelled as independent systems, as they have in practice no physical link between them.
However, they have to be positioned just right so that the overlap positioning stays correctly
modelled. Also it is important to note that the catenary overlapping is not done in the same way
for every type of catenary, i.e., each catenary type has its individual intersecting method. To
have a clear outlook of the LN2 line overlapping arrangement a representation is presented on
Figure 5.22.
For a fair comparison between an overlap and a normal catenary section two intervals of
interest are selected for analysis, each containing ten catenary spans. The intervals of interest are
presented in Table 5.10. In the work it is considered both single pantograph operation and
multiple with the separations of 31, 100, 200 and 400 meters. Note that the simulation with a
400 meter separation can only be accomplished due to the use of a second catenary. Using only
one catenary to analyse this last case would not be accurate since the catenary would not have
66
enough analysable length available after the transient response fading from the initial contact on
the start of the simulation.
Interval of interest
Start [m]
End [m]
Length [m]
Normal section
1242
1778
536
Overlap section
799
1292
493
Table 5.10: Description of the intervals of interest used for each catenary section
Figure 5.22: Schematic of a LN2 overlap section arrangement with projected views
The LN2 catenary main characteristics and modelling data used to build this model are
presented Table 5.11. The resulting catenary mesh with the static deformation already accounted
for is presented on Figure 5.23.
LN2 (TGV Atlantique line)

Catenary height [m]
Number of spans
Span length [m]
Damping
2
Section [mm ]
Mass [kg/m]
Young modulus [GPa]
Tension [N]
Claw with
Claw mass [kg]
Length [m]
Angle w/horiz.
1.4
24-26
21-23
45-54
0.0272

Stagger [m]
Damping
5.08
7-8
6.75
0.40
0
Contact Wire
Messenger Wire
Droppers
Steady Arms
150
1.334
120
20000
dropper
0.195
-
65.5
0.605
84.7
14000
dropper
0.165
-
12
0.11
84.7
1.25-1.075
90
120
1.07
84.7
C.W.
0.200
1.22
-10
Table 5.11: Geometric and material properties of the LN2 catenary (TGV Atlantique line)
67
Figure 5.23: Representation of the finite element model of the LN2 catenary (TGV Atlantique
line) with the static deformation already accounted.
68
Starting with the results of the pantographs passage on the regular section, Figure 5.24
depicts the contact forces developed between the pantographs and the catenary. The results
show that the amplitude of the contact forces in the trailing pantographs is always larger than
those in the leading pantographs. However this effect fades away as the pantograph separation
becomes larger.
pantographs with several separations in a regular catenary section
As seen before, not much more can be inferred from the contact force. To have a more
detailed analysis of these results, as it is required by the European norms, the statistical values
of the contact force are overviewed for the different pantograph separations, in Figure 5.25. The
most important observation of these statistical results is that all pantographs are approved on the
compatibility acceptance norms. Nevertheless, attention must be paid to the trailing pantographs
at the 200 and 400 meter separations were both exhibit the higher contact force maximums and
standard deviations. The pantograph at 200 meter separation is the most critical, for which the
69
standard deviation threshold has just 12% of leftover margin. None of the pantographs have
contact loss neither their uplift on the steady arms is higher than the norm limits.

pantograph and multiple pantographs with several separations in a regular catenary section
In what the contact force results of the pantographs passage on the overlap section are
concerned, Figure 5.26 depicts the contact forces developed between the pantographs and the
catenary. These results show that the amplitude of the contact forces in the trailing pantographs
is always larger than that of the leading pantographs and that this amplitude increase fades away
as the pantograph separation go larger. It is also evident the contact force maximum which
coincides with the pantographs first contact on next catenary section.
70
pantographs with several separations in a catenary overlap section
The statistical analysis of the contact forces developed on the overlap section for a single
pantograph and for multiple pantographs, at several separations, is presented on Figure 5.27.
The results show that all pantographs pass on their acceptance requirements, none of the
pantographs have contact losses and the steady arm uplifts are within acceptable limits.
However, as in the normal section results, the trailing pantograph at 200 meter separation is
even in a more critical point for norm acceptance being its standard deviation threshold not
reached by 5%.
71

pantograph and multiple pantographs with several separations in a catenary overlap section
In order to make a comparison of the contact quality between the overlap section and the
normal section, the results of the contact force characteristics concerning the two sections types
are better understood when presenting the results as shown in Figure 5.28.As stated before, all
simulation possibilities pass under the European norm for pantograph acceptance, although the
results clearly show that the contact quality on the overlap section worsens, as expected due to
the catenary section shift. This degradation of contact is more accentuated for the multiple
pantographs in close proximity where the most critical case is for the leading pantograph at 31
meter distance from the trailing, which shows that the maximum contact force is closest to its
acceptance limit of 350N and also presents the largest standard deviation. As the distance
between pantographs becomes larger this degradation of the maximum contact force is less
accentuated to the point that at 400 meters distance the leading pantograph exhibits contact
force characteristics very close to its trailing counterpart on the normal section. Even the trailing
pantograph on the overlap section has a slightly better contact quality than the trailing
72
pantograph in the normal section. It is also noticeable, when observing the contact force
maximums on Figure 5.28 and the contact forces along the catenary on Figure 5.26, that for
multiple pantographs on an overlap section the critical pantograph is the leading one which
meets the next catenary section first and eases the trailing pantograph entrance by uplifting the
second sections contact wire.
Figure 5.28: Statistical quantities associated to the contact force between an overlap and a
normal section of the catenary system for different pantograph separations.
To study mutual influence between the leading and the trailing pantographs over a normal
and overlap section of the catenary, the statistical data of the contact forces is graphically
rearranged and presented on Figure 5.29 for the normal section and on Figure 5.30 for the
overlap section. In both cases the statistical values of the contact force of a single pantograph
operation are also presented to better understand the problem. In relation to the contact quality
on the normal section, the perturbations of the trailing pantograph over the leading pantograph
exists but are very low except for the pantograph with a 400 meter separation, where a
73
degradation on the contact is noticeable. It is difficult to reason with certainty about the causes
for this degradation. However several points have to be taken into consideration. First it is
important to take into account that the wave propagation due to contact of either or both the
leading and the trailing pantograph with the contact wire can reflect on the catenary ends. Also
it is understandable that this wave propagation is damped by the catenary damping. However
this effect might not be enough to overcome a bigger perturbation imposed on the line as the
trailing pantograph exhibits one of the worst contact qualities with the highest maximum contact
force. On the other hand, the trailing pantograph contact forces are clearly affected by the
leading pantograph. It is observed that the trailing pantograph for separation of 31 and 100
meters have a slightly better contact quality when compared with its leading counterpart or also
to the single pantograph case. However and much more evident is the negative influence on the
contact quality that the leading pantograph has over the trailing at 200 and 400 meter separation.
These results are consistent with the conclusions taken on section 5.3 where a critical distance
between pantographs is suggested.
trailing pantographs on a normal catenary section for different pantograph separations
On the catenary overlap section, where a comparison between the leading and trailing
pantographs can be found on Figure 5.30, it is observed that for the leading pantographs only
the one with a 31 meter separation appears to be influenced by the trailing pantograph. It is
within reason to relate this slight contact quality deterioration of the leading pantograph due to
the mutual influence of the contact wire uplifts caused by both the leading and trailing
pantographs. The uplifts relate the punctual raising of the contact wire on the position of the
pantograph contact. When there are two punctual uplifts close enough, they increase each other
slightly because the contact wire stays more supported. As the pantograph separations becomes
larger, at 100, 200 and 300 meters, the punctual uplifts of both leading and trailing pantographs
do not interfere with each other. At the 31 meter separation their mutual influence results on a
small fading of the contact quality on the leading pantograph if compared to the other partings.
74
trailing pantographs on a catenarys overlap section for different pantograph separations
Until now the contact force developed over the overlap section has been analysed by the sum of
the contact forces that actuate on the pantograph collector strip. When transitioning from one
catenary to another two different contacts occur on the same pantograph, one corresponding to
the contact with the departing catenary section and a second to the contact with the incoming
catenary section. Figure 5.31 presents the contact forces related to each contact made on a
specific pantograph. For simplicity only the results for the leading and trailing pantographs, at
31 meters separation, are shown. However, for all the other pantographs separations the results
are similar. Careful analysis of the presented results show that that while there is never a
complete contact loss for the total of the two contacts developed on the overlap section, the
results register a contact loss and regain of contact on each of the contacts developed on the
departing and incoming catenaries. This event occurs on both leading and trailing pantographs.
To explain this effect it has to be taken into account that the incoming catenary has no imposed
uplift until contact occurs. As the contact on the incoming catenary occurs the contact on the
departing catenary fades until is lost. However, when the incoming catenary gains uplift due to
the new contact its contact wire is raised matching the contact wire of the departing catenary
causing a regain of contact that quickly is loosed again. This occurrence shows the importance
of the uplifts on the catenary transition and it is expected that larger uplifts result on less smooth
line transitions. It is very difficult to validate this numeric result with the presently existent
experimental results. Note that this occurrence takes roughly 0.3 seconds. Limited literature
references are available with overlap section studies. Reference [64] relates that the uplift on the
contact wire has great influence on the dynamic performance of the pantograph in this type of
sections as it has been concluded above with the results of the case study presented here.
75
(a)
(b)
Figure 5.31: Discretized contact forces on the catenary overlap section for the leading (a); and
trailing pantograph (b), with 31 meters separation.
From another stand point the influence of the leading contact over the trailing pantograph
is evident on the results. All the trailing pantographs exhibit a better contact quality with,
especially when comparing the contact force maximums between the leading and trailing
pantographs at each separation. These contact force maximums, which can be observed in
Figure 5.26, relate to the moment where the pantograph meets the incoming catenary. So it is
concluded that, at least for this particular catenary and specifically for this overlap section
arrangement the leading pantograph appears to ease the trailing pantograph entrance one the
incoming catenary having a smoother transition on the overlap section, even smother than a
single pantograph transitioning.
76
Conclusions and Future Development

The development of catenary and pantograph systems that allow their operation with
higher speeds and better overall contact require that the computer tools used in their analysis
include all modeling features relevant to their analysis. A computational approach based on the
co-simulation of linear finite element and general multibody codes is presented and
demonstrated in the framework of the pantograph-catenary interaction. It was shown that the use
of linear finite elements are enough to allow for the correct representation of the catenary
provided that the wire tension forces are accounted for in the stiffness formulation and that the
droppers slacking is properly represented via the force vector. Minimal requirements for the
catenary finite element modelling include the use of Euler-Bernoulli beam elements with axial
tensioning and geometric stress stiffening for the catenary messenger and contact wire with a
discretization enough to capture the deformation wave traveling of the contact wire. The
dynamic equilibrium of the catenary system after each time step is attained with an iterative
scheme in which displacements, velocities and forces are corrected. A minimum number of
iterations must be set to find the correct dropper compensation forces.
It was also shown that the use of multibody dynamics methods allow capturing all of the
important dynamic features of the pantographs. When multibody pantograph models are used,
the co-simulation between the finite element and multibody codes must be ensured. The contact
model between the pantograph collector strip and the catenary contact wire is used to achieve
the co-simulation. Although other procedures exist, the use of a contact penalty formulation
demonstrates to be enough to obtain all main contact features. The correct use of the cosimulation procedure, in which the minimal time step with which the problem can be solved is
controlled by the finite element part, it is the challenging part of putting the dynamic simulation
of these systems. The results of several case studies, presented in this work, demonstrate how all
quantities used to characterize the dynamic response of the system are readily available from the
pantograph and catenary simulation tools.
It was shown that catenary systems are very complex structures and can present a very
different dynamic response among them. This important when evaluating the contact quality
that each catenary provide. However to achieve a better contact quality it is important not to
consider the catenary and the pantograph systems independently as a factor of compatibility
between both systems plays a fundamental role.
The application of the procedures to multiple pantograph operations, in high-speed
railway vehicles, allowed the identification of the important quantities of the dynamic response
that are required for the pantograph homologation and for operational decisions. The catenary
damping plays a fundamental role in the pantograph-catenary contact quality. Catenary low
damping leads to higher maximum contact forces, lower minimum contact forces, eventually to
77
contact losses, and to higher standard deviations of the contact forces. All these characteristics
of the contact force lead to the rejection of the operation of multiple pantograph units at the
required speed of 300 km/h in lightly damped catenaries. It is also concluded, from the results
of the analysis, that for operations in average damped catenaries all standard separations
between the pantographs lead to acceptable contact forces. As a general tendency, it was
observed that for smaller pantograph separations the trailing pantograph affects the quality of
the leading pantograph contact due to the wave travelling speed of the contact wire. For larger
pantograph separations it is the leading pantograph that affects adversely the contact quality of
the trailing pantograph. In any case, all results show that the critical separation between leading
and trailing pantographs is 200 m, i.e., it is at this separation that the leading pantograph has a
greater influence in the contact quality of the trailing pantograph.
The numeric software tool developed here is also able to consider catenary overlap
sections which represent a critical section on the catenary systems. These irregularities in the
system can lead to increased contact force variation and thereby contact loss possibility. It was
possible to identity that the uplift on the contact wire imposed by the pantograph-catenary
contact has a great influence on the quality of the contact. The contact degradation is
particularly noticeable for the leading pantograph in multi pantograph operations when close
separations between pantographs are used. Also, within the same reasoning, it was observed that
the first pantograph passage eases the trailing pantograph transition.
Some identified challenges remain for future considerations. One of the major difficult
when developing the catenary finite element model was to develop a catenary mesh that would
match the real contact wire sag when statically deformed. As catenaries are complex structures
this was not easy to achieve as the intricate flexibility and line tensioning of these types of
structures need to be taken into account. Still, there is a need to develop better methodologies on
this concern, especially when a catenary model is to be built from experimental measures that
the statically deformed shape of the catenary finite element model would have to match with
accuracy.
One other aspect which needs to be the aim of further investigation is the identification of
the catenary damping parameters. It was shown that the catenary damping plays a fundamental
role in the pantograph-catenary contact quality, so its correct modelling is critical. However, it
is recognized that the estimation of the structural damping of not only the catenary but other
structures is still a technological challenge. Rayleigh damping, also known as proportional
damping, was used to model the developed catenary model. It is even possible to apply this
same methodology locally by addressing different damping parameter to each component. Still,
these damping parameters need to be correctly identified either on current operating catenaries
or catenary in design phase. So it is of importance to find methodologies able to identify the
catenary damping on existent catenaries with experimental testing and validation, plus relate
78
these findings to catenaries that are still in project. Furthermore it should also be considered the
damping on the contact law used for the penalty method to model the contact. The parameters of
the contact law used on this work were set to consider the contact as purely elastic which is a
current practice on present software tools that model catenaries. However, as already shown, a
correct modelling of the catenary model is critical and it is possible that the same applies on the
contact modelling. The contact law used on this work, as with many others that can be easily
included on this tool, is able to take into account damping hysteresis but it remains the problem
to identify their damping parameters correctly.
Spatial pantograph models require the use of multibody dynamics procedures to capture
all their dynamic features. In the particular case of using unidirectional lumped mass pantograph
models the equations of the motion of the system can be solved together with the finite element
equilibrium equations. The lumped mass models result from a laboratory identification of the
system that represents the pantograph prototype and it is, by definition, a validated model.
However, a multibody pantograph model made of rigid bodies and perfect kinematic joints does
not have the minimum features to represent correctly the real system. It is a topic of research to
identify the minimum features required for a multibody pantograph model, being the existence
of bushings and clearances in the joints and eventual flexibility of the bow and arms some of the
modeling features that need to be accounted for.
One point that should be taken into future consideration is the aerodynamic effect on the
catenary due to the direct effects of the wind on the overhead contact line and on the pantograph
components plus the indirect effect due to the additional motion of the carbody imparted to the
base of the pantograph. These phenomenons are estimated to have impact on the contact quality
in particularly wind exposed areas. Although the current numerical simulation tool here
developed is able to handle this effects there are not implemented.
79
References
[1]
A. Collina and S. Bruni, "Numerical Simulation of Pantograph-Overhead Equipment

Interaction", Vehicle System Dynamics, 38 (4), 261-291, 2002
[2]
A. W. C. Shing and P. P. L. Wong, "Wear of Pantograph Collector Strips", Journal of Rail

and Mass Transit, 222, 169-176, 2008
[3]
G. Bucca and A. Collina, "A Procedure for the Wear Prediction of Collector Strip and
Contact Wire in Pantograph-Catenary System", Wear, 266 (1-2), 46-59, 2009
[4]
F. Pupke, "Installation of Contact Wire (CW) for High Speed Lines

Recommendations",Oral presentation at IEEE Meeting, January 25, Houston, Texas,
2010
[5]
K. Ikeda, "Optimization of Overhead Contact Lines for Sinkansen Speed Increases", JR

East Technical Review, 12, 6469, 2008
[6]
K. Ikeda, "Development Method for Improving Overhead Line Equipment for

Implementation of Stable Current Collection at High-Speed", JR East Technical Review,
8, 37-40, 2006
[7]
H. Tsukagoshi and N. Hirota, "Development of a New Spring Type Tensioning Device for
Sinkansen", JR East Technical Review, 2, 22-30, 2003
[8]
G. Poetsch, J. Evans, R. Maisinger, W. Kortum, W. Baldauf, A. Veitl and J. Wallaschek,

"Pantograph/Catenary Interaction and Control", Vehicle System Dynamics, 28, 159-195,
1997
[9]
J. P. Mentel, "Technical developments in superstructure", Proc. Communication at

Highspeed 2008: 6th World Congress on High Speed Rail.
[10]
Y. Oura, Y. Mochinaga and H. Nagasawa, "Railway Electric Power Feeding Systems",

Japan Railway & Transport Review, 16, 48-58, 1998
[11]
S. Harada, M. Shimizu, K. Ikeda, J. Sato, S. Koyano and K. Chikanari, "Development of

Simple Catenary Equipment Using PHC Contact Wire for Sinkansen", QR of RTRI, 49
(2), 96-102, 2008
[12]
California High Speed Train Project, "OCS Requirements", Technical Memorandum

TM3.2.1, Sacramento, California, 2010
[13]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, A. Facchinetti, S. Bruni, J.-P. Massat and H. Dupuis, "Key

Parameters for Pantograph/Catenary Numerical Models", PantoTRAIN Technical Report
D1.1, UNIFE, Brussels, Belgium, 2010
[14]
J. Pombo, J. Ambrsio, M. Pereira, F. Rauter, A. Collina and A. Facchinetti, "Influence of

the Aerodynamic Forces on the Pantograph-Catenary System for High Speed Trains",
Vehicle System Dynamics, 47 (11), 1327-1347, 2009
[15]
F. Kiessling, R. Puschmann and A. Schmieder, Contact Lines for Electric Railways, John
Wiley & Sons Inc., Berlin, Germany. 2002
80
[16]
T. Scanlon, M. Stickland and A. Oldroyd, "An Investigation Into the Use of Windbreaks
for the Reduction of Aeroelastic Oscillations of Catenary/Contact Wires in a Cross Wind",
Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 214 (F3), 173-182, 2000
[17]
EUROPAC, "EUROPAC Publishable Final Activity Report", EUROPAC Technical Report,

SNCF, Paris, France, 2008
[18]
A. Collina, A. L. Conte and M. Carnevale, "Effect of Collector Deformable Modes in

Pantograph-Catenary Dynamic Interaction", Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 223 (1), 1-14, 2009
[19]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, J.-P. Massat and L. Christophe, "Pantograph Design Optimisation

Methodology", PantoTRAIN Technical Report D5.1, UNIFE, Brussels, Belgium, 2012
[20]
A. Facchinetti and B. Bruni, "Hardware-in-the-Loop Hybrid Simulation of PantographCatenary Interaction", Journal of Sound and Vibration, DOI:
10.1016/j.jsv.2012.1001.1033, 2012
[21]
A. I. Betts, R. Homes and J. H. Hall, "Defining and Measuring the Quality of Current
Collection on Overhead Electrified Railways", Proc. IEE International Conference on
Electric Railway System for a New Century.
[22]
P. Boffi, G. Cattaneo, L. Amoriello, A. Barberis, G. Bucca, M. F. Bocciolone, A. Collina

and M. Martinelli, "Optical Fiber Sensors to Measure Collector Performance in the
Pantograph-Catenary Interaction", IEEE Sensors Journal, 9 (6), 635 640, 2009
[23]
S.-I. Seo, Y.-H. Cho, J.-Y. Mok, C.-S. Park and K.-H. Kim, "A Study on the Measurment
of Contact Force of Pantograph on High Speed Train", Proc. ICCAS2005.
[24]
EN50317 standard, "Railway applications - Current collection systems - Requirements for

and validation of measurements of the dynamic interaction between pantograph and
overhead contact line", CENELEC European Committee for Electrotechnical
Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2012
[25]
EN50367 standard, "Railway applications - Current collection systems - Technical criteria

for the interaction between pantograph and overhead line", CENELEC European
Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization, Brussels, Belgium, 2006
[26]
F. Rauter, J. Pombo, J. Ambrsio, M. Pereira, A. Bobillot and J. Chalansonnet, "Contact

Model for the Pantograph-Catenary Interaction", JSME International Journal of System
Design and Dynamics, 1 (3), 447-457, 2007
[27]
K. Lee, "Analysis of Dynamic Contact Between Overhead Wire and Pantograph of a

High-Speed Electric Train", Journal of Rail and Mass Transit, 221, 157-166, 2007
[28]
J.-H. Seo, H. Sugiyama and A. A. Shabana, "Three-Dimensional Deformation Analysis of

the Multibody Pantograph/Catenary Systems", Nonlinear Dynamics, 42, 199-215, 2005
[29]
M. Schaub and B. Simeon, "Pantograph-Catenary Dynamics: An Analysis of Models and

Techniques", Mathematical and Computer Modelling of Dynamic Systems: Methods,
Tools and Applications in Engineering and Related Sciences, 7 (2), 225-238, 2001
81
[30]
J.-H. Seo, S.-W. Kim, I.-H. Jung, T.-W. Park, J.-Y. Mok, Y.-G. Kim and J.-B. Chai,
"Dynamic Analysis of a Pantograph-Catenary System Using Absolute Nodal
Coordinates", Vehicle System Dynamics, 44 ( 8), 615-630, 2006
[31]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, F. Rauter and M. Pereira, "A Memory Based Communication in

the Co-Simulation of Multibody and Finite Element Codes for Pantograph-Catenary
Interaction Simulation", Multibody Dynamics, E. Bottasso C.L., ed., Springer, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands, 211-231, 2008
[32]
E. R. R. A. C. European Rail Research Advisory Council, "Strategic Rail Research

Agenda 2020", Brussels, Belgium, 2007
[33]
E. C. European Commission, "White Paper: Roadmap to a Single European Transport

Area - Towards a Competitive and Resource Efficient Transport System", Brussels,
Belgium, 2011
[34]
T. Dahlberg, "Moving force on an axially loaded beam with application to a railway

overhead contact wire", Vehicle System Dynamics, 44 (8), 631-644, 2007
[35]
J. S. Przemieniecki, Theory of matrix structural analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York,. 1967
[36]
K.-J. Bathe, Finite element procedures, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1996
[37]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, A. Facchinetti, S. Bruni and J.-P. Massat, "European catenary

data base", PantoTRAIN Technical Report D3.1, UNIFE, Brussels, Belgium, 2010
[38]
N. Newmark, "A Method of Computation for Structural Dynamics", ASCE Journal of the
Engineering Mechanics Division, 85 (EM 3), 67-94, 1959
[39]
K.-J. r. Bathe, Finite element procedures in engineering analysis, Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1982
[40]
H. L. G. Pina, Mtodos Numricos (Numerical Methods), McGraw-Hill, Lisbon, Portugal.

1995
[41]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, F. Rauter and M. Pereira, "Multiple Pantograph Interaction with

Catenaries in High-Speed Trains", Proc. Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on
Railway Research.
[42]
M. Carnevale, "Innovative Solutions for Improving Pantograph Dynamics and Current

Collection",PhD Thesis, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy. 2011
[43]
P. E. Nikravesh, Computer-Aided Analysis of Mechanical Systems, Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey. 1988
[44]
J. Pombo and J. Ambrsio, "General Spatial Curve Joint for Rail Guided Vehicles:
Kinematics and Dynamics", Multibody Systems Dynamics, 9 (No. 3), pp. 237-264, 2003
[45]
P. Flores, Kinematics and dynamics of multibody systems with imperfect joints : models
and case studies, Springer, Berlin. 2008
[46]
J. Ambrsio and P. Verissimo, "Improved Bushing Models for Vehicle Dynamics,

Multibody System Dynamics", Multibody Systems Dynamics, 22 (4), 341-365, 2009
[47]
J. Ambrsio, F. Rauter, J. Pombo and M. Pereira, "A Flexible Multibody Pantograph

Model for the Analysis of the Catenary-Pantograph Contact", Multibody Dynamics:
82
Computational Methods and Applications, Arczewski et al., (Ed.), ed., Springer,

Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1-27, 2010
[48]
N. Zhou and W. Zhang, "Investigation of the Influence of the Pan-Head Elasticity on

Pantograph-Catenary Dynamic Performance", Proc. In Proceedings for the 21st
Symposium on Dynamics of Vehicles on Roads and Tracks.
[49]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, A. Facchinetti, S. Bruni and J.-P. Massat, "Validation

requirements for pantograph / catenary simulation tools", PantoTRAIN Technical Report
D1.3, UNIFE, Brussels, Belgium, 2010
[50]
C. P. Vyasarayani, T. Uchida, A. Carvalho and J. McPhee, "Parameter identification in

dynamic systems using the homotopy optimization approach", Multibody Syst Dyn, 26 (4),
411-424, 2011
[51]
C. Pereira, A. Ramalho and J. Ambrsio, "A Critical Overview of Internal and External
Cylinder Contact Force Models", Nonlinear Dynamics, 63 (No. 4), 681-697, 2011
[52]
G. T. Theodore and K. Khozeimen, "Computer Analysis of Rigid Frames", Computers

and Structures, 1, 193-221, 1971
[53]
H. M. Lankarani and P. E. Nikravesh, "Continuous Contact Force Models for Impact

Analysis in Multibody Systems", Nonlinear Dynamics, 5, 193-207, 1994
[54]
K. Lee, "A Short Note for Numerical Analysis of Dynamic Contact Considering Impact
and a Very Stiff Spring-Damper Constraint on the Contact Point", Multibody Systems
Dynamics, 26 (4), 425-439, 2011
[55]
P. Flores, M. Machado, M. T. Silva and J. M. Martins, "On the Continuous Contact Force
Models for Soft Materials in Multibody Dynamics", Multibody Systems Dynamics, 25 (3),
357-375, 2011
[56]
S. Djerassi, "Three-Dimensional, One Point Collision with Friction", Multibody Systems

Dynamics, 22 ( 2), 173-195, 2012
[57]
MathWorks, "Memory-Mapping Data Files",

http://www.mathworks.com/help/techdoc/import_export/braidws-1.html.
[58]
MathWorks, "Calling MATLAB Engine from C/C++ and Fortran Programs",

http://www.mathworks.com/help/techdoc/matlab_external/f38569.html.
[59]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, M. Pereira, P. Antunes and A. Msca, "Recent Developments in

Pantograph-Catenary Interaction Modelling and Analysis", International Journal of
Railway Technology, 1 (1), 249-278, 2012
[60]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, M. Pereira, P. Antunes and A. Msca, "A Computational

Procedure for the Dynamic Analysis of the Catenary-Pantograph Interaction in HighSpeed Trains", Journal of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics, 50 (3), 681-699, 2012
[61]
J. Ambrsio, J. Pombo, M. Pereira, P. Antunes and A. Msca, "Optimization of HighSpeed Railway Pantographs for Improved Pantograph-Catenary Contact", Proc.
Proceedings of the 6th Asian Conference on Multibody Dynamics (ACMD 2012).
83
[62]
J. Pombo, P. Antunes and J. Ambrsio "A Study on Multiple Pantograph Operations for
High-Speed Catenary Contact", Proc. Proceedings of the Eleventh International
Conference on Computational Structures Technology.
[63]
P. Antunes, A. Msca, J. Ambrsio , J. Pombo and M. Pereira, "Development of a

Computational Tool for the Dynamic Analysis of the Pantograph-Catenary Interaction for
High-Speed Trains", Proc. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on
Computational Structures Technology.
[64]
P. Hare`ll, L. Drugge and M. Reijm, "Study of Critical Sections in Catenary Systems

During Multiple Pantograph Operation", Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, 219 (4), 203211, 2005
84

2012 MScThesis PAntunes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2012 MScThesis PAntunes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Development of Multibody Pantograph and Finite

Element Catenary Models for Application to High-speed

Pedro Cabao Antunes

Prof. Lus Manuel Varejo de Oliveira Faria

Prof. Jorge Alberto Cadete Ambrsio

Prof. Joo Carlos Eli de Jesus Pombo

Member of the Committee:

Prof. Manuel Frederico Oom de Seabra Pereira

Dynamic Analysis of Catenaries Using Linear FEM ........................................ 16

FEM Catenary Models ...................................................................................... 19

Time integration method ................................................................................... 24

3 General Pantograph Dynamic Analysis and Modelling ......................................................... 27

Geometric Conditions for Contact .................................................................... 36

Continuous Contact Force Model ..................................................................... 38

4.2 Co-Simulation of Multibody and Finite Elements ........................................................ 39

Co-Simulation Procedure .................................................................................. 39

Communication Protocol .................................................................................. 41

Data Exchange Methodology ............................................................................ 42

5 Applications to Overhead Current Collecting Systems.......................................................... 45

Standard deviation (max)

Maximum contact force(Fmax)

Maximum CW uplift at steady-arm (dup)

Maximum pantograph vertical amplitude(z)

Percentage of real arcing (NQ)

[19, 26] with no limitations on how contact may develop but

Catenary Dynamic Analysis and Modelling

Figure 2.2: Representation of the functional elements of the catenary geometry

Characteristics of Current High-Speed Catenaries

Figure 2.6: Japanese compound catenary for the Shinkansen lines.

The Finite Element Method on the Pantograph-Catenary System

Dynamic Analysis of Catenaries Using Linear FEM

in the global force vector. The

FEM Catenary Models

Euler Bernoulli Beam

Euler Bernoulli Beam

Euler Bernoulli Beam

Euler Bernoulli Beam

Euler Bernoulli Beam

Contact wire height [m]

Table 2.3: Geometric and material properties of a generic simple catenary

Figure 2.10: Representation of the constraints applied on a general catenary model

Lumped Mass Pantograph Dynamic Analysis in Finite Elements Application

Figure 2.11: Representation of the pantograph lumped mass model

being the following restriction used as a boundary condition.

K 2 K1 y1 m1 g K 2 l02 K1 (l01 y0 ) Fstatic

pantograph dynamic equilibrium equation: Mpat

catenary dynamic equilibrium equation:

Time integration method

t t . In order to be accurately close to this prediction, the approximation of the displacements

good enough convergence is reached where, dt t d t t d and v t t v t t d , being d and

ft +t ft +t M a0 dt a2 v t a3at C a1d t a4 v t a5at

General Pantograph Dynamic Analysis and Modelling

Characteristics of High-Speed Pantographs

Multibody Dynamic Analysis of Pantographs

applied forces describing gravitational, contact/impact or other forces. A wide variety of

Figure 3.1: Generic multibody system.

Multibody Pantograph Models

A pantograph consists of a collection of bodies and mechanical elements, as depicted in Figure

Initial Position [m]

Table 3.1: Rigid body data of the pantograph multibody model

Attachment Points Local Coordinates [m]

Table 3.2: Kinematic joints used in the pantograph multibody model

Attach Pts Local Coord [m]