JP2012126218A - Single axle steering truck for railroad vehicle and railroad vehicle - Google Patents

Abstract

An object of the present invention is to reduce the maximum lateral pressure of an outer gauge side wheel of a two-axle truck for a railway vehicle when passing a curve, and to prevent the safety of an inner gauge side wheel from being worse than that of a conventional carriage.
A one-axis steering cart that steers only a front wheel shaft or a rear wheel shaft of a biaxial cart. Steering amount represented by β / {sin ⁻¹ (a sin α / L)} × 100 of the steering device that steers any of the wheel shafts when passing a curve (β: steering angle of wheel shaft, a: shaft distance, α: When the bogie angle (the relative angle between the bogie and the car body in the curve) and L: the distance between the bogie centers is 100%, the steering amount increment rate with respect to the theoretical steering amount was adjusted in the range of -10% to 44%. .
[Effect] In railway single-axle steering carts that steer only the front axle or rear axle, the lateral pressure acting on the outer gauge wheels during curve traveling is reduced, and the possibility of derailment of the inner gauge wheels is avoided. As a result, safety when passing a curve is improved.
[Selection] Figure 7

Description

  The present invention relates to a single-axle steering carriage for a railway vehicle that steers only a wheel shaft (hereinafter referred to as a front shaft) in the traveling direction of the two-axis truck or a wheel shaft on the rear side in the traveling direction (hereinafter referred to as a rear shaft). The present invention relates to a railway vehicle having a single-axis steering carriage.

  When the railway vehicle carriage passes a sharp curve, the angle (attack angle) formed by the rail and the wheel shaft increases, and high lateral pressure is generated. In view of this, a double-shaft steering cart 1a that steers in a letter C shape as shown in FIG. In FIG. 11, 2a denotes a steering wheel shaft, 3 denotes a bogie frame, 4a denotes a rail on the outer track side, and 4b denotes a rail on the inner track side.

  In such a double-shaft steering cart 1a, a separate steering device is added to the conventional cart 1b (see FIG. 12) in which both wheels of the biaxial cart are non-steering wheels (normal wheels) 2b. To increase. However, from the viewpoint of manufacturing cost, maintenance cost, and weight reduction, it is preferable that the number of additional parts is small. Therefore, instead of steering both wheel shafts of the two-shaft carriage, one side as shown in FIGS. 13 (a) and 13 (b). A single-axle steering cart 1c that steers only the wheel shaft 2a has also been proposed.

  By the way, in the case of a double-shaft steering bogie that steers both wheel shafts of a biaxial bogie while passing a curve, the theoretical steering amount calculated by the specifications of the vehicle body and the bogie and the curve radius is generally determined. In an actual double-axle steering cart, an increment is often added to the theoretical steering amount for the purpose of improving the curve passing performance such as the reduction of the lateral pressure, but it is necessary to examine the details of the increment in advance. is there.

  For example, in the double-axle steering cart proposed in Patent Document 1, both the steering wheel axes are directed to the center of the curve in conjunction with the bogie angle (the relative angle generated between the vehicle body and the cart when passing the curve) so as to reduce the attack angle. I have to.

  At this time, in consideration of the turning resistance between the carriage and the vehicle body, the steering amount (steering amount: 120 to 135) with an increment rate of 20 to 35% with respect to the theoretical steering amount defined by the following formula 1 is 100%. %) Is given mechanically to optimize the reduction of lateral pressure.

  However, the steering amount proposed in Patent Document 1 relates to a biaxial steering cart that steers both wheel shafts of a biaxial cart, and does not relate to the steering amount of a single-shaft steering cart that steers only one wheel shaft.

  Patent Document 2 describes the results of a simulation that considers relaxation curves and fluctuations in the friction coefficient in a double-shaft steering vehicle similar to Patent Document 1, with a view to reducing the overall lateral pressure. Yes.

  According to the simulation result, it is described that the increment rate with respect to the theoretical steering amount is more than 0% and 17% or less (steering amount: more than 100% and 117% or less). However, this study also relates to a double-shaft steering carriage, not a single-shaft steering carriage. Further, it has been pointed out that when the steering amount is excessively increased by the evaluation disclosed in Patent Document 2, the lateral pressure increases and the safety is deteriorated.

  On the other hand, Patent Documents 3 and 4 disclose single-shaft steering carts that steer only one wheel shaft of a biaxial cart. However, Patent Documents 3 and 4 do not describe a study on the increment rate of the steering amount as in Patent Documents 1 and 2.

  Patent Document 5 discloses a dual-axle steering cart in which the steering amount of the front shaft and the rear shaft is intentionally different, and the steering amount of the rear shaft> the steering amount of the front shaft. However, in Patent Document 5, only the magnitude of the steering amount of the front shaft and the rear shaft is discussed, and the increment rate of the steering amount is not specifically examined as in Patent Documents 1 and 2.

  Patent Document 5 describes that when the steering amount of the rear shaft is larger than the steering amount of the front shaft, the lateral pressure of the front shaft is reduced by moving the rear shaft from the center of the track to the outer track side. is there. Also in Patent Document 4, which proposes a single-shaft steering carriage that steers only the rear axle (hereinafter referred to as a rear axle steering carriage), the attitude of the rear axle that is steered changes (from the center of the track toward the outer track). There is a description that the lateral pressure decreases by moving. However, this description is for the rear axle steering carriage.

  On the other hand, in the case of a single-axle steering bogie that steers the front axle and does not steer the rear axle (hereinafter referred to as the front axle steering carriage), the wheel axle to be steered is different, so the curve is different from the rear-shaft steering carriage. It is predicted that the behavior of the carriage and wheel axle will differ when passing.

  Further, it is expected that the behaviors of the rear wheel steering bogie and the front shaft steering bogie at the time of passing through the curve differ from the behavior of the double shaft steered bogie and the wheel shaft.

  To summarize the above explanation, the behavior of the carriage and wheel axle when passing a curve is different between a double-axle steering carriage and a single-axle steering carriage. Also, even with a single-axle steering carriage, the front axle steering carriage and the rear axle steering carriage are curved. The behavior of the carriage and axle when passing is different. In addition, there are only examples for examining an appropriate steering amount increment rate for a double-shaft steering carriage, and no examples for examining an appropriate steering amount increment rate for a single-axle steering carriage.

  Therefore, even if the increment rate of the steering amount studied for the dual-axle steering cart is applied to a single-axle steering cart, the curve passing performance cannot be optimized (for example, the total lateral pressure can be minimized). There is also a possibility that the passing performance is deteriorated.

JP-A-10-203364 Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2008-126811 JP 2000-272514 A JP 2010-58650 A International Publication No. 2009/038068 Pamphlet

  The problem to be solved by the present invention is to improve the curve passing performance of a single-shaft steering carriage in which the behavior of the carriage and the wheel shaft at the time of passing a curve is not necessarily the same as that of the double-axle steering carriage.

  An object of the present invention is to reduce the maximum lateral pressure of an outer gauge side wheel of a two-axle truck for a railway vehicle when passing through a curve, and to prevent the safety of the inner gauge side wheel from being worse than that of a conventional carriage. .

That is, the single-shaft steering carriage for railway vehicles of the present invention is
A single-shaft steering carriage that steers only the front axle or the rear axle of the biaxial carriage in the traveling direction,
The steering amount increment rate with respect to the theoretical steering amount when the steering amount represented by the following formula of the steering device that steers any of the wheel shafts when passing through the curve is 100% is adjusted in the range of −10% to 44%. This is the main feature.
Steering amount (%) = β / {sin ⁻¹ (a sin α / L)} × 100
Where β: Steering angle of wheel axle a: Shaft distance α: Bogie angle
L: Distance between bogie centers

Moreover, the railway vehicle of the present invention is
When the single-axle steering carriage for railway vehicles of the present invention is arranged on both sides of the vehicle, the first and fourth wheel shafts or the second and third wheel shafts are steered from the front side in the traveling direction. Is the most important feature.

  In the present invention, since the increment rate of the steering amount of the single-shaft steering carriage is adjusted to the optimum range, the maximum lateral pressure of the outer gauge side wheel of the two-axle truck for railcars is reduced and the inner gauge side wheel is reduced when passing through the curve. In this case, the safety is not deteriorated as compared with the conventional cart.

  According to the present invention, in a railway single-shaft steering carriage that steers only the front axle or the rear axle, the lateral pressure acting on the outer gauge side wheel during curve traveling is reduced, and the possibility of derailment of the inner gauge side wheel is reduced. Since generation | occurrence | production can be avoided, the safety | security at the time of a curve passage improves.

It is the figure which showed the positional relationship of a wheel and a rail, (a) at the time of the center run of a track, (b) at the time of the flange contact of the outer track side wheel, (c) at the time of the flange contact of the inner track side wheel is there. It is the figure which showed the relationship between the steering amount increment rate of the rear-wheel steering trolley | bogie at the time of curve driving | running | working, and the left-right position of the front-back wheel shaft. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the relationship between the steering amount increment rate of the rear-wheel steering carriage and the measured lateral pressure acting on the front and rear shafts when the results shown in FIG. 2 are obtained. The lateral pressure measurement value, (b) is the lateral pressure measurement value in the inner gauge. FIG. 3 is a graph in which the maximum lateral pressure is selected and graphed for each steering amount increment rate with respect to Table 2. It is the figure which showed the relationship between the steering amount increment rate of the front-wheel steering trolley | bogie at the time of curve driving | running | working, and the left-right position of the front-back wheel axle. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing the relationship between the steering amount increment rate of the front-wheel steering carriage and the lateral pressure measurement values acting on the front and rear shafts when the result shown in FIG. 5 is obtained. The lateral pressure measurement value, (b) is the lateral pressure measurement value in the inner gauge. FIG. 5 is a graph in which the maximum lateral pressure is selected and graphed for each steering amount increment rate with respect to Table 4. FIG. 9 is a graph showing the total lateral pressure for each steering amount increment rate in Table 7. FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining the arrangement of a steering carriage, where (a) is a 1-3-axis steering carriage system that steers the first and third wheel shafts from the front side in the traveling direction, and (b) is the first one from the front side in the traveling direction. A 1-4 axis steering bogie system for steering the fourth wheel axis, (c) is a 2-3 axis steering bogie system for steering the second and third wheel axes from the front in the traveling direction, and (d) is a traveling direction. It is the figure which showed the 2-4 axis | shaft steering trolley system which steers the 2nd and 4th wheel axis from the front side. It is a conceptual diagram when a both-axis steering cart passes a curve. It is a conceptual diagram when the conventional trolley | bogie which made the both-wheels axis | shaft of a biaxial trolley | bogie use the non-steering wheel shaft (normal wheel shaft) passes a curve. It is a conceptual diagram when a single-shaft steering cart passes a curve, (a) is a front-shaft steering cart, (b) is a rear-shaft steering cart.

  The object of the present invention is to reduce the maximum lateral pressure of the outer gauge side wheel of the railcar two-axis carriage when passing through the curve, and to prevent the inner gauge side wheel from being deteriorated in safety compared to the conventional carriage. This was realized by adjusting the increment rate of the steering amount of the axle steering cart to the optimum range.

  Hereinafter, exemplary embodiments for carrying out the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.

  In a steering cart that steers the wheel axle, the increment rate of the steering amount that affects the passing performance at the time of passing through the curve can be freely set at the time of designing the steering device. In particular, a single-axle steering cart that steers either the front shaft or the rear shaft has a different behavior when passing a curve than a dual-axle steering cart, and even when the front shaft is steered and the rear shaft is steered. The behavior when passing is different.

  Therefore, the inventors investigated the influence of the steering amount increment rate on both the front-wheel steering cart that steers the front shaft and the rear-shaft steering vehicle that steers the rear shaft among the single-shaft steering carts. .

  In order to evaluate the relationship between the steering amount and curve-passing performance in a single-axle steering carriage, a simulated railway vehicle with a mixture of front and rear axle steering trucks was used. The curve running test was carried out while changing.

Curve condition:
Curve radius: 120m
Kant: 60mm
Slack: 18mm

A. About Safety Evaluation (Maximum Lateral Pressure Evaluation) During straight running, the wheels 11a and 11b are located at the center of the rails 4a and 4b as shown in FIG.

  On the other hand, when passing through the curve, as shown in FIG. 1 (b), the outer-rail side wheel 11a is closer to the outer-rail side rail 4a, and the inner-track side wheel 11b is closer to the center side of both rails 4a and 4b. The flange of the wheel 11a on the outer gauge side contacts the shoulder of the rail 4a on the outer gauge side (per outer gauge flange). Alternatively, as shown in FIG. 1 (c), the inner-rail-side wheel 11b is closer to the inner-rail-side rail 4b, and the outer-rail-side wheel 11a is closer to the center side of both rails 4a and 4b. The flange of the wheel 11b contacts the shoulder of the rail 4b on the inner gauge side (per inner gauge flange). When hitting the flange, a high lateral pressure is generated, and there is a possibility that the wheel rides on the rail and derails (riding derailment).

  When evaluating the safety against derailment, if the maximum value of the lateral pressure generated on the wheel that is in contact with the flange is the worst value among the four wheels of two wheels per vehicle, the lower value However, it is judged that the curve passing performance is high.

  In the case of a normal carriage, only the outer gauge side wheel hits the flange, so it can be determined by the lateral pressure of the outer gauge side wheel. It is considered that the wheels are different, and the wheels on the inner rail side may hit the flange, so all four wheels per one truck were evaluated.

Hereinafter, the test results will be described separately for the front axle steering carriage and the rear axle steering carriage.
[Rear axle steering cart]
The presence / absence of contact with the flange is determined from the measurement result of the position of the wheel shaft in the left-right direction (left-right displacement). FIG. 2 is a diagram showing the relationship between the steering amount of the rear-wheel steering carriage and the left-right position of the front and rear wheel axles (hereinafter referred to as the front axle and the rear axle) during the curve traveling under the above conditions.

  As shown in FIG. 2, when the steering amount increment rate is -100% (equivalent to a normal cart), the front shaft is close to the outer track side and is in contact with the flange, but the rear shaft is located on the track center side. It can be seen that there is no contact with the flange. On the other hand, when the steering amount increment rate is −26% or more, it can be seen that the rear shaft is also moved to the outer gauge side like the front shaft and is in contact with the flange. Table 1 below summarizes whether the front shaft and the rear shaft are in contact with the flange on the inner or outer rail side based on the relationship shown in FIG.

  Next, FIG. 3 shows the results of measuring the lateral pressure acting on the front and rear shafts in the outer and inner tracks when the results shown in FIG. 2 are obtained. Table 2 below summarizes the lateral pressures of the wheels hitting the flanges shown in Table 1 from FIG.

  Further, FIG. 4 is a graph in which the maximum lateral pressure is selected for each steering amount increment rate with respect to Table 2 and is graphed. It can be said that the curve passing performance is higher as the value shown in FIG. 4 is lower.

  From FIG. 4, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is from −100% (normal carriage) to 8%, the maximum lateral pressure is reduced and the curve passing performance is improved. However, when the steering amount increment rate is 44%, the maximum lateral pressure is almost the same as in the case where the steering amount increment rate is 0%, as shown in FIG. In addition, when the steering amount increment rate is between 44% and 100%, the maximum lateral pressure starts to increase, and when the steering amount increment rate is 100%, the steering amount increment rate is -100% (with the normal carriage). It was found that the maximum lateral pressure was almost the same as in the case of Equivalent), and the curve passing performance was not improved by steering.

  As shown in FIG. 4, when the steering amount increment rate exceeds 44%, the curve passing performance deteriorates as shown in FIG. 3 (a). This is because it increases rapidly. From FIG. 3 (a), when the steering amount is increased to 144% or more (steering amount increment rate is 44% or more), it is predicted that the lateral pressure of the rear axle will increase further. It is thought to get worse.

  Therefore, in the case of a rear-wheel steering bogie, it is understood that a steering amount increment rate of −10% to 44% is suitable, and 8% to 44% is a more preferable range.

[Front axle steering cart]
The presence / absence of contact with the flange is determined from the measurement result of the position (left / right displacement) in the left / right direction of the wheel axis in FIG. From FIG. 5, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is from −100% (normal carriage) to 44%, the front shaft is closer to the outer track side and the rear shaft is positioned on the track center side. On the other hand, when the steering amount increment rate is 100%, it can be seen that both the front shaft and the rear shaft move to the inner rail side and are in contact with the flange on the inner rail side. Table 3 below summarizes whether the front shaft and the rear shaft are in contact with the flange on the inner or outer rail side based on the relationship shown in FIG.

  Next, FIG. 6 shows the result of measuring the lateral pressure acting on the front and rear shafts in the outer and inner tracks when the results shown in FIG. 5 are obtained. Table 4 below summarizes the lateral pressures of the wheels hitting the flanges shown in Table 3 from FIG.

  Further, FIG. 7 is a graph in which the maximum lateral pressure is selected for each steering amount increment rate with respect to Table 4 and is graphed. It can be said that the curve passing performance is higher as the maximum lateral pressure value shown in FIG. 7 is lower.

  From FIG. 7, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is from −100% to 44%, the maximum lateral pressure decreases as the steering amount increment rate increases and the curve passing performance is improved. On the other hand, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is between 44% and 100%, the maximum lateral pressure starts to increase, and the curve passing performance deteriorates. It should be particularly noted that when the steering amount increment rate is 100%, the flange contact is generated on the inner track side.

  In general railway sharp curves, derailment prevention guards are installed to ensure safety by assuming derailment to the outer gauge side, but derailment prevention guards assuming derailment to the inner gauge side are not necessarily It is not necessarily installed. Therefore, the flange contact on the inner rail side that induces the possibility of derailment to the inner rail side should be avoided even if the value of the maximum lateral pressure is low.

  From the above results, in the single-shaft steering cart that steers the front shaft, it is suitable that the increment rate of the steering amount is -10% or more and 44% or less from the viewpoint of reducing the maximum lateral pressure and avoiding the inner rail side derailment. 20% or more and 44% or less, and further 35% or more and 44% or less are more preferable ranges.

  From the above, for the purpose of improving the curve passing performance when the maximum lateral pressure is used as an index, the increment rate with respect to the theoretical steering amount is the same for both the single-axle steering cart that steers the rear axle and the single-axle steering cart that steers the front axle. It has been found that it is desirable to set it to −10% or more and 44% or less.

B. About Evaluation Considering Wear (Overall Lateral Pressure Evaluation) In A in the previous section, the maximum lateral pressure generated in the carriage is used as an evaluation index for safety evaluation against derailment. On the other hand, there is also a method of evaluating the sum of the lateral pressures of the wheels in contact with the flanges in order to reduce the wear amount of the flange portions of the wheels.

  According to general wear rules (Huiman, Archer, etc.), the amount of wear of an object is proportional to the pressing load. In the case of a railway vehicle, lateral pressure corresponds to the pressing load. Therefore, when the sum of the lateral pressures of the wheels per flange (hereinafter referred to as total lateral pressure) is introduced as an evaluation index as an index expressing the amount of wear of the wheels in one truck, the lower the total lateral pressure, It is considered that the amount of wear of the iron is reduced.

Hereinafter, the test results will be described separately for the front axle steering carriage and the rear axle steering carriage.
[Rear axle steering cart]
The lateral pressure of the wheel hitting the flange is shown in Table 2 above. Table 5 below shows the sum of the positive values of the lateral pressures of the front shaft and the rear shaft in each steering amount increment rate condition of Table 2.

  From Table 5, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is from -100% to -10%, the total lateral pressure decreases as the steering amount increment rate increases. On the other hand, when the steering amount increment rate is from -10% to 100%, the total lateral pressure increases as the steering amount increment rate increases. When optimizing the amount of wheel wear in one vehicle, it is desirable that the steering amount increment rate be -26% to + 8%.

[Front axle steering cart]
The lateral pressure of the wheel hitting the flange is shown in Table 4 above. Table 6 below shows the sum of the positive values of the lateral pressures of the front shaft and the rear shaft in each of the steering amount increment rate conditions in Table 4.

  From Table 6, it can be seen that when the steering amount increment rate is from −100% to 44%, the total lateral pressure decreases as the steering amount increment rate increases. On the other hand, when the steering amount increment rate is 44% to 100%, the total lateral pressure increases as the steering amount increment rate increases. Therefore, when the wheel wear amount in one truck is optimized, it is desirable that the steering amount increment rate is 44%.

  By the way, when a general railway vehicle is used, the traveling direction is switched back and forth. Therefore, when the single-axis steering carriage is applied to a general railway vehicle, the steering shaft is arranged symmetrically as viewed from the vehicle center position.

  Therefore, the 1-4 axis steering bogie system for steering the first and fourth wheel shafts from the front side in the traveling direction shown in FIG. 10B, or the second and second side from the front side in the traveling direction shown in FIG. 10C. In the case of a 2-3 axis steering bogie system that steers the third wheel axis, a mechanism for switching the steering axis depending on the traveling direction is not required, so that a simple configuration as a railway vehicle is possible, and manufacturing and maintenance costs can be suppressed.

  However, when a railway vehicle is configured with a 1-4 axis steering bogie system or a 2-3 axis steering bogie system, one of the two cars of one vehicle is a front axle steering carriage and the other is a rear axle steering carriage. Both will always be mixed.

  When evaluating the safety against derailment, the 1-4 axis steering bogie system, the 2-3 axis steering bogie system, the rear axle steering carriage, and the front axle steering carriage as a result, the steering amount increment rate is as described above. It is suitable that the increment rate of the steering amount is -10% or more and 44% or less. Further, when viewed as a combination of a rear axle steering truck and a front axle steering carriage, the steering amount increment rate is more preferably 20% or more and 44% or less, and further preferably 35% or more and 44% or less.

  On the other hand, for the purpose of optimizing wheel wear, the total lateral pressure is the lowest value for the front axle steering cart when the steering amount increment rate is 44% (see Table 6). When the steering amount increment rate is set to 44%, the overall lateral pressure increases as compared to the normal cart (see Table 5), and thus wheel wear may increase compared to the normal cart.

  Table 7 below shows the total lateral pressure obtained from Table 5 and Table 6 for the combination of the rear axle steering carriage and the front axle steering carriage. A graph of this table is shown in FIG.

  FIG. 8 shows that the total lateral pressure takes the minimum value when the steering amount increment rate is −10%. Further, according to the result of this total lateral pressure, in the case of a combination of a rear-wheel steering bogie and a front-shaft steering bogie, a steering amount increment rate of −26% or more and 44% or less is suitable, and further, −20% or more, It is more desirable that the content be 4% or less, more preferably −14% or more and −6% or less.

  Therefore, when a railway vehicle is configured with a 1-4 axis steering bogie system or a 2-3 axis steering bogie system, as described above, the maximum lateral pressure (safety), overall Each of the lateral pressures (wheel wear) can be appropriate. Furthermore, if the steering amount increment rate is set to -10% or more and 4% or less, both the maximum lateral pressure (safety) and the total lateral pressure (wheel wear) can be taken into consideration.

  The present invention is not limited to the above example, and it goes without saying that the embodiments may be changed as appropriate within the scope of the technical idea described in each claim.

  For example, as the steering method of the steering carriage, either an active forced steering method or a semi-forced steering method may be adopted. Note that the active forced steering method is a method of using an air pressure, hydraulic pressure, or electric type actuator to actively steer the wheel shaft while applying energy and controlling from the outside. On the other hand, the semi-forced steering system is a system in which a vehicle body, a carriage, and a wheel shaft are connected by a mechanical mechanism such as a link, and a bogie displacement generated between the body and the carriage when passing a curve is used as a driving force. Among these, the active forced steering method has a high manufacturing / maintenance cost of the device itself, but the semi-forced steering method uses a simple mechanism such as a link lever, so the manufacturing / maintenance cost is low.

1c Single-axle steering carriage 2a Steering wheel axle 2b Non-steering axle (normal axle)
3 Bogie frame 4a Rail on the outer rail side 4b Rail on the inner rail side

Claims (5)

A single-shaft steering carriage that steers only the front axle or the rear axle of the biaxial carriage in the traveling direction,
The steering amount increment rate with respect to the theoretical steering amount when the steering amount represented by the following formula of the steering device that steers any of the wheel shafts when passing through the curve is 100% is adjusted in the range of −10% to 44%. A single-axis steering carriage for a railway vehicle.
Steering amount (%) = β / {sin ⁻¹ (a sin α / L)} × 100
Where β: Steering angle of the wheel axle a: Shaft distance α: Bogie angle (the relative angle between the carriage and the vehicle body in a curve)
L: Distance between bogie centers   The single-axis steering carriage for a railway vehicle according to claim 1, wherein the steering device is configured to be interlocked with a bogie angle.   When the single-axle steering carriage for railcars according to claim 1 or 2 is arranged on both sides of the vehicle, the first and fourth wheel shafts or the second and third wheel shafts are steered from the front side in the traveling direction. A railway vehicle characterized by being arranged as described above.   When the curve passes, the steering amount increment rate of the steering device that steers the wheel shaft with respect to the theoretical steering amount is adjusted in the range of −10% or more and 4% or less. When a single-wheel steering bogie for a railway vehicle that steers only one of the two wheel shafts is arranged on both sides of the vehicle, the first and fourth wheel shafts or the second and third wheel shafts are steered from the front in the traveling direction. A railway vehicle characterized by being arranged to   The railway vehicle according to claim 4, wherein the steering device is configured to be interlocked with a bogie angle.

Images