💁🏻♀️ Click to watch Webinar
-Oct-16-2023-12-04-44-8817-AM.png?width=770&height=433&name=MEN%20PPT%20Template%20%20(3)-Oct-16-2023-12-04-44-8817-AM.png)
Exploring RSI Analysis Methods in North America
Ying Tan and John Lobo from HDR examined current rail-structure interaction (RSI) analysis methods and acceptance criteria prescribed by various transit agencies and national guidelines in the United States and Canada. They compared these approaches to European code standards, highlighting key differences and similarities.
Numerical Analysis of Simplified Structures
The researchers conducted a numerical analysis comparing results from two different methods applied to a simplified structure. This comparison revealed crucial insights into the relationship between analysis methods and design philosophies.
Key Findings
- Analysis methods are deeply intertwined with design philosophy and acceptance criteria
- Acceptance criteria must be chosen strictly based on the adopted analysis methods
- Inconsistent guidelines among North American transit agencies can lead to overly conservative structure designs
Challenges in Current North American RSI Guidelines
Many transit agencies in the United States and Canada provide:
- Inadequate guidelines for performing rail-structure interaction analysis
- A mix of requirements from European and North American methods
These inconsistencies can result in overly conservative structure designs, potentially increasing costs and complexity.
Call for Unified National Guidelines
The study highlights the need for clear national guidelines in North America that:
- Prescribe standardized methods of analysis
- Provide corresponding acceptance criteria
- Address gaps in current methodologies
