Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
High-speed maglev trains operating on flexible guideway bridges are sensitive to localized track steps and pier settlements, which can drive the electromagnetic system into saturation and amplify coupled train-guideway vibration. This study develops an integrated framework combining a saturation-corrected electromagnetic-force model, fuzzy neural-network adaptive backstepping control (FNN-ABSC), and coupled structural-response analysis. The force model is calibrated using COMSOL results and validated against published experimental measurements; errors remain within 6% and decrease to below 3% in the saturated range. The FNN-ABSC uses gap-error and gap-rate information to preserve levitation-gap tracking while suppressing rapid transients. Relative to Fuzzy-ABSC, it reduces settling and rise times by approximately 32.4% and 21.2%, respectively, with zero steady-state error and no overshoot. In the coupled model, identical controller instances share the network architecture and initial parameters but adapt independently online using local signals. The measured track-irregularity profile is supplemented with localized deterministic track steps and pier-settlement defects. Track steps introduce broadband transient excitation and strongly amplify local electromagnet, levitation-frame, and guideway accelerations, whereas the smoother long-wavelength settlement excites comparatively stronger low-frequency carbody bounce/pitch response. Under the measured baseline irregularity, guideway mid-span acceleration increases from 0.15 m/s 2 at 120 km/h to 0.95 m/s 2 at 600 km/h. For the studied configuration at 600 km/h and the adopted 5-15 mm absolute safety band, the conservative tolerable track-step and pier-settlement amplitudes are approximately 4 mm and 18 mm, respectively.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: