EN 50318:2018

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-september-2019
Nadomešča:
SIST EN 50318:2003
Železniške naprave - Sistemi tokovnega odjema - Veljavnost simuliranja
medsebojnih dinamičnih vplivov med tokovnim odjemnikom in kontaktnim
vodnikom
Railway applications - Current collection systems - Validation of simulation of the
dynamic interaction between pantograph and overhead contact line
Bahnanwendungen - Stromabnahmesysteme - Validierung von Simulationssystemen für
das dynamische Zusammenwirken zwischen Dachstromabnehmer und Oberleitung
Applications ferroviaires - Systèmes de captage de courant - Validation des simulations
de l'interaction dynamique entre le pantographe et la caténaire
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: EN 50318:2018
ICS:
29.280 Električna vlečna oprema Electric traction equipment
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

EUROPEAN STANDARD EN 50318
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM
December 2018
ICS 29.280 Supersedes EN 50318:2002
English Version
Railway applications - Current collection systems - Validation of
simulation of the dynamic interaction between pantograph and
overhead contact line
Applications ferroviaires - Systèmes de captage de courant Bahnanwendungen - Stromabnahmesysteme - Validierung
- Validation des simulations de l'interaction dynamique von Simulationssystemen für das dynamische
entre le pantographe et la caténaire Zusammenwirken zwischen Dachstromabnehmer und
Oberleitung
This European Standard was approved by CENELEC on 2018-06-07. CENELEC members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC
Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration.
Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national standards may be obtained on application to the CEN-CENELEC
Management Centre or to any CENELEC member.
This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation
under the responsibility of a CENELEC member into its own language and notified to the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre has the
same status as the official versions.
CENELEC members are the national electrotechnical committees of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization
Comité Européen de Normalisation Electrotechnique
Europäisches Komitee für Elektrotechnische Normung
CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Rue de la Science 23, B-1040 Brussels
© 2018 CENELEC All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CENELEC Members.
Ref. No. EN 50318:2018 E
Contents Page
European foreword . 4
1 Scope . 5
2 Normative references . 5
3 Terms and definitions . 5
4 Symbols and abbreviations . 8
5 General . 9
5.1 Typical application . 9
5.2 Overview of the validation process . 9
6 Modelling of the pantograph . 12
6.1 General requirements . 12
6.2 Input data requirements . 12
6.2.1 General . 12
6.2.2 Mass – spring – damper – models (lumped parameter models) . 13
6.2.3 Multi-body models . 13
6.2.4 Transfer function models . 13
6.2.5 Hardware in the loop . 13
6.3 Validation of pantograph models . 13
7 Modelling of the overhead contact line . 15
7.1 General requirements . 15
7.2 Data requirements . 15
7.3 Static check of overhead contact line model . 16
8 Parameters of simulation . 16
9 Output . 17
9.1 General . 17
9.2 Contact force . 17
9.3 Contact wire displacement . 18
9.4 Pantograph displacement . 18
10 Validation with measured values . 18
10.1 General . 18
10.2 Comparison values . 18
10.3 Limits of validation . 19
10.3.1 Application of simulation method to other conditions . 19
10.3.2 Deviations of pantograph characteristics . 19
10.3.3 Deviations of overhead contact line parameters . 19
10.3.4 Deviations of the simulation parameters . 19
11 Reference model . 20
11.1 Purpose of reference model . 20
11.2 Reference model data . 20
11.3 Parameters of simulation . 20
11.4 Reference model results . 21
Annex A (normative) Reference model specification . 22
A.1 General . 22
A.2 Overhead contact line data . 22
A.2.1 General data . 22
A.2.2 Special data for the contact line reference model - AC - Simple . 24
A.2.3 Special data for the reference model of contact line AC - Stitched . 25
A.2.4 Special data for the reference model of contact line DC - simple . 26
A.3 Pantograph data . 27
A.4 Results of simulations for reference models . 28
Annex B (normative) Model specifications and measurement results for validation . 31
B.1 Measurement results of simple AC high speed contact line . 31
B.1.1 Simulation data for overhead contact line model . 31
B.1.2 Pantograph model . 40
B.1.3 Measured data of dynamic interaction for validation . 40
B.2 Measurement results of a stitched AC high speed contact line . 41
B.2.1 General . 41
B.2.2 Simulation data for overhead contact line model . 41
B.2.3 Pantograph data . 55
B.2.4 Calculated and measured data of OCL-rest position for validation . 56
B.2.5 Measuring data of dynamic interaction for validation . 56
B.3 Measurement results of simple DC high speed contact line . 57
B.3.1 General . 57
B.3.2 Simulation data for overhead contact line model . 57
B.3.3 Pantograph data . 80
B.3.4 Measured data of dynamic interaction for validation . 81
Annex C (informative) Relation to TSI assessment process . 82
Annex ZA (informative) Relationship between this European standard and the essential
requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC [2008 OJ L191] aimed to be covered . 85
Bibliography . 87

European foreword
This document (EN 50318:2018) has been prepared by CLC/SC 9XC "Electric supply and earthing systems
for public transport equipment and ancillary apparatus (Fixed installations)" of CLC/TC 9X “Electrical and
electronic applications for railways”.
The following dates are fixed:
• latest date by which this document has (dop) 2019-12-07
to be implemented at national level by
publication of an identical national
standard or by endorsement
• latest date by which the national (dow) 2021-12-07
standards conflicting with this document
have to be withdrawn
This document supersedes EN 50318:2002.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CENELEC shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
— additional definitions for new used terms are included (Clause 3);
— the validation process is improved (Clause 5);
— a validation process for pantograph models is included (Clause 6);
— data requirements for overhead contact line modelling are improved (7.2);
— requirements for static checks for the overhead contact line are included (7.3);
— mathematical parameters to describe deviation from Gaussian distribution added to the required output
(Clause 9);
— the validation with measured values is improved (Clause 10);
— measured data from line tests are included for three main types of overhead contact lines in Annex B,
permitting a validation for standard systems without additional measurement;
— reference models are extended to different types of contact lines (Clause 11 and Annex A) for easy
check of simulations before validation.
This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CENELEC by the European Commission and
the European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive(s).
For the relationship with EU Directive 2008/57/EC see informative Annex ZZ, which is an integral part of
this document.
Annexes designated “normative” are part of the body of the standard. In this standard, Annex A and
Annex B are normative.
1 Scope
Simulation techniques are used to assess the dynamic interaction between overhead contact lines and
pantographs, as part of the prediction of current collection quality. This document specifies functional
requirements for the validation of such simulation methods to ensure confidence in, and mutual acceptance
of the results of the simulations.
This document deals with:
– input and output parameters of the simulation;
– comparison with line test measurements, and the characteristics of those line tests;
– validation of pantograph models;
– comparison between different simulation methods;
– limits of application of validated methods to assessments of pantographs and overhead contact lines.
This document applies to the current collection from an overhead contact line by pantographs mounted on
railway vehicles. It does not apply to trolley bus systems.
2 Normative references
The following documents are referred to in the text in such a way that some or all of their content constitutes
requirements of this document. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
EN 50119:2009, Railway applications — Fixed installations — Electric traction overhead contact lines
EN 50206-1:2010, Railway applications — Rolling stock — Pantographs: Characteristics and tests —
Part 1: Pantographs for main line vehicles
EN 50317:2012, Railway applications —Current collection systems — Requirements for and validation of
measurements of the dynamic interaction between pantograph and overhead contact line
EN 50367:2012, Railway applications — Current collection systems — Technical criteria for the interaction
between pantograph and overhead line (to achieve free access)
3 Terms and definitions
For the purpose of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
ISO and IEC maintain terminological databases for use in standardization at the following addresses:
• IEC Electropedia: available at http://www.electropedia.org/
• ISO Online browsing platform: available at http://www.iso.org/obp
NOTE Further definitions from the Normative References can be used.
3.1
contact point
location of mechanical contact between a pantograph contact strip and a contact wire
3.2
contact force
vertical force applied by a pantograph to the contact wire(s)
Note 1 to entry: The contact force is the sum of the forces of all contact points of a pantograph.
3.3
static contact force
vertical force exerted upward by the collector head on the overhead contact line system at standstill
[SOURCE: EN 50206-1:2010, 3.3.5]
3.4
aerodynamic force
vertical force applied to the pantograph as a result of air flow around the pantograph components
3.5
mean contact force
statistical mean value of the contact force
[SOURCE: EN 50317:2012, 3.5]
3.6
standard deviation
square root of the sum of the squared sample variance divided by the number of output values minus 1
3.7
skewness
parameter that quantifies the symmetry of the shape of a data distribution
FF−
( )
m
∑
n
(1)
sk =

FF−
( )

m
∑

n


3.8
excess of kurtosis
parameter that quantifies whether the shape of the data distribution matches the Gaussian distribution
FF−
( )
m
∑
n
ek − 3
(2)

FF−
( )

m
∑

n


3.9
minimum of contact force
minimum value of the contact force while the pantograph passes over the analysis section
=
3.10
maximum of contact force
maximum value of the contact force while the pantograph passes over the analysis section
3.11
loss of contact
physical separation of the collector head from the contact wire
Note 1 to entry: In simulation this condition occurs when the contact force is zero or less.
3.12
simulation method
numerical method that uses a fixed set of input parameters describing a system (e.g. pantograph/overhead
contact line system) to calculate a set of output values representative of the dynamic behaviour of this
system
3.13
pantograph model
mathematical model in a one- or more-dimensional geometry describing the dynamic characteristics of the
pantograph
3.14
mass – spring – damper – model
lumped parameter model
method representing a dynamic mechanical system (e.g. pantograph) as a series of discrete concentrated
masses connected together by spring and damper elements
3.15
transfer function
ratio of an applied input to the response of the pantograph, depending on frequency
3.16
apparent mass
transfer function describing the relation between applied contact force and resulting acceleration at the
contact point for the frequency range of interest
3.17
hardware in the loop
hybrid simulation/test rig measuring method, where a real pantograph responds interacting with a
simulation model of the overhead contact line
3.18
multi-body model
method representing a dynamic mechanical system (e.g. pantograph) based on interconnected rigid or
flexible bodies
3.19
collector head
part of the pantograph supported by the frame, which includes contact strips, horns and can include a
suspension
3.20
overhead contact line model
mathematical model in a two- or three-dimensional geometry describing the characteristics of an overhead
contact line for interaction with pantographs
3.21
wave propagation speed of the contact wire
speed of a transversal wave, which runs along the contact wire
3.22
maximum uplift at the support
maximum value of the vertical uplift of the contact wire at a support
3.23
analysis section
subset of the total overhead contact line model length over which the simulation will be evaluated
3.24
frequency range of interest
frequency range within which the dynamic performance of the overhead contact line – pantograph system
is considered
Note 1 to entry: For validation with measurements this range correlates with the frequency range defined in
EN 50317.
3.25
dynamic interaction
behaviour between pantograph(s) and overhead contact line in contact, described by contact forces and
vertical displacements of contact point(s)
3.26
frequency band analysis
analysis inside a frequency range of interest using subranges of frequencies to study special topics
3.27
elasticity of overhead contact line
uplift divided by the force applied to the contact wire in a static state
3.28
range of vertical position of the point of contact
difference between maximum and minimum dynamic height of the contact point, relative to the track, during
dynamic interaction between the pantograph and the contact wire
4 Symbols and abbreviations
For the purpose of this document, the following symbols and abbreviations apply.
Abbreviations:
AW auxiliary wire
CT centre of the track
CW contact wire
CWH contact wire height
HIL hardware in the loop
MT type of support
MW messenger wire
Mxx support or mast number
OCL overhead contact line
SDx number of dropper to stitch wire
STx span type number as reference to Figure Span number
SW stitch wire
Symbols:
a measured vertical acceleration at the contact point
cp,meas
a simulated vertical acceleration at the contact point
cp,model
C structural damping matrix
s
c damping of element n
n
Dx dropper number
E modulus of elasticity
e elasticity of contact line
ek excess of kurtosis of contact force
F contact force
F measured vertical force applied at the contact point
applied,meas
F simulated vertical force applied at the contact point
applied,model
f actual frequency
i
Fm mean contact force
f maximum frequency
n
Fsa lateral force at steady arm
f minimum frequency
K stiffness matrix
k stiffness of element n
n
Ldr dropper length
Lx dropperlength (for CW no. x)
dr
Lsa length of steady arm
M mass matrix
m measured apparent mass
app,meas
m apparent mass of the model
app,model
mn mass of element n
Q accuracy of the pantograph simulation model
sk skewness of contact force
X distance between left mast and dropper no. x
α, β proportional damping coefficients
σ standard deviation of contact force
5 General
5.1 Typical application
One of the purposes of the application of this standard is to inform the process for seeking authorization for
an OCL or pantograph design. In Annex C, Figure C.1 shows the route through to assessment of an OCL
system in accordance with the ENE TSI [1], and Figure C.2 the assessment of a pantograph in accordance
with the LOC & PAS TSI [2], for European Interoperability.
NOTE Other applications, not related to TSI authorizations (e.g. research, technical development, etc), may
require a different process.
5.2 Overview of the validation process
The theoretical study of the dynamic interaction between pantograph and overhead contact line by
computer simulation makes it possible to obtain much information about the system and to minimize the
costs of line tests.
In order to be used with confidence the simulation method shall be validated. The validation for a simulation
method shall be done in a process described in Figure 1.
A simulation method validated according to this standard, shall be considered for application to overhead
contact line/pantograph combinations and conditions only within the limits of validity defined in 10.3.
A new validation shall be made when the conditions to apply simulation are outside the limitations defined
in 10.3 for existing validations.
The validation for a simulation method shall be done with the steps which are shown in Figure 1. The steps
are:
1) A first validation step shall be done by a “desktop assessment” in accordance to Clause 11. The most
relevant reference model data shall be chosen from the reference models in Annex A for the conditions
for which validation is required.
NOTE This desktop assessment will improve the confidence in the simulation method. As Annex A cannot cover
all possible solutions and combinations a choice from this subset is necessary.
For validation of simulation methods implemented for new technologies in ways that are totally different
from the current state of the art, and which are not able to use models with the data according to
Annex A, the “desktop assessment” may be omitted.
2) The final assessment shall be done by a “Line Test Data Validation” based on test results according
to 10.1 to demonstrate the accuracy of simulation according to 10.2.
Annex B provides data sets from line test measurements in accordance with EN 50317 to allow for a
validation for a given model within the limitations according to 10.3.
If the accuracy according to either 10.2 or to 11.4 cannot be achieved then the simulation method shall be
improved according to 6.3 for pantograph model adjustments and according to 7.3 for contact line model
before revalidation.
Figure 1 — Evaluation process
6 Modelling of the pantograph
6.1 General requirements
A pantograph model shall describe the dynamic characteristics of a pantograph, regarding interaction with
overhead contact lines, in the frequency range of interest.
Commonly used pantograph models are:
– mass – spring – damper – models (lumped parameter models);
– transfer function models;
– multi-body models;
– physical pantographs, when hardware in the loop (HIL) is adopted.
The pantograph may be modelled with one or more dimensional geometry, depending on the phenomena
to be investigated.
For the modelling of active pantographs the characteristics of control and the dynamic characteristics shall
be available.
Aerodynamic effects on the pantograph shall as a minimum be considered by enhancing the mean contact
force as a function of speed.
6.2 Input data requirements
6.2.1 General
Depending on the modelling method and the individual pantograph characteristics, the relevant parameters
appropriate to fully describe the pantograph shall be available for simulation.
These parameters shall take into account other dependencies (operation height, stagger, nonlinearities,
frequency), as required.
Common parameters of pantographs are:
– kinematics;
– transfer function;
– natural frequencies;
– mass distribution;
– degree of freedom of joints;
– damping characteristics;
– spring characteristics;
– friction values;
– stiffness;
– bump stops;
– location of application of the static contact force;
– location of application of the aerodynamic forces.
NOTE Aerodynamic forces usually depend on the orientation, operation height and position of the pantograph
and the type of train.
6.2.2 Mass – spring – damper – models (lumped parameter models)
For mass – spring – damper – models (lumped parameter models), the following input is required:
– mass values of a minimum of two discrete mass elements;
– stiffness characteristics connecting the discrete masses, including any nonlinearity (if applicable);
– damping characteristics connecting the discrete masses, including any nonlinearity (if applicable);
– friction values (if applicable);
– bump stops (if applicable);
– application points of static and aerodynamic forces.
6.2.3 Multi-body models
For multi-body models, the following additional input is required:
– definition of all parts of the model including mass distributions, inertia characteristics, flexibility (if
applicable);
– kinematics, describing transmission of movements, kinds of joints and their position and limitations (if
applicable);
– internal forces applied to the system and their application points for springs, dampers and friction
elements;
– application points of static and aerodynamic forces.
6.2.4 Transfer function models
For transfer function models the following input is required:
– an analytical definition of the Laplace transform function, e.g. zeros and poles inside the frequency
range of interest, between the vertical displacement of the contact point and the contact force.
6.2.5 Hardware in the loop
Hardware in the loop uses the pantograph in its final configuration on the test rig. Aerodynamic effects shall
be implemented as an adjusted static contact force.
6.3 Validation of pantograph models
The validation of the pantograph models shall be carried out by comparison of the dynamic properties of
the pantograph model with those of the real pantograph as measured with a pantograph test rig. The
comparison shall be carried out using the same principle as used in the procedure “Calibration of the
measurement system” defined in EN 50317:2012, 7.5.
The test shall be carried out with the pantograph of interest and with its extension at a typical height inside
20 % to 80 % of the working range, as defined in EN 50206-1. The force shall be applied centrally to the
pantograph head.
The results are usable for 20 % to 80 % of the pantograph working range. Values outside this range require
additional investigations.
This test shall be carried out at the predicted mean contact force appropriate to the maximum design speed
for the pantograph. The mean contact force shall fulfil the requirements of EN 50367:2012, 7.3, Table 6 for
the designated speed.
Measurements of the applied vertical force (F ) and the resulting vertical acceleration at the contact
applied
point (a ) shall be taken applying sinusoidal excitations for the frequency range of interest in suitable steps.
cp
For comparison and validation purposes the excitation shall be from 0,5 Hz up to 20 Hz in 0,5 Hz steps.
The intervals may be reduced at resonant frequencies.
The amplitude of excitation shall be high enough to overcome the static friction in the pantograph.
NOTE 1 A range of amplitude of the greater between ± 15 % of the mean contact force and ± 20 N usually gives
representative results.
Based on the measurements of the applied force and the acceleration at the contact point, the measured
apparent mass (m ) in kilograms shall be determined for the frequency range of interest:
app,meas
F
applied,meas
m =
(3)
app.meas
a
head,meas
The apparent mass of the simulation model shall be determined in the same way as for the test rig
measurement based on the values for applied force and resulting acceleration at the contact point identified
in the simulation environment:
F
applied,model
m =
(4)
app.model
a
head,model
The apparent mass of the pantograph model (m ) shall be calculated in kilograms using the same
app,model
frequencies in the same frequency range as the measurements.
The accuracy (Q) of the pantograph simulation model shall be calculated by using the following formula
based on the magnitudes of the apparent mass:
 n−1 
 
log mapp,,model i
 
 
Q=1− ff−−1 100%
(5)
( )
∑ ii+1
 
 
ff−
 log mapp,,meas i 
 
n 1
i=1
 
 
For the calculation of Q frequencies with measured values for the apparent mass below 2 kg shall be
excluded.
NOTE 2 The limit of 2 kg is defined to avoid the denominator approaching zero.
The accuracy Q of the simulation model shall be greater than 90 % for the whole frequency range 0,5 Hz
to 20 Hz and for the band 0,5 Hz to 5 Hz.
NOTE 3 The accuracy value Q quantifies the differences between test rig measurements and pantograph model in
the shape of the logarithmic curves used to represent the apparent mass. This value does not describe an absolute
accuracy.
Any change in a pantograph component directly connected to a model parameter shall be accepted without
requiring a new validation of the pantograph model. New validation of the pantograph model is necessary
for all other changes.
NOTE 4 For example, for lumped parameter models the mass and the spring coefficient at the collector head, m3
and k3 according to Figure A.4, are components directly connected to model parameters.
A comparison between different pantograph models for the same pantograph may be performed by
comparing the transfer function calculated from the different models.
7 Modelling of the overhead contact line
7.1 General requirements
The model of the overhead contact line shall describe the dynamic characteristics, regarding interaction
with pantographs, in the frequency range of interest.
The overhead contact line may be modelled with two- or three-dimensional geometry, depending on the
phenomena to be investigated.
Rigid Overhead Contact Lines (ROCL) have very small vertical displacements in operation. The validation
of these models and interaction simulations is only possible for the contact force in direct comparison with
the measured results.
NOTE The displacement of a rigid overhead contact line during operation is currently not measured with
acceptable accuracy.
7.2 Data requirements
The length of overhead contact line model shall be greater than the analysis section, so that the passage
of the pantographs is not influenced by initial transients and end effects of the model. To investigate special
sections of overhead contact line (e.g. overhead contact line over turnouts, etc) the length of analysis
section may be reduced. Depending on the modelling method and the individual overhead contact line
characteristics, the relevant geometrical and mechanical parameters of the overhead contact line shall be
available for simulation:
– length of each span, distance between supports;
– position of droppers;
– contact wire height (sag, dropper length, wire gradients);
– encumbrance at the supports;
– geometry and mass distribution of steady arms;
– stagger and offset of all wires;
– number and types of wires (contact wire, catenary wire, auxiliary wire, stitch wire, droppers, etc);
– mass per unit length of each wire or density and cross-section;
– mechanical tension of wires. Where the tension depends on temperature, this relationship shall be
specified;
– section properties and stiffness for the beams of rigid overhead contact line;
– mass of links between wires and droppers (clamps);
– the mechanical characteristics of the supports and structures;
– the stiffness characteristic of droppers;
– damping of all components of the overhead contact line or a damping rate of the system, if available.
NOTE Typical damping rates (ratio of damping vs. critical damping) of overhead contact lines are between 0,05 %
and 0,2 %.
7.3 Static check of overhead contact line model
The usability of the overhead contact line model shall be checked by comparing the results of a static
behaviour calculated with this model with measurements or design calculations.
The outcome of the calculation based on the overhead contact line model in the static condition needs to
be evaluated to validate the implemented numerical calculations in the addressed simulation method. The
following results shall be extracted to evaluate the method:
– static position of the contact wire at each dropper and at the steady arm;
– elasticity of overhead contact line at the same points;
– dropper length.
The numerical results shall be compared to reference results from Annex A, from Annex B, from
measurements or from design calculations.
Those results shall be compared to the numerical model for one span which shall remain within the following
ranges.
Table 1 — Deviation of simulated static values
Parameter Required accuracy
Contact wire position ±5 mm
±0,1 mm/N or ± 10 % whichever
Elasticity
is greater
Dropper length ±10 mm
NOTE 1 The values in Table 1 are not applicable to rigid overhead contact line.
NOTE 2 The ranges for deviation of elasticity is to cover contact lines with high and low tension forces.
This validation shall be renewed if the parameters of the overhead contact line differ more than the
limitations given in 10.3.3.
8 Parameters of simulation
The parameters of the pantograph and overhead contact line shall be given according to Clauses 6 and 7.
Depending on the modelling method and the problem to be investigated by simulation, the relevant
parameters appropriate to fully describe the simulation shall be available.
Common parameters of simulations are:
– train speed;
– analysis section;
The analysis section shall consist of those parts of the overhead contact line model over which the
passage of the pantographs is not influenced by initial transients and end effects of the model.
Depending on the phenomena to be studied, the analysis section should be defined accordingly. For
validation purposes see Clause 10 and for the reference models see Clause 11.
– number of and distances between pantographs;
– static contact force of each pantograph;
– aerodynamic effects on each pantograph, taking into account the pantograph orientation;
NOTE Aerodynamic effects can be covered by specifying the applied mean contact force as a function of speed.
– operating height of the pantograph if needed by the pantograph model;
– wire temperatures if relevant to the overhead contact line model;
– damping of the overhead contact line (if not provided according to 7.2);
– frequency range of interest.
Depending on the phenomena to be studied, the frequency range of interest shall be defined in advance
and shall be consistent with the pantograph model, overhead contact line model and simulation method
and with the measurement system.
9 Output
9.1 General
The simulation shall calculate the variation of the contact forces, the contact wire displacements and the
pantograph displacements when the pantograph passes along the overhead contact line model.
The output parameters shall be filtered to exclude frequencies outside the frequency range of interest.
Filter characteristics and type depend on the problem to be investigated. For validation purposes
see Clause 10 and for comparison with benchmark see Clause 11.
Information about filters used shall be given with results as output.
The outputs from the simulation shall be analysed over the analysis section.
The following clauses specify the outputs for a single pantograph. If the train has more than one pantograph,
then the output shall be available for each pantograph.
9.2 Contact force
Within the frequency range of interest, outputs should be analysed within two additional frequency bands,
relating to span passing and dropper passing frequencies.
For validation and comparison purposes the frequency range of interest shall be 0 Hz to 20 Hz and the
bands shall be 0 Hz to 5 Hz and 5 Hz to 20 Hz.
If the standard deviation of the contact force has to be calculated in several bands, the calculation can be
performed in the time domain by applying proper pass-band filters or in the frequency domain. When
comparing different values, e.g. numerical and measured values, the same calculation method shall be
adopted.
Required outputs:
– the time history of the contact force;
– the mean contact force Fm;
– the standard deviation of contact force σ;
– actual maximum and minimum of contact force, Fmin and Fmax;
– statistical distribution (histogram) of contact force including information about skewness and excess of
kurtosis.
NOTE The statistical distribution with the base figures of skewness and kurtosis will give information about the
variation from Gaussian distribution.
9.3 Contact wire displacement
Required output:
– the maximum uplift of the contact wire at all supports of the analysis section for each pantograph
separately.
The time history of the vertical position of the wire at any specified point shall be available for output.
Where it is necessary to check at special locations for the minimum height of the contact wire according to
EN 50119:2009, 5.10.4, the maximum downwards movement of the contact wire and the location where
this occurs for those special sections shall be calculated during the simulation run.
9.4 Pantograph displacement
The time history of the vertical displacement of any specified point of the pantograph model shall be
available for output.
Where it is necessary to check at special locations for the maximum contact wire height according to
EN 50119:2009, 5.10.7, the maximum upwards movement of the contact point and the location where this
occurs for those special sections shall be calculated during the simulation run.
10 Validation with measured values
10.1 General
The validation of a simulation method shall be carried out by comparison of simulated results with equivalent
measured values from a line test. The line test shall be carried out with measurement equipment according
to EN 50317. The conditions for the validation are given in 10.2.
The simulation results shall be filtered in the same frequency range and using the same kind of filter as the
measured values and in accordance with EN 50317:2012, 7.6.
The measured values are necessary as time histories if the statistical values necessary for validation are
not completely elaborated during the measurement phase.
Annex B provides data sets from line test measurements in accordance with EN 50317 to allow for a
validation for a given model within the limitations according to 10.3. Any other measurement data fulfilling
the requirements can be used for validation.
NOTE The results in Annex B are analysed based on a proper statistical basis. The time history for these results
is not necessary.
10.2 Comparison values
The validation shall be done by comparison between simulated and measured values of contact forces and
displacements in the overhead contact line.
The comparison shall be done for:
– the standard deviation of the contact force σ;
– maximum uplift at the support for all measured supports;
– if measured values are available, the range of vertical position of the point of contact for the span with
maximum length (excluding overlaps).
The comparison for the standard deviation of the contact force shall be performed considering also a
frequency band analysis in the 0 Hz to 5 Hz and 5 Hz to 20 Hz frequency ranges, in order to achieve
increased confidence in the simulation model.
The time history of measured contact force is needed to perform the frequency band analysis.
The deviation of the simulated values from the measured values shall be within the tolerances given in
Table 2.
Table 2 — Deviation of simulated dynamic values
Parameter Required accuracy
Standard deviation of the contact force σ ±20 %
Maximum uplift at the support −10 mm ; +20 mm
Range of vertical position of the point of contact ±20 mm
Mean contact force Fm ±2,5 N
NOTE 1 The accuracy of standard deviation is valid for all three frequency bands.
NOTE 2 For simulation of systems with rigid overhead contact line only the limits for standard
deviation of contact force are applicable.

NOTE The accuracies above include an allowance for the accuracy of the measurement system and the
repeatability of the measurement values, and allow for actual conditions occurring in the line test which have not been
incorporated in the model such as:
— span to span variation in tension of conductors;
— random variations in dropper length;
— across track wind affecting pantograph aerodynamics;
— track irregularities and vehicle dynamics;
— local inaccuracies in dropper spacing or span length;
— actual state of contact wire wear affecting contact wire mass.
For the validation with measurements the analysis section at least shall cover two half tension lengths and
one overlap.
10.3 Limits of validation
10.3.1 Application of simulation method to other conditions
To use a simulation method under conditions that differ from those
...