Carbody tilting is today a mature and inexpensive technology that allows higher train speeds in horizontal curves, thus shortening travel time. This doctoral thesis considers several subjects important for improving the competitiveness of tilting trains compared to non-tilting ones. A technology review is provided as an introduction to tilting trains and the thesis then focuses on enhancing the benefits and strategies for less motion sickness. A tilting train may run about 15% faster in curves than a non-tilting one but the corresponding simulated running time benefit on two Swedish lines is about 10%. The main reason for the difference is that speeds are set on other grounds than cant deficiency at straight track, stations, bridges, etc. The possibility to further enhance tilting trains’ running speed is studied under identified speed limitations due to vehicle-track interaction such as crosswind requirements at high speed curving. About 9% running time may be gained on the Stockholm–Gothenburg (457 km) mainline in Sweden if cant deficiency, top speed, and tractive performance are improved compared with existing tilting trains. Non-tilting high-speed trains are not an option on this line due to the large number of 1,000 m curves. Tilting trains run a greater risk of causing motion sickness than non-tilting trains. Roll velocity and vertical acceleration are the two motion components that show the largest increase, but the amplitudes are lower than those used in laboratory tests that caused motion sickness. Scientists have tried to find models that can describe motion sickness based on one or more motion quantities. The vertical acceleration model shows the highest correlation to motion sickness on trains with active tilt. However, vertical acceleration has a strong correlation to several other motions, which precludes vertical acceleration being pointed out as the principal cause of motion sickness in tilting trains. Further enhanced speeds tend to increase carbody motions even more, which may result in a higher risk of motion sickness. However, means to counteract the increased risk of motion sickness are identified in the present work that can be combined for best effect. Improved tilt control can prevent unnecessary fluctuations in motion sickness related quantities perceived by the passengers. The improved tilt control can also manage the new proposed tilt algorithms for less risk of motion sickness, which constitute one of the main achievements in the present study. Local speed restrictions are another means of avoiding increased peak levels of motion sickness when increasing the overall speed. The improved tilt control and the proposed tilt algorithms have proven to be effective in on-track tests involving more than 100 test subjects. The new tilt algorithms gave carbody motions closer to non-tilting trains. Rather unexpectedly, however, the test case with the largest decrease in tilt gave a greater risk of motion sickness than the two test cases with less reduction in tilt. It is likely that even better results can be achieved by further optimization of the tilt algorithms; the non-linear relation between motions and motion sickness is of particular interest for further study. / QC 20110429

<p>Carbody tilting is today a mature and inexpensive technology allowing higher speeds in curves and thus reduced travel time. The technology is accepted by most train operators, but a limited set of issues still holding back the full potential of tilting trains. The present study identifies and report on these issues in the first of two parts in this thesis. The second part is dedicated to analysis of some of the identified issues. The first part contains Chapters 2 to 5 and the second Chapters 6 to 12 where also the conclusions of the present study are given.</p><p>Chapters 2 and 3 are related to the tilting train and the interaction between track and vehicle. Cross-wind stability is identified as critical for high-speed tilting trains. Limitation of the permissible speed in curves at high speed may be needed, reducing the benefit of tilting trains at very high speed. Track shift forces can also be safety critical for tilting vehicles at high speed. An improved track standard must be considered for high speed curving.</p><p>Chapters 4 and 5 cover motion sickness knowledge, which may be important for the competitiveness of tilting trains. However, reduced risk of motion sickness may be contradictory to comfort in a traditional sense, one aspect can not be considered without also considering the other. One pure motion is not the likely cause to the motion sickness experienced in motion trains. A combination of motions is much more provocative and much more likely the cause. It is also likely that head rotations contribute as these may be performed at much higher motion amplitudes than performed by the train.</p><p>Chapter 6 deals with services suitable for tilting trains. An analysis shows relations between cant deficiency, top speed, tractive performance and running times for a tilting train. About 9% running time may be gained on the Swedish line Stockholm – Gothenburg (457 km) if cant deficiency, top speed and tractive performance are improved compared with existing tilting trains. One interesting conclusion is that a non-tilting very high-speed train (280 km/h) will have longer running times than a tilting train with today’s maximum speed and tractive power. This statement is independent of top speed and tractive power of the non-tilting vehicle.</p><p>Chapters 7 to 9 describe motion sickness tests made on-track within the EU-funded research project<i> Fast And Comfortable Trains (FACT).</i> An analysis is made showing correlation between vertical acceleration and motion sickness. However, vertical acceleration could not be pointed out as the cause to motion sickness as the correlation between vertical acceleration and several other motions are strong.</p><p>Chapter 10 reports on design of track geometry. Guidelines for design of track cant are given optimising the counteracting requirements on comfort in non-tilting trains and risk of motion sickness in tilting trains. The guidelines are finally compared with the applied track cant on the Swedish line Stockholm – Gothenburg. Also transition curves and vertical track geometry are shortly discussed.</p><p>Chapters 11 and 12 discusses the analysis, draws conclusions on the findings and gives proposals of further research within the present area.</p>

Carbody tilting is today a mature and inexpensive technology allowing higher speeds in curves and thus reduced travel time. The technology is accepted by most train operators, but a limited set of issues still holding back the full potential of tilting trains. The present study identifies and report on these issues in the first of two parts in this thesis. The second part is dedicated to analysis of some of the identified issues. The first part contains Chapters 2 to 5 and the second Chapters 6 to 12 where also the conclusions of the present study are given. Chapters 2 and 3 are related to the tilting train and the interaction between track and vehicle. Cross-wind stability is identified as critical for high-speed tilting trains. Limitation of the permissible speed in curves at high speed may be needed, reducing the benefit of tilting trains at very high speed. Track shift forces can also be safety critical for tilting vehicles at high speed. An improved track standard must be considered for high speed curving. Chapters 4 and 5 cover motion sickness knowledge, which may be important for the competitiveness of tilting trains. However, reduced risk of motion sickness may be contradictory to comfort in a traditional sense, one aspect can not be considered without also considering the other. One pure motion is not the likely cause to the motion sickness experienced in motion trains. A combination of motions is much more provocative and much more likely the cause. It is also likely that head rotations contribute as these may be performed at much higher motion amplitudes than performed by the train. Chapter 6 deals with services suitable for tilting trains. An analysis shows relations between cant deficiency, top speed, tractive performance and running times for a tilting train. About 9% running time may be gained on the Swedish line Stockholm – Gothenburg (457 km) if cant deficiency, top speed and tractive performance are improved compared with existing tilting trains. One interesting conclusion is that a non-tilting very high-speed train (280 km/h) will have longer running times than a tilting train with today’s maximum speed and tractive power. This statement is independent of top speed and tractive power of the non-tilting vehicle. Chapters 7 to 9 describe motion sickness tests made on-track within the EU-funded research project Fast And Comfortable Trains (FACT). An analysis is made showing correlation between vertical acceleration and motion sickness. However, vertical acceleration could not be pointed out as the cause to motion sickness as the correlation between vertical acceleration and several other motions are strong. Chapter 10 reports on design of track geometry. Guidelines for design of track cant are given optimising the counteracting requirements on comfort in non-tilting trains and risk of motion sickness in tilting trains. The guidelines are finally compared with the applied track cant on the Swedish line Stockholm – Gothenburg. Also transition curves and vertical track geometry are shortly discussed. Chapters 11 and 12 discusses the analysis, draws conclusions on the findings and gives proposals of further research within the present area. / QC 20101119