Railway train energy simulation is an important and popular research topic. Locomotive traction force simulations are a fundamental part of such research. Conventional energy calculation models are not able to consider locomotive wheel–rail adhesions, traction adhesion control, and locomotive dynamics. This paper has developed two models to fill this research gap. The first model uses a 2D locomotive model with 27 degrees of freedom and a simplified wheel–rail contact model. The second model uses a 3D locomotive model with 54 degrees of freedom and a fully detailed wheel–rail contact model. Both models were integrated into a longitudinal train dynamics model with the consideration of locomotive adhesion control. Energy consumption simulations using a conventional model (1D model) and the two new models (2D and 3D models) were conducted and compared. The results show that, due to the consideration of wheel–rail adhesion model and traction control in the 3D model, it reports less energy consumption than the 1D model. The maximum difference in energy consumption rate between the 3D model and the 1D model was 12.5%. Due to the consideration of multiple wheel–rail contact points in the 3D model, it reports higher energy consumption than the 2D model. An 8.6% maximum difference in energy consumption rate between the 3D model and the 1D model was reported during curve negotiation.

中文翻译：

---

机车附着力模型的列车能量模拟。

铁路列车能量模拟是一个重要而流行的研究课题。机车牵引力模拟是此类研究的基础。传统的能量计算模型无法考虑机车的轮轨附着力，牵引力附着力控制和机车动力学。本文开发了两种模型来填补这一研究空白。第一个模型使用具有27个自由度的2D机车模型和简化的轮轨接触模型。第二个模型使用具有54个自由度的3D机车模型和详细的轮轨接触模型。考虑到机车附着力控制，两个模型都集成到纵向列车动力学模型中。进行并比较了使用常规模型（1D模型）和两个新模型（2D和3D模型）的能耗模拟。结果表明，由于在3D模型中考虑了轮轨粘附模型和牵引力控制，因此它报告的能耗比1D模型要少。3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为12.5％。由于3D模型中考虑了多个轮轨接触点，因此它报告的能耗要高于2D模型。在曲线协商期间，报告了3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为8.6％。3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为12.5％。由于3D模型中考虑了多个轮轨接触点，因此它报告的能耗要高于2D模型。在曲线协商期间，报告了3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为8.6％。3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为12.5％。由于3D模型中考虑了多个轮轨接触点，因此它报告的能耗要高于2D模型。在曲线协商期间，报告了3D模型和1D模型之间的能耗率最大差异为8.6％。