## 3 Simulation and Analysis Model of Train-Track-Station Coupled Vibration
### Dynamic Response Results and Analysis of the Station Under Various Working Conditions
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline Structural Type & Operating Condition & Vehicle Speed (km/h) & Dynamic Coefficient & Displacement (mm) & Acceleration (m/s\({}^{2}\)) \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Station Type A} & Single Line & 200–350 & 1.17 & 0.271 & 0.880 & 0.352 & 1.533 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Double Lines & 200–350 & 1.25 & 0.437 & 1.247 & 0.372 & 1.593 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Triple Lines & 200–350 & 1.25 & 0.437 & 1.247 & 0.372 & 1.593 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quadruple Lines & 200–350 & 1.25 & 0.437 & 1.247 & 0.372 & 1.593 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quintuple Lines & 200–350 & 1.25 & 0.437 & 1.247 & 0.372 & 1.593 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Sextuple Lines & 200–350 & 1.25 & 0.437 & 1.247 & 0.372 & 1.593 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Station Type A} & Single Line & 200–350 & 1.14 & 0.042 & 0.671 & 0.191 & 1.386 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Double Lines & 200–350 & 1.18 & 0.071 & 0.953 & 0.297 & 1.501 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Triple Lines & 200–350 & 1.17 & 0.071 & 1.053 & 0.310 & 1.507 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quadruple Lines & 200–350 & 1.17 & 0.069 & 1.058 & 0.309 & 1.506 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quintuple Lines & 200–350 & 1.16 & 0.073 & 1.057 & 0.312 & 1.516 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Sextuple Lines & 200–350 & 1.17 & 0.074 & 1.055 & 0.311 & 1.509 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 7: Maximum Dynamic Response Results of the Rail Bearing Floor Slab. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline Structural Type & Operating Condition & Vehicle Speed (km/h) & Displacement (mm) & Acceleration (m/s\({}^{2}\)) \\ \cline{2-7}  & Single Line & 200–350 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Double Lines & 200–350 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 & 0.000 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Triple Lines & 200–350 & 0.119 & 0.424 & 0.064 & 0.734 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quadruple Lines & 200–350 & 0.119 & 0.424 & 0.064 & 0.740 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quintuple Lines & 200–350 & 0.129 & 0.478 & 0.073 & 0.740 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Sextuple Lines & 200–350 & 0.129 & 0.480 & 0.075 & 0.629 \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Station Type B} & Single Line & 200–350 & 0.050 & 0.126 & 0.209 & 0.768 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Double Lines & 200–350 & 0.075 & 0.181 & 0.283 & 0.877 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Triple Lines & 200–350 & 0.145 & 0.468 & 0.297 & 1.184 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quadruple Lines & 200–350 & 0.147 & 0.465 & 0.307 & 1.199 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Quintuple Lines & 200–350 & 0.146 & 0.518 & 0.326 & 1.226 \\ \cline{2-7}  & Sextuple Lines & 200–350 & 0.156 & 0.516 & 0.322 & 1.208 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: Maximum Dynamic Response Results of the Platform Slab. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & & \multicolumn{10}{c}{Power Vehicle} & \multicolumn{10}{c}{Tailer Vehicle} \\ \cline{3-14}
**Structural** & **Operating** & **Method** & **Desiment** & **Method** & **Local** & **Local** & **Vertical** & **Acquires** & **Local** & **Deployment** & **Local** & **Vertical**  
Table 9 provides a summary of the maximum dynamic response values of trains under various operating conditions for the two types of \"building-bridge integrated\" structures. It can be observed that the lateral and vertical accelerations, derailment coefficients, and wheel load reduction rates of the trains all meet the limit values specified by the relevant standards, and the comfort indices in both lateral and vertical directions reach the \"excellent\" level. To more intuitively illustrate the response time histories of trains passing through the two types of station structures, acceleration time-history diagrams are plotted for trains (taking the six-line condition with mainline speed at 200 km/h and arrival-departure line speed at 80 km/h as examples) as shown in Figure 8. It can be observed that under the same operating conditions, the acceleration time-history curves of the trains with the two different structural configurations are essentially consistent.