Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Increasing train speeds exacerbate aeroelastic issues in the pantograph–catenary system, significantly compromising current collection quality. During high-speed operation, complex spatial train excitations and high-speed airflows intensify system vibrations, threatening contact stability and structural integrity. To investigate aeroelastic mechanisms under train dynamic responses, a bidirectional fluid–structure interaction (FSI) model was developed using ANSYS Workbench. The SST k–ω turbulence model and Newton–Raphson method solved the flow field and nonlinear structural responses, while implicit iteration and node-level data transmission were employed to enable bidirectional data exchange between the fluid and structural solvers. FSI simulations were conducted under three distinct train dynamic boundaries: train fixed (TF), train vibration (TV), and train tilt (TT). Results indicate that complex train responses severely deteriorate the pantograph service state. The 15-Hz forced train vibration intensifies aerodynamic load fluctuations and concentrates structural vibration energy in the low-frequency band, weakening contact stability; however, its impact on the stress distribution of key components remains limited. Conversely, the nonlinear alternating aerodynamic loads induced by train tilt, deeply coupled with contact point offset and lateral loads, drive the contact vibrations to exhibit wideband and high-amplitude characteristics. This coupling severely deteriorates the loading state at geometric transitions, such as the L-shaped bracket of the pan-head, and significantly amplifies structural stress.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: