This invention relates to a muff coupling intended for vehicle couplers of the type that comprises two components, formed with ring-shaped flanges, and interconnectable via a muff comprising of at least two arch parts tightenable against each other, each of which separately has an inner flute formed between two inwardly turned bulges, which flute is delimited by a bottom and two opposite, force-transferring side surfaces, which are obliquely inclined in order to, upon radial tightening of the arch parts against each other, be pressed against analogously obliquely inclined shoulder surfaces on the flanges of the components and thereby, by wedge action, transfer axial component forces to the same with the purpose of pressing the ends of the components in close contact against each other.
Couplers having muff couplings of the kind generally mentioned above are used above all for the coupling of rail-mounted vehicles of different types, e.g., carriages or wagons and/or locomotives in train units. More precisely, each end of the individual carriage is connected with a coupler, which can be coupled together with a compatible coupler in the nearby carriage in the train unit. In the modern railway technology, only automatic or semi-permanent central couplers are in all essentials used in which the requisite damping function between the carriages is integrated, i.e., the carriages lack separate dead blocks. In one respect, the couplers may be divided into two main types, viz. a simpler type that utilizes hooks as coupling elements, and a more sophisticated type that makes use of more complicated latch mechanisms.
Common to all types of modern couplers is that they are manufactured by a specially adapted modular structure so far that the couplers—in order to provide for different purchasers' individual needs and wishes—are put together from a variety of different components of standard type as well as special designs, this providing finished couplers having highly varying properties in respect of, for instance, inherent strength, length, force transfer capacity (tension and compression, respectively), shock absorbing capacity, crash absorption capacity, price, service friendliness, possibilities to repair, etc. The need for specially adapted manufacture is particularly marked in the light of the fact that only a few actors serve the entire world market for couplers and that the railway traffic in the different countries of the world is controlled by national rules and regulations of shifting character, e.g., in respect of security, speed, travel comfort, timetable reliability, topography of landscape, etc. Therefore, the components that are found in the couplers vary in number and nature. Thus, in central couplers, there may be included, according to the individual specification of requirements from the purchaser, in addition to a head, for instance, shock absorbers or dead blocks, length-determining extension or spacing collars, crash-absorbing deformation tubes, leading anchors, pivot brackets and the like.
In order to reliably connect the components in question with each other, muff couplings of the type that has been mentioned by way of introduction has since long been used. Muff couplings may also be found in the interface between two cooperating couplers, viz. when the same are of a semi-permanent type. Previously known muff couplings for rail vehicle couplers are, however, associated with annoying disadvantages. One such disadvantage is that the couplings have a considerable weight and are ungainly. This is due to the fact that each one of the two arch parts or halves, which together form a surrounding muff, has to be formed with two very strong bulges in order to resist and carry the tensile and compressive stresses, respectively, which the same alternatingly are exerted to in connection with different driving situations, e.g., acceleration, jerky journey, braking, etc., and for intermittently transferring considerable dynamic forces to and from the end flanges on the components in a complicated and varying interaction of forces. Therefore, the known muffs have a width of about 120 mm and weigh about 12 kg (6 kg per arch part), the individual, inner bulge having a width of approx. 30% of said total width.
Also the end flanges, which by wedge action are pair-wise clamped between the two inner bulges of the muff, are comparatively big, above all in respect of the thickness thereof, (i.e., the radial measure by which the same project from the otherwise cylindrical envelope surfaces of the components). In spite of the muff and the bulges thereof as well as the end flanges on the coupled components co-operating with the same being strong and weight-swallowing, the capacity of the established coupling joint to transfer the dynamic forces in a train of forces from one component to the other is, however, not optimal. Thus, the transfer of force between the individual component and the muff takes place via one single interface in the form of the two chamfered or conical contact surfaces that are pressed against each other. These contact surfaces have a moderate area and are located fairly far out from the centre of the coupling joint seen in the radial direction. Therefore, the lines of force that permanently act axially to and fro in the proper components are forced out into fairly abrupt curves upon the passage thereof via the coupling joint.
A particularly annoying consequence of the structurally strong embodiment of the muff couplings is that they are weight-swallowing so far that each kilogram of extra weight reduces net loading capacity of the vehicles correspondingly. Because each coupler may include a plurality of muff couplings and each carriage in a train unit demands two couplers, the net loading reduction in total may become considerable.
The present invention aims at obviating the above-mentioned disadvantages of previously known muff couplings for vehicle couplers and at providing an improved muff coupling. Therefore, a primary object of the invention is to provide a muff coupling that is light and formed for transferring occurring dynamic forces in a strength-wise expedient train of forces from one component to the other. It is also an object to provide possibilities for, if required, increasing the active area of the contact surfaces via which transfer of force takes place, with the outmost object of improving the strength and reliability of the muff coupling. In a particular aspect, the invention aims at providing a muff coupling that in a universal way enables coupling of not only components having one and the same type of connecting flanges, but also components having end flanges of different types. It is also an object to provide a muff coupling that is easy to handle in connection with repairs and maintenance.
According to the invention, at least the primary object is attained by the features that are defined in the characterizing clause of claim 1. Preferred embodiments of the muff coupling according to the invention are furthermore defined in the dependent claims.
In the drawings:
In
Before the invention is further described, reference is made to
Outwardly, the two arch parts are defined by a semi-cylindrical, external envelope surface 20, as well as two ring-shaped end surfaces 21.
In
Reference is now made to
In accordance with the invention, the component tube 2 is formed with two (or more) axially spaced-apart flanges 13, 13′, each of which individually includes an obliquely inclined shoulder surface 18, 18′. In an analogous way, the arch part 9 is, as is seen in
Between the two flanges 13, 13′, a peripherical groove 22 is present, which is delimited by the contact surface 18, as well as a first clearance surface 22′, which extends at an acute angle β to the surface 18. In the example, this angle β amounts to 68°. In an analogous way, a groove 24 is present between the bulges 14, 14′, which groove is delimited by the cone surface 17′, as well as by a second clearance surface 23, which with the surface 17′ forms an angle χ that is smaller than the angle β and that in the example amounts to 65.5°. Said angular difference (68−65.5=2.5°) means that the surfaces 22′, 23 clear from each other and form a play when the arch parts 9 are clamped against each other and surround the flange pairs on the respective component tube. Furthermore, measures have been taken so that the two cylindrical back surfaces 25 on the flanges 13, 13′ should not touch the bottom in the groove 24 and the flute 15, respectively, in the muff. Thus, the two back surfaces 25 have an outer diameter D1 that is smaller than the corresponding inner diameters D2 and D3, respectively, in the arch part. In the concrete embodiment example, D1 amounts to 150 mm, while D2=155 mm and D3 =152.7 mm. Furthermore, in the example the diameter D4 of the groove 22 is 140 mm, while the inner diameter D5 of the bulges 14, 14′ amounts to 143 mm. By this geometry, it is guaranteed that contact between the muff and the flanges of the component tubes solely takes place via the conical contact surfaces 17, 17′, 18, 18′.
In a way known per se, the two component tubes 2, 3 are formed with one or more semi-cylindrical recesses 27, which co-operate with one or more projections 28 (see
By the fact that forces can be transferred between the muff 8 and the individual component tubes 2, 3 via two axially spaced-apart contact surfaces instead of only one such, the flanges of the component tubes as well as the inner bulges of the muff may be made less projecting than the corresponding flanges and bulges, respectively, in the muff couplings of previously known couplers without the total force-transferring surface being reduced. On the contrary, the total force-transferring contact surface may even be increased in spite of the radius size of the flanges and of the bulges having been decreased. This reduction of the radius size of the flanges and of the bulges means that the outer peripheries of the contact surfaces are located closer to the center axis C of the coupler; something which in turn means that the train of forces or lines of forces between the cylinder walls of the component tubes and the muff will occur in passages located at a minimum radial distance from the center axis C, i.e., considerably closer to the envelope surfaces or cylinder walls of the tubes than in the known muff couplings according to
The described muff coupling may in practice be used not only for coupling of individual components in one and the same coupler, but also for coupling of two different couplers of semi-permanent type. Irrespective of the case of use, the above-described muff coupling implies that each one of the two parts that is to be coupled together has pairs of flanges that fit or match the two pairs of inner bulges in the muff. At least during a period of introduction this could lead to problems, for instance when a railway-carriage having a coupler according to the invention should be coupled together with a carriage having a coupler of the older type, or if a component existing in stock should be coupled together with a new component made in accordance with the invention with the purpose of forming a coupler. In order to solve this problem during at least a transition period, two alternative embodiments are foreseen, which schematically are illustrated in
Thus, in
In
Feasible Modifications of the Invention
The invention is not only limited to the embodiments described above and shown in the drawings. Thus, it is feasible to form the individual component with more than two axially spaced-apart connecting flanges and form the arch parts of the muff with a corresponding number of inner, axially spaced-apart bulges. In this connection, it should also be pointed out that the muff may be composed of more than two arch parts, even if the number of two is preferred.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
0301528 | May 2003 | SE | national |
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind | 371c Date |
---|---|---|---|---|
PCT/SE2004/000638 | 4/27/2004 | WO | 00 | 11/16/2005 |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2004/103790 | 12/2/2004 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
1190350 | Williams | Jul 1916 | A |
2065480 | Soper | Dec 1936 | A |
3964773 | Stade et al. | Jun 1976 | A |
4332404 | Huffman | Jun 1982 | A |
4522434 | Webb | Jun 1985 | A |
4840026 | Nash et al. | Jun 1989 | A |
4863045 | Altherr | Sep 1989 | A |
5080400 | Adamek et al. | Jan 1992 | A |
6041824 | Powell | Mar 2000 | A |
20020074802 | Feichtinger | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20030197381 | Lehnhardt | Oct 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0358052 | Mar 1990 | EP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20080012335 A1 | Jan 2008 | US |