The Vehicle, Spring 2007

Table of Contents She Might Just Take You for GrantedRebecca M. Griffithpage 1 ShwagDarius Juttipage 2 In LoveAmanda Vealepage 9 SubmissiveSarah Ellerpage 10 Wedding SongRebecca M. Griffithpage 11 Why No Ladies and Gentlemen, My Shit Never StinksJacob Fosterpage 13 Death of an English MajorLindsey Durbinpage 14 Summer\u27s PerfumeRebecca M. Griffithpage 15 Gigavolt and ChrisEric Schumacherpage 16 UntitledKris Jonespage 22 Ode to the MuseGreg Harrellpage 23 TenderAmanda Vealepage 24 When the Muses HeaveElizabeth Hoodpage 25 Depression LiftingAmanda Vealepage 26 Red SwordAndrew Deckerpage 27 Warring IdeologyMargaret B. Hamperpage 29 ConfessionGreg Harrellpage 34 A Glass PuzzleBrittany Morganpage 35 Hey MaJacob Fosterpage 36 As July Faded AwayRebecca M. Griffithpage 37 About the LeftoversGina LoBiancopage 38 Me, Myself & ILindsey Durbinpage 39 Iced Parking LotRebecca M. Griffithpage 41 About the Authors Art Submissions Mike\u27s Revelation and MikeSean Walkercovers UntitledChad Navelpage 9 Morning in Tintern AbbeyCarrie Muellerpage 12 WestminsterCarrie Muellerpage 21 A Fighting ChanceOsha Rudduckpage 22 Rooftop SunsetJennifer O\u27Neilpage 25 EIU IVCarrie Muellerpage 28 MandolinOsha Rudduckpage 38 EIU IIICarrie Muellerpage 42https://thekeep.eiu.edu/vehicle/1087/thumbnail.jp

Multibody System Investigation of Contact Geometry: Application to Deformable and Variable Profile Rails

Modeling the contact problem is a fundamental feature in a variety of multibody system dynamics applications and is of particular importance in the area of railroad vehicle dynamics. An accurate model of the wheel and rail is required in order to develop high fidelity models of vehicle/track interaction scenarios. This may be accomplished through including the dynamic effects of track flexibility and through refinement of the contact surface geometry model. This thesis will present an alternative approach for modeling both of these applications. The first method introduced is an adaption of the finite segment approach to modeling rail flexibility as an alternative to conventional finite element methods. The finite segment approach differs from the finite element approach by concentrating a body's elasticity and inertia between rigid elements rather than distributing them throughout each elastic element. It is first shown that the finite segment method may be integrated with existing rail geometry representation techniques. It is then shown through a comparative numerical analysis that the finite segment method provides reasonable accuracy in the prediction of the deformation of the rail. It is also shown that this method results in fictitious spikes in the contact forces which are not eliminated via model refinement. The second method introduced is an adaption of absolute nodal coordinate formulation (ANCF) thin plate element geometry to modeling contact surfaces. It is shown that existing methods for modeling variable profile contact geometry do not satisfy the continuity requirements of the contact approach employed in this thesis. The most common procedure is direct linear interpolation between profile curves. The low order continuity of this method results in erroneous spikes in the predicted contact forces. A new ANCF thin plate element is introduced after demonstrating that existing ANCF elements do not satisfy the continuity requirements. A railroad vehicle example including variable profile rail is commented on. Here, a comparative numerical analysis shows that the new ANCF thin plate surface model eliminates the erroneous spikes in the predicted contact forces at the cost of a small increases in the computational time required for the simulation

Use of Finite Element and Finite Segment Methods in Modeling Rail Flexibility: A Comparative Study

Safety requirements and optimal performance of railroad vehicle systems require the use of multibody system (MBS) dynamics formulations that allow for modeling flexible bodies. This investigation will present three methods suited for the study of flexible track models while conclusions about their implementations and features are made. The first method is based on the floating frame of reference (FFR) formulation which allows for the use of a detailed finite element mesh with the component mode synthesis technique in order to obtain a reduced order model. In the second method, the flexible body is modeled as a finite number of rigid elements that are connected by springs and dampers. This method, called finite segment method (FSM) or rigid finite element method, requires the use of rigid MBS formulations only. In the third method, the FFR formulation is used to obtain a model that is equivalent to the FSM model by assuming that the rail segments are very stiff, thereby allowing the exclusion of the high frequency modes associated with the rail deformations. This FFR/FS model demonstrates that some rail movement scenarios such as gauge widening can be captured using the finite element FFR formulation. The three procedures FFR, FSM, and FFR/FS will be compared in order to establish differences among them and analyze the specific application of the FSM to modeling track flexibility. Convergence of the methods is analyzed. The three methods proposed in this investigation for modeling the movement of three-dimensional tracks are used with a three-dimensional elastic wheel/rail contact formulation that predicts contact points online and allows for updating the creepages to account for the rail deformations. Several conclusions will be drawn in view of the results obtained in this investigation

Application of X-ray photoelectron Sspectroscopy in determining the structure of solid-phase bound substrates

The synthesis of compounds on solid supports has grown rapidly in the past 10 years, but one of the hurdles to the routine adoption of solid-supported chemistry is the limited number of analytical methods available to characterize resin-bound compounds. There have been methods developed for on-bead reaction monitoring of solid-phase reactions; both magic angle spinning (MAS) NMR1 and FTIR2 are useful techniques, but much solid-phase chemistry still relies on releasing the product from the solid support for validation. As a result, there still remains the need for complementary techniques that could quantify and/or identify functional groups prepared during solid-phase synthesis