CHALLENGES IN INTRODUCING SPEED

OF 160 KMPH FOR PASSENGER TRAINS

AND 100 KMPH FOR HIGH AXLE
FREIGHT ON IR
- A Case Study for AGC – PWL Section of
North Central Railway –
Author
Sunil Kumar Gupta
Sr. DEN(CO)/AGC
North Central Railway

Co-Author
Sujeet Kumar
ADEN/2/MTJ/AGC
North Central Railway
Enhanced train utility (line capacity)
 Presently Mail /express and freight trains are running
at varying speed ranging from 60, 65, 80,100 Km/h for
goods train to 110,130 Km/h for mail / express trains.
Running trains at such wide speed range has adverse
effect on mobility.
 Introduction of freight train at 100 km/h and semi
high speed at 160 Km/h will increase the line capacity
and ultimate the mobility.
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS
Track requirement:

 Rails: 60kg/90 UTS rails

 Sleeper: PSC sleeper with 1660 Sleeper density
 Ballast cushion: 300 mm with minmum 150 mm cleaned
cushion.
 Formation : well compacted and stable formation
 Turnout: Thick web switch
 Crossing: 60 kg CMS crossing with gapless joint
 SEJ: Improved SEJs
 Rail/weld Protection : All welds (Good weld also), shall be
protected by joggled f/p
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS contd..

Level crossings: Preferably No LC gate should be en-

route. All level crossings on route shall be replaced with
grade separators in planned manner. Existing LC must
be manned & interlocked.

Run through lines and the platform lines:

 Demarcation through a yellow line on the platforms
 strictly observe the precaution through public
announcement
INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS contd..
Signaling Requirements
 Automatic signaling in entire route.
 Complete track circuiting of station yard
 Electrical operation of points and mean for locking
 Interlocking (PI, RRI or SSI) with Central panel arrangement

Locomotive Requirement
 Train protection warning system (TPWS).
 Mobile Train radio communication (MTRC)
 VHF sets to be provided if (MTRC) is not commissioned.
Pilot Project -Gatiman Express
Salient Features:
 16.4.2014 – COCR conducted
 27.10.2015 - CRS accorded conditional sanction
 14.01.2016 - Railway board announced regular
operation between NZM-AGC.
 5.04.2016 –Gatiman Express started
CHALLENGES IN INTRODUCING 160
KM/H SPEED
1. PSR removal
2. Provision of Boundary wall at vulnerable
location to prevent CRO and tress passing
3. Elimination of LC gates
4. Availability of maintenance corridor
5. Push trolley inspection and USFD testing
(corridor require)
6. Fracture detection system
7. Riding quality of track ( C & M vol 1
compliance)
CHALLENGES…
PSR removal
 Initially there were 18 PSR on UP line and 17 PSR on DN
line. Till Jan’ 2019 6 PSR from UP line and 8 PSR from DN
line have been removed.
CHALLENGES…
Boundary wall along the track
• CRS recommended 100% sealed corridor to avoid any
CRO and trespassing.
• Total scope -385 line Km (Palwal –Dholpur)
• Initially 30 line Km fencing was provided at identified
vulnerable location
• As on Jan ‘2019 progress is 210 line Km

CRO incidences
Section 2013- 2014- 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19
14 15
AGC - 170 150 214 206 335 360*
PWL
* Up to Jan’ 2019
 BARBED WIRE FENCING RELEASED PSC SLEEPER
FENCING

RCC BOUNDARY WALL WITH PRECAST PANEL

RCC BOUNDARY WALL CAST IN SITU

10
CHALLENGES…
Elimination of LC gates
 CRS recommended to replace all LC gates with grade separators

Action plan to eliminate the LC gate is as under

Eliminated till

Sanction

Sanction
Action Plan

Balance
date.

ROB
Section scope
By By Up to
Up to 31.03.20 Up to 31.03.21
LHS ROB 31.03.22

23
12 15
(5 nos. ROB
PWL-AGC 52 2 0 50 15 35 (6 nos. ROB & (4 nos. ROB &
& 18 nos.
6 nos. LHS) 11 no. LHS)
LHS)

Problem being faced:

 RUB can’t be constructed in the vicinity of canal and waterlogged areas.
 Land acquisition for approaches is also a biggest hurdle in built-up areas
CHALLENGES…
Availability of maintenance corridor:
 120 m in working time table but rarely available
 Only 30% blocks falls in nominated corridor.
 Due to out of path and goods trains

Position of corridor block availability in last 3 years

Year Block hrs Block hrs % block granted w.r.t. % block
demanded granted Demanded granted in
corridor
Nos. Hrs Nos. Hrs Nos. Hrs
15492:0
2016-17 3873 3357 6341:00 87 41 30
0
13495:0
2017-18 3691 3355 7242:00 91 53 31
0
2018-19
11016:0
(up to 3044 2605 4391:00 86 40 29
0
Jan'19)
CHALLENGES…
USFD testing on such high speed/density route
 Very short margin availability due to large no of trains
 Worry about own safety - Difficult to concentrate
 Affects testing quality adversely
 USFD testing should be in corridor block (min 3 hrs)

Push trolley inspection :

 No push trolley /rail dolly in Gatiman corridor
 Such inspection should be in maintenance corridor
 Track man, key man- lost life during, lost leg (2 cases)
CHALLENGES…
Fracture detection system:
 Technology based system should be adopted
 Accurate and timely detection
 Ultrasonic Broken Rail Detection Trial in Allahabad
 More reliable than manual patrolling based system

Riding quality of track

 Track should be C&M Vol-1 standard
 Even with very good quality of running and TGI value
 only 60 to 80 % track comply to C & M vol 1
 Reason : maintenance & TRC chord don’t match with critical
wave length of rolling stocks
 TRC chord – 3.5m & 7.5m
 CSM, HOT – 14-15m
 UNIMAT - 18m
 CHALLENGES…

Average TGI value of AGC – PWL section

121 126
CHALLENGES…

OMS PEAKS observed in GATIMAN EXPRESS (PWL-AGC) Section

UP Line DN Line
Month of
Peak > 0.15 g Peak > 0.20 g Peak > 0.15 g Peak > 0.20 g
recording
Vertical Lateral Vertical Lateral Vertical Lateral Vertical Lateral

Oct' 18 13 0 1 0 14 1 3 0

Nov' 18 16 0 2 0 7 0 0 0

Dec' 18 8 0 1 0 12 0 1 0

Jan' 19 14 0 1 0 14 0 0 0
 C & M volume 1 compliance (PWL-AGC)
UP ROAD DN ROAD
Month of TRC
% OF KMS % OF KMS OF FACTORS NOT CONFIRMING C& M-1 % OF KMS % OF KMS OF FACTORS NOT CONFIRMING C& M-1
recording No KMS
RECORDED
CONFIRMIN
KMS
RECORDED
CONFIRMIN
G C&M-1 G
UNEVENNES
UNEVENNESS TWIST GAUGE ALIGNMENT TWIST GAUGE ALIGNMENT
S

Mar-17 7967 126 78.00 0.79 0.79 37.31 28.57 125 76.00 0.00 0.00 24.00 20.81

May-17 7968 126 40.16 0.00 29.92 59.84 18.11 109 12.84 0.91 70.64 69.72 25.69

Aug-17 7968 84 53.01 0.00 13.01 46.44 21.42 91 59.00 0.00 25.27 41.00 30.76

Dec-17 7965 117 74.00 2.56 5.12 26.51 17.09 121 73.00 0.82 2.47 27.27 21.00

Mar-18 7968 86 62.79 0.00 25.52 37.21 11.62 116 46.55 3.00 53.45 32.75 14.65

Oct-18 7965 122 69.68 0.00 7.37 22.95 16.39 116 66.37 1.72 3.44 32.75 21.56

Jan-19 7968 ǚ 28.00 119 64.71 0.84 35.29 35.29 25.21

126 62.00 0.00 27.00 48.00
 Critical Wavelength of various
rolling stock
S.N. Critical Wavelength of various rolling stock at different speeds
Rolling Vertical Mode
Stock 90 Kmph 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Kmph Kmph Kmph Kmph Kmph Kmph
Km/h
V
e LHB 18.94 21.04 23.15 25.25 27.36 29.46 31.57 33.67
To To To To To To To To
r
t
Coaches 23.15 25.72 25.98 30.86 33.44 36.01 38.58 41.15
i
c WAP-5 19.84 22.05 24.25 26.46 28.66 30.86 33.07 33.27
a
l WAP-7 18.52 20.58 22.63 24.69 26.75 28.81 30.86 32.92
L LHB Coaches 17.01 18.9 20.79 22.68 24.57 26.46 28.34 30.23
a To To To To To To To To
t
e 21.01 23.34 25.68 28.01 30.35 32.68 35.01 37.35
r WAP-5 17.86 19.84 21.83 23.81 25.79 27.78 29.76
31.75
a
l WAP-7 19.23 21.37 23.50 25.64 27.78 29.91 32.05
34.19
CHALLENGES…

committee of 3 SAG officers on RDSO

TM-173 report on identification of
relevant chord and gave their
recommendations for adoption of the
same on Indian Railway for
measurement of track geometry
parameters.
Recommended chord lengths for
speeds bands above 130 KMPH
Chord
Parameter Rolling stock
length

9 meter WDM-3D
Unevenness 18 meter ICF Coach, LHB Coach, WAP-5,
WAP-7
9 meter WDM-3F
Alignment 15 meter ICF Coach, LHB Coach, WAP-5,
WAP-7, WAP-4
ACS 149
Thanks
Lateral Ballast Resistance (LBR) of Sleepers

LBR is dependent on µ which

depends on roughness of sleeper
particularly at bottom, Quality of
Ballast and its consolidation
 What DTS Does?
• During tamping, lifting, slewing, deep screening etc. the lateral
resistance of track gets reduced . During maintenance tamping, it
reduces to 50 % (Internationally studied).
• Lateral Ballast Resistance rebuilds gradually with passage of trains.
Initial settlement is fast but is uncontrolled and track parameters
achieved after tamping are not retained.
• With DTS, initial controlled consolidation is achieved. Consolidation
is uniform and more effective.
• Detoriation of Track parameter under train load is effectively
controlled.
 Proportional Levelling system in DGS

Maximum Settlement or Constant Pre Load

mode (Work site tamping)
The machine works with proportional
levelling system “off” to achieve maximum
consolidation.

Controlled Settlement or Variable Pre-Load

mode (Maintenance tamping).
The machine works with proportional
levelling system “on” to achieve adequate
consolidation simultaneous retaining track
parameters by controlling load at different
point
• The consolidation ensures uniform
track modulus and increased µ i.e
increased LBR.
• Track detoriation takes altogether
different path.
 Trial was conducted in JHS Division of
Indian Railways to calculate the LBR in
following condition:
• The LBR of individual sleepers in
RDSO (Report consolidated track.
NO TM 195) • LBR of individual sleeper after
tamping by CSM with 30 mm general
lift.
• LBR after one round of Stabilisation
by DTS.
TEST BEING
CONDUCTED
IN JHANSI
DIVISION -
NCR
 LBR Test Result

Item No of Sleepers Average Value Remarks

Tested

Initial LBR for 6 1433 Kgf -

consolidated track

LBR after tamping(30 6 663 Kgf 46% of Initial LBR

mm General Lift)

LBR after one round 6 914 Kgf 64% of initial LBR

of DTS working (increase of 40%)
 Trial in Muradabad division of Northern Railway

This was done to find the traffic equivalent of one round of DTS
Item Average Value

LBR after tamping(30 mm General Lift) 575 Kgf

LBR after one round of DTS working 760 Kgf

• Every day Traffic (GMT) in that section was taken from Traffic control (Lko).
• Corresponding increase in LBR was measured at regular interval to
estimate GMT at which LBR becomes 760 Kgf
 Traffic (GMT) equivalent of DTS Consolidation
The traffic (GMT) every day and corresponding increase in LBR was measured.
Lateral Ballast Resistance
1600
Lateral Ballast Resistance (Kgf)

1400

1200

1000

800
760
600

400

200

-0.5
0
0
0.205 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
GMT Traffic After DTS

Traffic equivalent of one round of DTS is 0.205 GMT (Internationally this has been
found to be upto 0.3 GMT ).
 Indian Railway’s Manual provisions
IRTMM-2000 (Para 2.3.2)
In one pass machine carries out stabilization equivalent to passage of
one lakh tonne of traffic.

LWR Manual (Para 1.18)

Consolidation of track (PSC) is making up of loss of resistance by:
• Passage of atleast 50000 Gross Ton of traffic.
• At least one round of stabilization by DTS.
• For newly laid LWR/CWR, at least three round of packing , last two of
which should be with on-track tamping Machines. (?)
High Speed Route maintenance requirement

01
To keep vehicle dynamic within
limit, following measures are
required to be taken :
• The maintenance tolerance is kept
tighter.
• Track modulus should be uniform.
02
Any speed restriction results in
huge punctuality loss so it
should be for minimum
duration.

DTS provides a solution to these new challenges.

 Maintenance Cycle -Normal
• Immediately after
tamping, the rate of
detoriation of track is
very high.
• After initial consolidation
the rate becomes
uniform.
• Next tamping is done
when track reaches the
maintenance Limit.
• Tamping after certain
cycles becomes not so
effective and major
maintenance input
required.
 Maintenance Cycle-High speed route

• For high speed routes

the maintenance limit
is more tight, thus
frequency of tamping
Minimum allowable maintenance limit
and renewal is more. for high speed routes
• Track maintenance
requires traffic block
which is very critical in
high speed routes.
 Maintenance cycle with DTS
• Uniform track modulus and
increased µ i.e increased LBR.
• With DTS, the maintenance cycle
changes and the first tamping is
shifted by X GMT of traffic.
• The period between next and all
subsequent tamping increases thus
reducing maintenance effort. X
• Case study by DB AG has shown
that interval between two tamping
Rate of detoriation of track attended by DTS
can be increased by 30%. Similar
result has been reported
Conrail,USA. For high speed it
becomes crotical
 Impact of Speed restriction-High Speed Routes
Vide Railway Board letter no 2016/M(L)/467/2 dated 07.11.2016, the
estimated time loss for train speed for 140 Km/h and 160 Km/h for
appreciation of impact are given below:
No of Coaches Restricted Speed (Km/h) of Time loss to Passenger train hauled by 2 WDP4
length 1 KM Locomotive (minute)
140 Km/h (loss due 160 Km/h (loss due
acceleration to normal acceleration to normal
speed) speed)
24 ICF Coaches 100 5.05 15.13
(including 5 SGAC) 70 7.14 17.67
40 9.22 19.06
20 12.08 22.02

• As 200Kmph and above , the impact is going to be more pronounced.

 Speed Relaxation at BCM work site
(Para 238(2)(g)(iii) of IRPWM)
Details of Work Days of Work Speed Restriction
Deep screening of track by BCM, ballast equalization 1st day 40 Kmph
followed by initial packing and initial stabilization by DTS
First round of tamping followed by stabilization of track by 2nd day 40 Kmph
DTS (1st Tamping)
Survey of track for design tamping mode as per annexure 5.3 3rd day 40 kmph
of IRTMM-2000, boxing of ballast section and tiding
Second round of tamping followed by stabilization of track 4th day 40 Kmph
by DTS (2nd Tamping)
Survey of track for design tamping mode as per annexure 5.3 5th Day 40 Kmph
of IRTMM-2000, boxing of ballast section and tiding
Third round of tamping in design mode followed by third 6th Day 75 Kmph
round of stabilization of track by DTS (3rd Tamping)
Inspection of track, boxing of ballast section and tiding 8th Day Normal Speed of the section.
(may be taken upto 110
Kmph)
 Impact of existing relaxation schedule.
• Speed is normalised on 8th day and if we take average progress of 300m per
day, the speed restriction length will be for 2.4 Km with the breakup given
below :
Speed restriction No of days Length @ 300m /day Time Loss (App)
progress Time loss/Train
(Sectional speed 160
Kmph)

40 Kmph 5 1500 m 25 min

75 Kmph 3 900

• The restriction therefore needs to be for short duration, short length and
should be of as high speed as possible.
 International Best Practice on SR relaxation

Network Railway (UK), are relaxing speed to 80 mile/hour (130 Km/h)

and above immediately after track renewal and Deep Screening by
using following procedure:
• At Track renewal site- Tamping in design mode followed by DTS in
controlled settlement mode.
• At Deep Screening site- Using Special Ballast Cleaning machine with
Ballast Hopper attached for feeding Ballast just behind cutter bar
during screening and with In-built Tamper and Stabiliser. Inbuilt Track
Geometry system ensures that desired geometry is achieved during
tamping and DTS ensures that track parameter is retained with
consolidation.
 Reccommendation of M/s Plasser & Theurer
Condition Leveling Settlement settings Oscillation Working speed
system frequency

After first tamping operation OFF 80 bar 30-35 HZ 600-1000 m/h

(Constant Loads)
After second tamping operation OFF 100 bar 30-35 HZ 600-1000 m/h
(Constant Loads)
After final tamping operation ON 70 bar 30-35 HZ 600-1300 m/h
(Design mode tamping) (variable load)

Though maximum speed is not specified, can safely be taken to apply for 200 Kmph sectional
speed.
By three round of tamping with two in maximum settlement mode and one in controlled
settlement mode immediately after design mode of tamping the speed can be made normal.
 Conclusion
• The capacity of DTS is under rated on IR. Its performance on IR condition
is same as internationally accepted. After some more studies, the
corresponding manual provisions in LWR and IRPWM be reviewed.
• Tamping machine is only for correcting track parameter. Its utilisation for
consolidation of track as in LWR manual is not correct.
• For high speed routes, we cannot afford to work without DTS .
To control maintenance cycle for controlling maintenance cost.
For early relaxation of speed at worksites to avoid punctuality loss.
IPWE INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR 2019

FATIQUE CRITERION BASED

STRESS ANALYSIS FOR RAIL,
A MUST FOR HIGH-SPEED &
HEAVY FREIGHT TRAFFIC

S. GOPALAKRISHNAN
Retd. Addl. Member Works / Railway Board
M.S. EKBOTE
Retd. Addl. Member CE / Railway Board
RAJESH KUMAR SHEKHAWAT 1
Senior Professor (Projects), IRICEN
 PREAMBLE
This Paper is presented at a crucial moment, following Railway Board’s final order dated
14.3.18 on Item no.1298 of 86th TSC, which deals with “Track Structure for 25t Axle Load
freight wagons being operated at 100km/h”.
In 86th TSC Meeting (Dec.’16), RDSO recommended track structure for 25t operation,
which included the use of 68kg-90UTS rail. TSC did not accept RDSO’s recommendations;
but wanted further study, which was approved by Railway Board.
After another round of discussion by TSC in the 9th Extra Ordinary Meeting held on 18th
& 19th Jan.’18, RDSO revised the rail stress calculation, considering some fresh factors.
The next milestone is the issue of final directives by the Railway Board (vide no.
2018/CE-II/TS/25T of 14.3.18), giving detailed description of all components for track
structure, among which the first item is “60kg or higher section with 110 UTS”. This
letter says that the orders are consequent to TSC proceedings and RDSO’s revised Stress
Analysis Report sent under their letter no. CT/DG/LW/HAW dated 21.02.2018.
Incidentally, Specification IRS-T-12 -2009 covers only three grades – one grade of 90UTS
and 2 grades of 110UTS. The latter two grades are not yet produced by SAIL.
This Paper submits that RB’s directive is entirely in the right direction. However, the
Authors find that this decision is unfortunately supported by deficient calculations. The
present methodology of rail stress calculation and analysis can be replaced by ‘Fatigue
Criterion Based Stress Analysis’ in line with the practice of advanced railway systems.
2
 GROUNDS THAT PROMPTED PREPARATION OF THIS PAPER
1. First and Second Authors have worked as Dy. Director in RDSO in 1973-78.
2. They have participated in a Program at Hindustan Aeronautics on “Design
based on fatigue”, which included the application of Smith Diagram.
3. The First Author while working for Railway & Metro Rail Projects in Malaysia
for 12 years, had acquired experience in Track stress calculation. These
calculations were accepted by the Consultants from Europe and Australia. He
had also inspected and accepted rails, complying with EN-13674-1, at reputed
rolling mills in Germany and China,
4. The Second Author was associated with “Study of Rail Problems in Mumbai
Suburban Sections” and had opportunity to work with Dr. Esveld directly.
5. The Second Author, had deeply studied rail problems all over IR, while working
as AM(CE)/Rly.Board.
6. The Authors had studied RDSO’s Rail stress Analysis Report dated 21.2.18,
which has explained the limitations of the reliability of their calculations. They
noticed that some of the assumptions made in the calculation appear to be
obsolete, in the light of international practice. Though this Report talks about
Smith Diagram, this has not been applied in the analysis. The Authors felt that
they can contribute to improve the method of analysis.
3
 MAJOR EMPHASIS IN THIS PAPER:
SHIFT FROM ‘CHECKING THE MAXIMUM STRESS AGAINST YIELD STRESS’ TO
‘CHECKING THE FLUCTUATION OF STRESS FROM FATIGUE POINT OF VIEW’.
This Technical Paper suggests ‘Rail Stress Analysis’ applying the following principles:
 Fatigue Criterion should be applied for the combined effect of bending stresses,
thermal stresses and residual stress remaining in rail.
 Yield Stress Criterion should be applied for the combined effect of (a) bending
stresses due to wheel load acting centrally on rail-head, (b) stresses caused by
lateral bending due to lateral force acting on the rail and (c) stresses consequent
to torsion of the rail due to eccentric loading of wheel load and lateral force.
 Criteria of (1) Shear Stress Fatigue and (2) Shear Stress Yield should be applied for
contact shear stress induced at rail top due to impact wheel load.
Thus significant improvement has been suggested, as compared to the present
method, wherein all stresses put together is verified against yield strength. Having
experienced that rails are frequently failing due to fatigue, the right remedy is fatigue
oriented design.
Instead of reinventing the wheel, the Authors have followed the principles given in
Dr. Esveld’s Book ‘Modern Railway Track’. A method of estimating the Factor of
Safety for the given loading condition (which is not available in the present
methodology) has been introduced by the Authors.
4
 PRIME STEP NEEDED, WITH REGARD TO QUALITY OF RAIL STEEL
Revision of the stipulation for Yield Strength (fy) and Endurance Limit (fe)
in IR Specification T-12, to induce the Suppliers to manufacture rails to meet
the technical requirements of heavy and high-speed traffic, combined with SAFETY.

fy of rail steel as adopted by IR is 52% of UTS. Thus fy of 90UTS rails is 46.8 kg/mm2 and
that of 110UTS rail will be 57.2 kg/mm2. But advanced railways stipulate fy of nearly 60-
65% of UTS. (AREMA has stipulated fy > 70% of UTS). Also, elongation requirement is
10-14%, in contrast to 9-10% as per IRS-T-12. Endurance Limit fe is also enhanced as
complimentary to higher yield strength and elongation, on advanced railways.
Technical brochure of Nippon Steel, Japan is reproduced here. (More information has
been given in the Paper.)
The Authors have learnt that such improvements
are possible by micro alloying process. The
following suggestions are made for IRS-T-12:

For 90UTS For 110UTS

Min. Yield strength (60%) 54 kg/mm2 66 kg/mm2

Min. Endurance Limit (43%) ±39 kg/mm2 ±48 kg/mm2

Percentage Elongation 12% 12%

5
IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR THE PRESENT METHOD OF CALCULATING RAIL STRESSES
(Closely follows the method given in Dr. Esveld’s text book)

1. Adding 0.2Q to the wheel load Q, to cater for on-loading on outer rail of curve.
2. Lateral force Y on rail to be taken as 0.15Q, instead of half of Prud’homme Limit
for Lateral Thrust on track. Prud’homme Limit will leave a residual deflection in
alignment and therefore will be unrealistically high.
3. Stresses due to lateral bending and twisting of rail due to lateral force Y and
eccentricity of wheel load need not be considered for evaluating fatigue effect.
But these will be considered for examining the possibility of plastic deformation,
when combined with bending stress due to bending in vertical plane.
4. Adopting Eisenmann Formula for Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF), instead of
following the curves given in RDSO’s Reports C-100 and C-92. Value of DAF will be
varied for calculation of (i) rail stress due to vertical bending, (ii) rail stress due to
eccentricity of wheel load and lateral force Y and (iii) stresses at different depths
from the sleeper bottom.
5. Adopting single value of Track Modulus instead of Initial and Elastic Moduli. The
correct approach will be to determine Track Modulus for dynamic condition and
apply the same in the calculation of bending stresses.

6
IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED FOR THE PRESENT METHOD OF CALCULATING RAIL STRESSES - Continued

6. No need to add 10% of stresses for heaving of track due to the leading wheel.
7. No need to add 10% of bending stresses ‘due to Unforeseen Conditions’, since the
revised method is fatigue criterion oriented
8. Use of Smith Diagram to evaluate the permissibility of fluctuating stresses,
instead of comparing the total stress to yield strength. This gives confidence
regarding factor of safety, since the application of Smith Diagram in the design of
fatigue prone components is internationally accepted.
9. Calculating contact shear stress, by substituting in the place of Q, the
Instantaneous Shock Load of Wheel, instead of [Static Q +1t]. By adopting max
permissible shear stress as 0.3xUTS, we can find out the maximum shock load
permissible from fatigue consideration. This exercise brings out the need to adopt
110UTS rail for 25t axle load and the need to control wheel flat length. This also
justifies lowering the Alarm Limit of WILD from 35t to 30t, despite using 110UTS rail.
10. Vertical Pressure caused by the vehicle at various levels below the sleeper-soffit
will be determined by Boussinesq Theory supplemented by Odemark Theory.
All the 10 improvements needed are explained in detail in the Technical Paper,
where the readers will find full and convincing explanations. However, only five
salient items will be highlighted in this presentation.
7
 PRINCIPLE OF
FATIGUE
CRITERION
DESIGN
Under dynamic
loading, fluctuating
stress at a point
may follow one of
these four patterns:

Pattern A is very popular and can be generated in a laboratory. To decide

Endurance Limit of rail-steel, standard machined samples are prepared from the
rail-head. Fatigue tests are conducted on the samples subjecting these to various
values of ±σ and finding the corresponding cycles of stress-reversal n causing
failure of the sample. The results are plotted to get ‘σ vs n curve’. From this plot,
the stress reversal ±σe corresponding to 5 (or 10) million cycles is interpolated and
taken as Endurance Limit fe.

If, in any other situation, stress reversal takes place similar to pattern B, C or D, it
is possible to find out the maximum permissible stress variation with respect to
σm, knowing Endurance Limit, UTS and Yield Strength. This is accomplished
through Smith Diagram, as explained in the Calculation given in Annexure. 8
 Dynamic Amplification Factor (DAF)
Eisenmann Formula is the internationally used formula giving the value of DAF.
Stress due to static force when multiplied by DAF gives Dynamic Stress.
DAF = 1 + qst,
q: Quality Factor = 0.1 for track in very good condition
0.2for track in good condition
0.3 for track in bad condition
s: Speed Factor =

t: Probability Factor = 1 for 84.15% coverage of scatter (or 84.15% confidence level)
2 for 97.7% coverage of scatter (or 97.7% confidence level)
3 for 99.85% coverage of scatter (or 99.85% confidence level)

t =1 is applied for calculating bending stresses in rails and fastenings

t =2 is applied for calculating stresses due to lateral force and in ballast bed
t =3 is applied for calculating rail stresses in sub-grade below ballast bed
9
 USE OF SMITH DIAGRAM TO APPLY
Fatigue safe zone is FATIGUE CONSIDERATION.
bounded by red line
Values of extreme stresses, inclusive
of Thermal Stress and Residual Stress
at periphery of rail-foot:
 When Wheel Load is at the point
considered: 50.2kg/mm2 (Tensile)
 When two Wheel loads are at
213cm on either side of the point
considered: 31.9kg/mm2 (Tensile)
 Mean stress: 41 kg/mm2

As seen in Smith Diagram, for the

mean stress of 41 kg/mm2, maximum
permissible stress range is 57.2 - 24.8
kg/mm2 (refer green strip), which is
larger than 50.2 - 32 kg/mm2 (refer
blue strip). So, this variation of stress
is OK from fatigue consideration.
Factor of Safety =
(57.2 – 24.8) ÷ (50.2 – 32) = 1.78
10
 Application of
Boussinesq Theory supplemented by
Odemark Theory,
For calculating the stresses
at various depths below sleeper bottom

Location Vertical pressure

Sleeper bottom 25.37 t/m2

Interface between 9.06 t/m2
ballast & sub-ballast
Interface between 4.63 t/m2
sub-ballast & sand layer
Interface between 4.21 t/m2
sand layer & formation

11
 Isolated wheel burn Local depression of rail head

CONSEQUENCES OF
EXCESSIVE CONTACT
STRESSES

Shelling, initial stage Shelling, advanced stage

Gauge corner shelling Continuous spalling due to false flange 12

 CONTACT SHEAR STRESS AT RAIL-WHEEL CONTACT POINT
Max. contact shear stress = 4.13 √(Q/r) kg/mm2
Q = wheel load in kg; r = worn out wheel radius in mm
P1 is Impact Wheel Over-load or Shock Wheel Load.
Stress caused by P1 is found by substituting Q = P1.
From this formula, the following can be derived:
(P1)Repetitive ≤ r (0.3xfu/4.13)2 = 0.00527rfu2
(P1)Occasional ≤ r (0.38xfu/4.13)2 = 0.00847rfu2
Where fu is the UTS

FOR WORNOUT WHEEL DIAMETER 930mm UTS 90kg/mm2 110kg/mm2

Repetitive P1 from fatigue failure criterion 19.85t 29.65t
Occasional P1 from plastic deformation criterion 31.907t 47.66t
13
 Calculations of Rail Stresses On Fatigue Consideration
The Computer Program is highly user friendly and follows the method presented in the Joint Paper
by Mr. S. Gopalkrishnan, Mr. M.S.Ekbote and Mr. Rajesh Shekhawat
This Program has been developed by Mr. M.S. Ekbote
The opening slide on Data entry appears as below
On pressing the “Next” button the next slide opens and on clicking “compute” button all results
are displayed as under-
Results of stress calculations from plastic deformation of rail are displayed on clicking the “next”
button on previous screen and clicking the “compute” button
Results of calculations for contact stresses are shown on the next screen.
Calculation of stresses underneath sleeper, ballast ,sub ballast, sand layer and
Formation are displayed in the last screen
 CONCLUSION

RAIL FRACTURE IS THE CHRONIC PROBLEM ON INDIAN RAILWAYS. FRACTURES ARE

ATTRIBUTABLE TO FATIQUE OF RAIL STEEL DUE TO REVERSAL OF BENDING STRESSES
OR REVERSAL OF RAIL-WHEEL CONTACT SHEAR STRESSES. HENCE, IT IS LOGICAL TO
 CALCULATE THE STRESSES BASED ON MORE ACCURATE PRINCIPLES, NOW
AVAILABLE WITH ADVANCED TRACK TECHNOLOGY
 EVALUATE THE STRESSES FROM FATIGUE POINT OF VIEW, USING SMITH DIAGRAM,
IN LINE WITH INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE
 CHANGE RDSO METHODOLOGY TO COMPUTE CONTACT SHEAR STRESSES,
CONSIDERING IMPACT WHEEL LOAD, WHICH WAS HITHERTO IGNORED.
ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN SEPARATELY TO AMEND IR SPECIFICATION FOR RAILS (IRS-
T-12), SO AS TO INCREASE THE YIELD STRENGTH, ENDURANCE LIMIT AND
ELONGATION OF RAIL STEEL, IN LINE WITH THE STIPULATIONS IN VOGUE ON
ADVANCED RAILWAY SYSTEMS. SAIL SHOULD BE PREVAILED TO DEVISE MICRO
ALLOYING TECHNIQUE TO ACHIEVE THIS OBJECTIVE. IN FACT, IR SHOULD INTRODUCE
120UTS (1175MPa) RAILS, SIMILAR TO R350-LT & R350-LHT GRADE RAILS,
COMPLYING WITH EN 13674-1.
THE AUTHORS REQUEST THAT ME / RAILWAY BOARD MAY ORGANIZE A MEETING OF
RDSO ENGINEERS WITH THE AUTHORS, FOR OPEN DISCUSSION.

Contacts of Authors: sgkdorai@yahoo.com, msekbote@gmail.com and shekhawat.rajesh@iricen.gov.in 19

International Technical Seminar
22-23 Feb-2019
Hyderabad (India) 1
2
 q, τ

Δσ2F σdyn Δσ3F

3
 Rail Stresses (2016) Kg/mm2
Bending stress (72% DAF) 13.07
Residual stress 19.20
Thermal stress 10.75
Stress due to unforeseen factors 4.68
Total stress 47.70
Permissible stress 46.80
Δσ = σtot - σper 0.9
Deviation (%) 1.9%

4
 Rail Stresses (2017) Kg/mm2
Rail foot
Location
Centre
Bending stress (72% DAF) 12.51
Residual stress 24.50
Thermal stress 11.32
Stress due to unforeseen factors 1.25
Total stress 49.58
Permissible stress 46.80
Δσ = σtot - σper 2.78
Deviation (%) 5,9%

Value of Residual stress increased as per EN 13674

5
 Rail Stresses (2018) Kg/mm2
Rail foot
Location
centre
Bending stress (72% DAF) 12.51
Residual stress 19.38
Thermal stress 11.32
Stress due to unforeseen factors 1.25
Total stress 44.46
Permissible stress 46.80
Δσ = σtot - σper -2.34
Deviation (%) -5,0%

All calc. same. Only Residual Stress value reduced as per actual received.

6
1. Residual stresses:
a. Substantial (40-50%).
b. Justification of taking higher residual stresses
c. Trend of Residual stresses in latest rolling techniques
2. Bending stresses: uniform.
3. Thermal Stresses: uniform, Can it be reduced?
4. Unforeseen stresses contribute a minor portion of total stresses.
5. Yield stresses:
1. Is it reasonable?
2. By taking lower value of Yield stresses are not we underutilizing
the Rail ?
6. The methodology of calculations uses a Specific track modulus
that has arisen from field measurements . Possibility to reduce the
overall rail stresses with improvements in the superstructure ?

7
 Internal Stresses induced on account of Rolling and Straightening process.
Dependent on Manufacturing Technology.

According to Εisenmann
for new technology
production of rails σΕ = 80 –
100 MPa

According to ΕN 13674 max

value for rail delivery σΕ = 245
MPa
Remaining bending
According to Esveld constant stress
stress for calculations σΕ+ΔΤ =
320 Mpa. It includes Thermal
Stresses 120 MPa for 50O K Thermal stress σΔT
Constant stress σΔΤ+Ε

Residual stress σΕ

8
According to RDSO report
constant stress σΕ+ΔΤ = 358,2
Mpa taken is too high.

According to Esveld constant

stress can be taken with a
value of 320 MPa into
consideration.

However maximum value for

the residual stress given by
European Regulation EN
13674 is not obligatory. Remaining bending stress 110 MPa

Thermal stress σΔT = 113 MPa

According to RDSO report

constant stress σΕ+ΔΤ = 358,2 MPa
Residual stress σΕ = 245 MPa

9
The distribution of residual
stress along the length( about
20 M) is depicted.
Continuous line- Max residual
stress along the rail
Dashed line- Minimum values
for residual stress .
For UIC-60 , the value varies
from 125-190 MPa.

As per actual value received

in DFCC, The residual status Value of Maximum Residual stress in DFCC
was 105 MPa in WDFCC & 188 Residual Stresses (MPa)
MPa in EDFCC.
The value of residual stress Section Supplier
for the rails received from 60 Kg 90 UTS 60 Kg 110 UTS (HH)
Jindal Steel are on the higher CTP-1&2 NSSMC & 100
side but still the value of 245 JFE,
MPa taken in calculation. CTP-3R Japan 105
APL-1 Jindal 174.87
APL-2 India 188.13

10
• Permissible yield stress in IR for 90 UTS Rail- 468 MPa
• Its on lower side as compare to world standard.
• Permissible yield stress in German, Swiss & Austrian Railways- 495
MPa.
• Permissible yield stress according to Esveld- 580 MPa.
• Lower value of yield stress leads to under utilization of Rail section.

11
 Capacity of Rails to bear Axle load and Speed as per Eisenmann diagram

According to Eisenmann rail

profile UIC60 90 UTS is
capable to withstand traffic
load 32 – 42 t before failure
for different foundation
modulus, in curves
(additional max load 20%) for
concrete sleeper.

12
 Capacity of Rails to bear Axle load and Speed as per Eisenmann diagram

C=0,05 N/mm3

Higher foundation modulus

enables the higher axle load
capacity of Rails

Quality of
C (N/mm3)
track support
Very bad 0,02
Bad 0,05
Good 0,10 – 0,20
Rigid 0,20 – 0,60

13
 Foundation Modulus C
(kN/mm3)
Stresses on rail head

Load
Combinations
Curve
Constant stresses
Axle Load- 25 T
(residual + thermal) Bending stresses of rail
V=100 km/h

Stresses in the sleeper-

Straight Track
ballast interface
Various conditions of the
track

Stresses in substructure

14
Dynamic stress at rail foot θ1 θ2

C (N/mm3) 0,15 0,07 0,02 0,15 0,07 0,02

Residual stress σE 190 190 190 190 190 190

Thermal stress σΔΤ 120 120 120 120 120 120

Constant stress 310 310 310 310 310 310

Stress due to Wheel Load 79,7 89,6 109,4 101,4 114,1 139,2

σtot 389,7 399,6 419,4 411,4 424,1 449,2

permissible stress σ,per 468 468 468 468 468 468

σper - σtot 78,3 68,4 48,6 56,6 43,9 18,8

Deviation (%) 16,73% 14,62% 10,38% 12,09% 9,38% 4,02%

15
• The value of Residual stress taken as 245 MPa is on higher side
without justification. Lower value of Residual stress should be taken
• Permissible yield stress taken as 468 MPa is less than the
International standard.
• Taking the value of residual stress as 193.8 instead of 245 MPa, total
stress in 60 kg 90 UTS rail are within permissible yield stress of 468
MPa.
• From the above analysis - 60 Kg Rail 90 UTS rail is suitable for 100
KMPH – 25 T Axle load.

16
In order to reduce the rail stresses, following suggestions are made:
1. For higher axle load it is recommended to follow best rail production
methods to reduce internal residual stresses. Significant reduction in residual
stress will lead to higher load capacity.
2. Foundation modulus plays an important role in load bearing capacity of Rail.
For higher axle load routes superstructure (formation & Bridges) to be kept
in good condition (C=0.12-0.15 N/mm3).
3. Reduction in Rail stress can be achieved by use of proper rail pad, wider
sleeper, suitable rolling stock.
4. Reduction in gap in maintenance time with monitoring and maintenance
program leads to higher value of foundation modulus.
5. In order to achieve the proper track behavior for 25t operation, further
investigations may be required like 3D FEM analysis, taking into
consideration the interaction between all track components.
17
18
 Selection of Rail
for
Mixed Traffic Regime
- Nilmani, Ex. Director/ Track-1/RDSO
- Ajay Kumar, Director/Track-2/RDSO
 SELECTION OF RAIL
Content
 Effect of increased Axle load/ Speed
 Design requirement of rail
 Effect of mechanical properties of rail
on rail degradation
 Experiences of other Railway systems
 Recommendation
 EFFECT OF INCREASED
AXLE LOAD/ SPEED
 Increased forces on track
 ORE, D/141/RP 1
 10% increase in axle load leads to 30 -
40 % increase in fatigue failure in rails
 ORE, D/141/RP 5
 10% increase in axle load leads to
increase in maintenance cycle by 33 %
 DESIGN CRITERIA

Failure criteria adopted for design

 Yielding under combination of
stresses– residual, bending, thermal
 Fatigue due to bending stress under
cyclic loading
 Contact stress fatigue
YIELD CRITERIA
 DESIGN CRITERIA

 Design of rail on IR has been primarily

based on the Yield Criteria
 Bending fatigue and Contact stress
fatigue would limit the life of rail on
account of fatigue failure
 FATIGUE DESIGN
 Considering constant residual and
temperature stresses, 60 Kg 880 grade
rail is inadequate in Bending fatigue
 Accounting for Dynamic loading, 60 Kg
880 grade rail is also inadequate in
contact fatigue.
 However, contact stress environment is
very complex. Hence, the world practice
is to select the rail based on prevailing
level of degradation
 SELECTION OF RAIL
 Modes of degradation
 Wear

 Fatigue defect
 Surface initiated
 Internal
 SELECTION OF RAIL
Surface initiated RCF defect
 Initiated by frictional loading of rail
head
 Surface crack initiation by plastic
deformation exceeding fracture strain
 Cracks initially grow at shallow angle
 With cracks becoming larger, growth
may become transverse
 Assisted by presence of tensile
stresses in rail head
CRACK PROPAGATION
 RCF - CRACK GROWTH AND
RAIL FAILURE
 Initiation and growth of small cracks is
governed by contact stress field
 Growth of larger cracks is mainly
governed by global bending and
thermal stresses
 Fracture criteria for a cracked rail
 Stress intensity factor (KI) ≥ Fracture
toughness of rail material (KIc)
RCF - RAIL FAILURE
RAIL MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
 Reduced Fatigue Defect generation
(from non-metalic inclusions)
 Increased strength (and Hardness)

 Milder Head Hardness gradient

 Higher strength (and Hardness) rail is

required from both Fatigue and Wear
considerations
 However, Fracture Toughness should
be adequate
 SELECTION OF RAIL

 World Railways have been adopting

stronger (and harder) rail
 Made possible with recent
advancements in rail manufacturing,
particularly Heat Treated rail
 SELECTION OF RAIL
 Governed by operating condition and
extent of degradation prevailing
 Condition on these accounts is severe
on IR
 60 Kg 880 Grade rail being used on IR is
inadequate for mixed traffic of 25 t and
160 kmph
 SELECTION OF RAIL

 These rails are also not adequate as per

European Railway and IHHA Guidelines
 Chinese and Russian Railways
experiences support use of higher
strength rail
 Heat Treated rail equivalent to R350HT
of EN Specifications (1175 MPa, 350-390
BHN) is recommended
THANK YOU !
Design & Development
of New Track
Components
for
Mixed Traffic Regime
- Sandeep Sharma, Ex. Director/ Track-2/RDSO
 DESIGN OF SLEEPER
 Effect of increased Axle load/ Speed
 Study with CHARMEC University
 Experiences of other Railway systems
 Development of Wider Sleeper (RT-
8527)
 Design Philosophy of Sleeper
 Instructions issued on IR for running of
Heavy Axle load wagons
 Install all sanctioned Weigh Bridges and ensure that all
weigh bridges are kept well maintained and functional.
 NO OVERLOADING must be permitted. Drastic penal action
should be taken against defaulters.
 Good train running and adequate powering should be
ensured to prevent instances of stalling/wheel slippages.
 Wagons must be well maintained, additional springs as
advised be provided during ROH/POH.
 WILD (Wheel impact load detector) must be installed at all
selected locations within one year.
 All remaining instrumentations of bridges etc. should be
concluded without any further delay.
(Hon’ble MR’s DO letter no MR/M/59/2006 dated 10.08.2006)
 INFERENCES FROM THE STUDY WITH
CHARMEC UNIV. SWEDEN
 Sleeper design for mixed traffic routes is mainly
governed by the heavy axle load and not by high speed
passenger trains.
 Presence of large size wheel flats and stiffer rail pads
have maximum effect on rail seat load and design rail
seat & Centre bending moment on the PSC sleepers.
 As the loading environment on IR is much
unpredictable due to overloading and presence of large
number of wheel flats of higher magnitude, it is
prudent to continue design of PSC sleepers on IR with
higher factor of safety for heavy axle loads.
Design of Wider & Heavier Sleeper
Design of wider and heavier sleeper has been
contemplated for the following main advantages:

 Increased width and weight providing higher

frame resistance against buckling, chances of
reducing de-stressing temperature with likely
reduction in rail/weld failures.
 Increase in rail seat area resulting in reduction in
pressure on rubber pad & higher rubber pad life.
 Reduction in ballast pressure leading to
reduction in ballast pulverization, deep
screening cycle & improved drainage.

5
 Sleeper Comparison in World Railways
S. Name of Country Gauge SECTIONAL DIMENSIONS AXLE LOAD
No. (mm) RAIL SEAT (mm) (KN)
DEPTH BOTTOM TOP
WIDTH WIDTH
1 AUSTRALIA 1435 212 250 200 245
2 CANADA 1435 203 264 216 292
3 CHINA 1435 203 280 170 245
4 GERMANY 1435 214 300 170 221
5 GR.BRITAIN 1432 203 264 216 245
6 HUNGRY 1435 181 280 204 202
7 ITALY 1435 171 284 222 221
8 JAPAN 1435 220 310 190 164
9 RUSSIA 1520 193 274 177 265
10 U.S.A 1435 241 279 241 321
11 INDIA 1673 210 250 150 221 / 245
(existing BG & 25T
sleeper)
12 INDIA 1673 230 280 210 245
(Wider Sleeper) 6
DESIGN, TRIAL CASTING & TESTING OF
WIDER SLEEPER

 Number of design options carried out at RDSO.

 All the sleepers have passed static bend tests (Rail seat
bottom, centre top, centre bottom) successfully. Three
nos. of sleepers were subjected to fatigue tests in Track
Machine Lab, RDSO. All the sleepers have withstood
fatigue test load successfully for specified 2 million
cycles.
 Design was finalised with M60 grade concrete and 16
no. of HTS strands.
Comparison of BG sleeper, existing 25T and Wider Sleeper
S. Item BG Sleeper 25 T Existing 25 T Wider
No. (22.5T) Sleeper Sleeper
1 RDSO Drawing No. RT- 2496 RT-7008 RT-8527
2 Grade of Concrete M-55 M-60 M-60
3 HTS Strands (3mm dia x 3 ply) 18 No. 20 No. 16 No.
4 Initial Prestress 70% 75% 75%
5 Prestress Loss 30% 30% 30%
6 Axle Load 22.5 T 25T 25T
7. Weight 267 kg 267 kg 334 kg
8 Dimensions: Length 2750 mm 2750 mm 2750 mm
- Depth at rail seat 210 mm 210 mm 230 mm
- Depth at centre 180 mm 180 mm 200 mm
- Width at top at rail seat 150 mm 150 mm 210 mm
- Width at Rail seat bottom 250 mm 250 mm 280 mm
9 Resisting Moment :
- at Rail Seat bottom 2.41 t-m (sagg.) 2.72 t-m (sagg.) 2.83 t-m (sagg.)
- at Centre top 1.58 t-m (hogg.) 1.83 t-m (hogg.) 1.95 t-m (hogg.)
10 Failure Moment : 4.65 t-m 5.06 t-m 5.59 t-m
11 Load Factor 3.92 3.82 4.42
FOS: at Rail Seat bottom 2.02 2.06 2.24
at Centre top 1.27 1.29 1.36
12 SBT :Cracking load at Centre top 60 KN 65 KN 68 KN
- Cracking load at rail seat bottom 230 KN 270 KN 280 KN
- Failure Load at rail seat bottom 370 KN 490 KN 535 KN
 Advantage of Wider Sleeper
Parameter Existing Section Wider Sleeper Section Percentage
Improvement
150 mm 210 mm
210 mm 230 mm

250 mm
280 mm

Rail seat Area 170.4mm x 130 mm 170.4 x 190 mm 46.0 %

(221.52 cm2) (323.76 cm2)
Rail pad Area 168mm x 125 mm 168 x 185 mm 48.0 %
(221.52 cm2) (323.76 cm2)
Pressure on 9.00 N/mm2 6.08 N/mm2 32.4 %
pad for 25T (91.7 kg/cm2 ) (62.0 kg/cm2 )
Ballast contact 6662.5 cm 2 7132.5 cm 2 7.05 %
Area
Ballast 5.96 kg/cm 2 5.54 kg/cm 2 7.05 %
pressure
Sleeper weight 267 kg 332 kg 24.3 %
9
 Improvements in PSC Sleeper Quality
 Reduction in maximum steam curing temperature in the
range of 55oC to 60oC in place of previous maximum
curing temperature range from 75 – 80oC based on
extensive trial at all sleeper plants and necessary
modifications in the PSC sleeper specifications (IRS-T39
& T-45).
 This will reduce chances of formation of DEF (Delayed
Ettringite Formation) in concrete which results in
internal splitting of concrete in 2 – 10 years of sleeper life
leading into premature failure of PSC sleepers.
 The maximum content of C3A & SO3 in 53S grade
cement for railway sleepers have been reduced to 9% &
3.3% from 10% & 3.5% respectively.
 Reduction in maximum cement content in the concrete
has upto 450 Kg/cum as per revised IS specification.
This will also enhance the durability of concrete.
10
Improved Components under developed
/ under development for wider sleeper
ERC Mk-VI
 New design of elastic rail clip of uniform dia. (23 mm) (ERC
Mk-VI) has been developed. Toe load of ERC Mk-VI has been
observed in range of 1200 – 1500 kg similar to toe load range of
ERC Mk-V which has been already adopted in IR.

 Final variant of prototypes of ERC Mk-VI has been tested in

RDSO for toe load, stress test & permanent set test and fatigue
test for 2.5 million cycles and found satisfactory.
 HIGH VISCOUS LINERS

 High viscous nylon-66 material is known for better

elongation & impact load properties.
 Viscosity number of high viscous nylon-66 material has
been kept as 270 cm3/g (minimum) as per ISO 307,
which will restrict use of regenerated / reconstituted
material.
 Heat stabilize grades of high viscous nylon-66 material
provide excellent long term heat ageing and property
retention.
 High Viscous Nylon liners will not break under load as
compared to GFN-66 liners.
HIGH PERFORMANCE PADS (RUBBER)

 The proposed high performance rail pad will aim to

provide higher degree of impact attenuation to reduce
the level of impact damage and degradation. Better
quality with use of rubber RSS grade 1-3 is expected as it
has less amount of dirt.
 Weldable CMS Crossing

 Advantages over CMS Xing -

 Elimination of fish plated joints, therefore suitable for
CWR through P&C
 Better transition between rail and crossing
 Hammering action of rail wheels eliminated leading to
improved safety & riding comfort
 Less maintenance & Improved service life
 Enhanced service life of sleepers and other track
components
 Canted Turnout : Advantages
 Frequency of lateral oscillation is reduced resulting in
improved riding comfort for passenger traffic.

 Lateral thrust is reduced leading to reduction in wear of

rail as well as wheels of rolling stock.

 The Canted rail over turnouts results in relatively central

contact band on the rail head which results in reduction
in contact pressure and gauge corner fatigue. This in
turn shall lead to increased service life of turnout.

 The transition areas at turnout extremities are removed

resulting in absolute continuity between approach track
and turnout and consequently smoother movement of
train over turnout.
 CONCLUSIONS
Wider sleepers (RDSO/T-8527) along with its fastening
components is expected to improve the track
performance considerably due to more track frame
resistance and increased life of rubber pads. This sleeper
will be more suitable for tracks with mixed traffic routes
of semi-high speed and heavy axle loads.
Introduction of New track components like High performance
pads, HVN lines and Canted Thick web turnouts with
Weldable CMS crossing will be essential for the
implementation of new operating regime of semi high speed
& heavy axle loads.
Shri Akshay Kumar Jha, CTE/ SCR
Shri D.S. Rama Rao, Sr.DEN/ N/ SC
Shri P. Devender, SSE/ PW/ SC
Int roduct ion

System Map of Secunderabad Division

MPS – 120 Kmph
GMT - 40 /50
Section identified for high speed as part of
Mission Raftar.
One of the requirements is to lay TWS for 160
kmph
Length of section - 437 km
2
No. of Stations - 27
Turnouts on Kazipet-Balharshah Section

Turnout
Section
1 in 12 1 in 8 ½ 1 in 16

Population 201 22 9

Progress 38 0 0

3
Manufacturing of Thick Web Switches

RDSO’s Drg No. T – 6155, Alteration 04 dt. 12.12.2017

TWS Manufacturing requires end forged thick web

asymmetric(Zu-1-60) rails, CNC controlled machines
etc.

Replacement of ORS by TWS requires full involvement

of S&T Team

Quantum of work for S&T is equivalent to Engg. In

4
terms of block time requirement.
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch

Thickness of
Tongue rail
at ATS

I6.5 mm 43 mm
Spring
Setting No SSD
Device(SSD)
5
SSD provided
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Distance
between Point 720mm 745mm
motor
sleepers 3&4

Obstruction 5mm and 3.25mm 5mm and 3.25mm

test obstruction test obstruction test only, until
standardized by RDSO.

6
Major differences between ORS and TWS
–Stock rail fastenings arrangements
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Outside

Bracket ERC
Inside

No fastening Leaf spring and wedges.

arrangement 7
Major differences between ORS and TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Stretcher bars

Stretcher bars No stretcher bars

Height of
tongue rail at
ATS 103
144

Height 144 mm Height 103 mm

(45+103+30=178 mm ) 8
(144+28=172mm)
(6mm GRSP for S.Rail)
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Difference
between Stock 28mm 30mm
rail top & tongue
rail top at ATS

9
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch

Slide chair

Bolted slide chair Elevated slide chair

with Leaf spring and
Wedges
10
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Pull rod
insulation and
Overall
insulations
difference
• Stretcher bar from both • Insulation at centre of the
tongue rails by insulation clamp locking rod.
in middle of stretcher bar. • Detection rods and lock
• Lug from stretcher bar rods insulated from rail
insulated
at point machine
• Detection rods and lock
rods insulated from rail
connecting slides.
11
through P clamps on both
side tongue rails.
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Description Over riding switch Thick web switch
Throw

115 ± 3 mm 160mm
Designed
throw of 143mm 220mm
motor
Height 6mm Zero
difference at
JOH 12
Major differences between ORS and
TWS
Descrip. Over riding switch Thick web switch
Special
bearing
plates
No.21,22,23,24-Elevated special
bearing plates.Sleeper no 25 to 27
normal special bearing plates.

Sleeper no.21 to 27 all

special bearing plates.
purpose is to ramp out Purpose is to meet out elevated
level difference of 6mm special bearing plates with normal
at heel block. special bearing plates at heel of 13
tongue rails.
Pre-block Activity
Video of TWS block working.
TWS to be trucked out & positioned correctly -LH & RH
Drilling of holes by S&T staff on switch portion
Cess Welding of TWS to Rails / Glued Insulated Rail Joints
Fixing of Fastenings
Oiling of Fittings and SSD Components
Integration of Stock and Tongue Rail
Opening of Crib Ballast in Inter-Space of Sleepers 3&4
Release of Jammed Fastenings
14
Man power required for ORS renewal is 18-20 Nos whereas for
TWS renewal its 26 to 28 Nos.
Block Working
ACTIVITY TIME REQUIRED
Dismantling of existing curved switches along
20 Minutes
with bearing plates
Re-spacing of sleeper No.4 to 745mm as
05 Minutes
against existing 720 mm
Provision of new GRSP in position for all 20
05 Minutes
sleepers
Insertion of new Thick Web switches in correct
position and ensuring all fittings properly. 15 Minutes
Installation of new Point motor by S&T staff
along with new clamp lock assembly & 2 hours
connected rods of point locking.
Total Block Duration 2Hr. 45Minutes 15
Parallel activity : SSD to be fixed on Sleeper 30 Minutes
No.13
Salient features of SSD laying
While fixing SSD at sleeper No.13 the insulation side
always be LH side and SSD spring always crossing
side.
Both arm of SSD fixed in Tongue Rail Foot hole.
Longer side the measurement from bolt to bolt is
54.5 cm and smaller side is 46.5 cm.
JOH gap is 60mm on open side and 0mm on close
side should be ensured.
SSD fixing & setting is highly skillful and requires
atlest 30 min during block.
16
Post Block Works
All the released switches, rails & loose fittings
to be stacked neatly away from the track.
Re-fixing of all the fittings.
Packing of slack sleepers and correcting cross
levels, if required.
Boxing of pre-fixing the track since the ballast
disturbed during block working.

17
Important points to be taken during
Laying of TWS
Care to be taken in handling of tongue rail.
The SSD is connected to the flange of
tongue rails which should be kept under
watch.
Track alignment in switch to be kept
perfectly straight which has affect on
setting.
18
Advant age of TWS
TWS if obstruction like stone piece is coming
between stock rail and tongue rail it gets
cleared easily due to more space .
Damage and wear of toe of switch is minimized.
In TWS, due to the provision of SSD housing up
to 13th Sleeper is perfect.
Due to its heavier cross section at toe of-switch,
structured stability of TWS is higher.
19
Advant age of TWS
Due to designed 160 mm opening at the toe,
clearance of 60 mm is available at JOH.
As rubber pad is introduced between stock rail
& slide plate at sleeper top in addition to the
GRP between sleeper and slide plate, better
resiliency achieved than conventional
switches.

20
Suggest ions f or Improvement
ANTI-THEFT ERCS may be used from sleeper No.3
to sleeper No.20
The design of rubber pad shall be such that it
should have horns.
DOWEL ARRANGEMENT shall be provided on top
of sleepers SL.No.4 to SL.No.15
The Hexagonal socket head cap screws used to fit
connecting rod to lever arm needs to be modified
for better fitting and safety.
21
Conclusion
TWS is essentially required to improve track
structure and for 50 kmph as well as 160 kmph
on main line.
The maintenance efforts are very less as
compared to Over Riding Switches.
Performance is much better and life is longer.

22
THANK YOU
MEETING THE CHALLENGES FOR HIGHER SPEED OPERATION
ON IR BY FOLLWING SOLVED EXAMPLES
J.S. Mundrey
Feb. 2019
 INDIAN RAILWAY TRACKS

 On main lines, 60 kg 90 UTS Rails welded into LWR/CWR laid on

Concrete Sleepers. No welding through points and crossings.
 Speed generally limited to 110-140 kmph for passenger trains and 75
kmp for goods trains. One train, Gatimaan Express, between Hazrat
Nizamuddin (New Delhi) and Agra, has been introduced to run at 160
kmph.

(2)
 INDIAN RAILWAY TRACKS (Continued)

 While locomotive and coaches for higher speed have been developed,
the signaling system improved, the tracks are maintained to the same
tolerances as for Rajdhani routes.

 Except carrying out some COSMETIC treatment, no fundamental

issues regarding sustained maintainability of tracks at higher speed
have been addressed. This has led to increased strain at sectional
gangs and supervisory level, and yet the running quality of track is far
below the international standards.

 At higher hierarchy levels, it has resulted into undue complacency, thus

stunted the growth of Track Technology.

(3)
 TRACK STANDARDS AND OPERATIONAL
ENVIRONMENT ON GERMAN RAILWAY
 Track Standards on German Railway are similar to Indian Railways.

 Track is continuously welded, including through points and crossings.

 Express passenger trains run at 160 kmph and freight trains at 100-120
kmph.

 All maintenance work on German Railway is carried out in complete

traffic blocks. No one is allowed to go on track during train operation.
The track work is planned well in advance, train schedules adjusted
accordingly.

 The train journey is extraordinarily smooth. German Railway has not

faced any fatal derailment on track account in the last 10 years.

(4)
 STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY - FOR
INDIAN RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW

 Track drainage is given top priority. All passenger are yards provided
with underground drains. In comparison the situation on IR is
deplorable.

IR – Poor Drainage at Platform Lines

(5)
 STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)
 On high-speed lines, Right of Way has been secured with fencing.
None is on the Track during train-runs . In comparison, IR track is a
thoroughfare.

Fencing on British Rail

 Turnouts of appropriate speed potential. On IR it will need major
remodeling of all passenger yards.
 Massive Formation Rehabilitation carried out to secure easy TRACK
STIFFNESS GRADIENT.
(6)
 STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)

Thoroughfare on Indian Railways Tracks

Thoroughfare on Indian Railways Track
 High Quality Standards of track construction. APT 1500 R A Welding
Robot for flash butt welding and digital control for thermit welding had
been adopted.
 GROUND PENETRATING RADAR has been deployed to map out the
physical condition of ballast and drainage.

(7)
 STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)

Formation Rehabilitation Robotic Mobile Flash Butt Welding

Track monitoring cars upgraded, equipped with driver view video of

tracks and with GPS navigation system. No need for manual
patrolling.

(8)
STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)

Manual Handling on IR Mechanized Rail Laying

(9)
STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)

Key Man Patrolling on IR Push Trolley Inspection on IR

(10)
STEPS TAKEN BY GERMAN RAILWAY FOR INDIAN
RAILWAYS TO FOLLOW (Continued)

Ground Penetrating Radar Mobile Maintenance Unit

(11)
 ROAD MAP FOR INDIAN RAILWAYS

 Foolproof drainage system. All passenger yards to have underground

drains.

 Impregnable fencing to ensure complete Right Of Way.

 Modern high-speed turnouts with appropriate speed potential and

carrying CWR through them. ALL PASSENGER YARDS NEED
REMODELLING.

 Track construction works to be completely mechanised. Rail procured

in the longest panel lengths, delivered at site by rail suppliers.

 Deployment of modern track recording cars with ground penetrating

Radar and ultrasonic testing etc. No need for manual patrolling.

 Track maintenance work well planned in advance and carried out by

mobile maintenance units.

(12)
 SUMMING UP

 German Railway is successfully running its express

passenger trains at 160 kmph and freight trains at 100-120
kmph for many years by improving their track structure and
with the deployment of modern track monitoring system.
German Railway has discontinued MANUAL
PATROLLING of Tracks.

 Indian Railways should FOLLOW THEIR EXAMPLE and

put their system in order BEFORE attempting any increase
of speed. This will not only ensure TROUBLE FREE
OPERATION but save the track men from a HIGHLY
STRESSED environment, they are exposed to, DAY IN
AND DAYOUT.
(13)
Thank You
Challenges in introducing Speeds of 160
kmph for passenger trains

S.K.Srivastava , ED (Mobilility)/RB

Niranjan Kumar , SSE/Mobility/RB

 Why 160 KMPH?

Reduction in Travel Time

• 25-30% across the board

Optimum Utilization of Assets Improved Safety & Security

• Mismatch between rolling stock and • TPWS and GSM-R
fixed infra speed potential • Automated diagnostics and mechanised
• LHB coaches and locomotives have maintenance
speed potential of 160kmph • Removal of LCs
• Fixed Infrastructure has speed • Fencing- Theft, Trespass and
potential of 130kmph or lower Seamless Cattle Run Over
Up- • Safer and Efficient Driving Environment

Improved Asset Reliability Gradation

• Automated predictive diagnostics Increased Throughput
• Elimination of LCs – Signal failure • Faster turnaround
• Fencing- Miscreant, Cattle Run over • Additional paths
• Improved Permanent Way

Customer Satisfaction Improved Market Share

• Saving in Time • Restore Competitiveness of
• Saving in Inventory Railways vis-à-vis other modes
• Predictable Environment

All Inputs together will generate a multiplier effect!

Railway’s Gain- Nation’s Gain
 Existing Condition
IR NETWORK GQ/DIAGONALS

>130KMPH 130KMPH >130KMPH 130KMPH

(0.3%) (5%) (2.1%) (29%)

110-
130KMPH
(22%)
70000 10000
ROUTE KM ROUTE KM

110-
130KMPH
(9%)

<110KMPH <110KMPH
(74%) (60%)

• Coaching stock – LHB and T-18 fit for 160 KMPH and above.
• Fixed infrastructure- 0.3% (185KM) fit for 160 KMPH. Only 5% fit for 130 KMPH.
 Existing Condition: GQ/Diagonals
 ~16% of IR network
(10000 route-km)- 52%
passenger and 58% freight
traffic.
DELHI
Infrastructure concerns:
Only ~30% (2740km) route
fit for 130kmph.
 ~15% (1370km) less than
110kmph. HOWRAH
Permanent speed restrictions NAGPUR

at average 14-15km;
Level crossing at every 3- MUMBAI
4km;
 Nearly 1000 (~9%)low speed
(<30kmph) turnouts.

CHENNAI

Rolling stock fit for 160kmph. Infrastructure gaps inhibiting realization

of rolling stock speed potential.
 Technical Specifications for 160kmph
RDSO Report No. CT-20 Rev. 2 dated Nov 2009 is the basic document stipulating consolidated
requirements of all departments for running of trains at 160kmph.
Key Inputs
Fixed Infrastructure for 160kmph
Civil
Eliminate all level crossings • Complete Grade Separation
• Thick Web Switches (Higher speed, 50kmph)
Fencing all along the track • Improved Switch Expansion Joint (Double Support)
Through
Strengthening of Track PSC Sleeper,
1660 Density;
Fencing-
Precast
Structure: 60kg- rail,1660 density PSC 60Kg Rail
Composite
sleeper on
Slab &
sleeper, Thick Web Switches (Higher Speed Column)
bridges
350mm
Potential), Improved SEJ (Double Support), ballast
Weak formation treatment, Composite sleeper Compact formation, No mud pumping
for bridges (PVC material), 350mm ballast
(150mm clean) etc.

Electrical Traction
1X25kV System 2X25kV System
Traction Power Supply Augmentation:
Existing 1 x 25 KV traction system to be ─600 AMP current ─1200 AMP current
converted to 2 x 25 KV. ─No feeder wire ─One feeder wire
─Low capacity ─High capacity
 1X25 KV system cannot sustain more
transformers transformers
than 2 trains at 160kmph in 1 TSS range (21.6/30MVA) (60/84MVA & 8MVA auto
(1 in each direction). transformer)
─TSS @40km ─TSS @70km
 Technical Specifications for 160kmph
Signal & Telecom
Provision of Train Protection and warning
system (TPWS )
On Board
─ Balises(electronic beacons) fixed to the MMI
track capture information for signal aspect
ahead. Balises

Line Electronic Unit

─ Signal aspect ahead information conveyed
to loco pilot in Onboard MMI (Man Machine
Interface)
─ System has capability to control speed of
train in case loco pilots fail to do so.

Mobile Train Radio Communication (MTRC) system

‒ Global System for Mobile Communication – Railway (GSM-R

‒ Present system is walkie talkie, 5W and 25W with a range of 1KM and 7.5 KM
respectively. This system operates on VHF (160-170 Mega Hz)
‒ MTRC system is provided through a network of base transmitting station, switching
centers etc. It provides seamless reliable mobile communication.
 Technical Specifications for 160kmph
Rolling Stock
 Instrumented Diagnostics system:

Item Data Captured Location

Relayed to
Data captured by
Wheel Profile Measures wheel profile and check On both control room
system
Measurement various flaws in the wheel ends
System with ultrasonically
Ultrasonic flaw
detector
Acoustic Bearing Detects defective axle box bearings 400-500 km
Detector by capturing acoustic signature
Wheel Impact Load Measures impact load of wheels on 400-500 km
Detector rails
Machine Vision Checks loose and hanging parts with 400-500 km
Inspection System high resolution cameras from the
(A) side of the train.
Machine Vision Checks underslung loose and hanging On stopping
Inspection System parts with high resolution cameras. stations
(B) Action taken
Management Communicated to
Hot Axle Hot Wheel Measurement of disc brake 400-500 km report fed on
Information maintainer.
temperature and wheel temperature. system
Report Maintainer
Hot Box Detector Checks hot bearing that are reaching 150-200 km decides action to
impending failure and may cause be taken and
derailments takes action

Radio Frequency Identification of rolling stock At every

Identification examination
point
 Scope of Major Activities
(Delhi- Mumbai)

Offline Activities Online Activities

No Nil/Negligible train interruption Under Train Regulation

•Fencing: 2X1384km •Road Under Bridges Insertion: 109*

•ROB: 153* (except launching) •Rail Renewal: 68TKM
•Road Under Bridge (construction): 109* •Deep Screening: 222TKM
•ETCS Level 2: 1483km •Formation Treatment: 258RKM
•GSM-R: 1360km •Thick Web Switches/ Crossings: 2000
•2X25 kV Traction System •Improved SEJ: 500
-Traction Sub Station: 20 (except switch •Composite Bridge Sleepers: 44000
over) •OHE modifications: 3040 TKM
-Sectioning Post: 24 (except switch
-Re-spanning
over)
-Feeder wire connection
-Sub Sectioning Post: 60 (except switch
-Switching over to 2X25 kV system
over)
(TSS, SP, SSP)
-Feeder wire erection

•Automated Diagnostic System:

 Estimation of Block Hour Requirements
(Delhi- Mumbai)
Output Total
Item Scope of Work Per effective
Description
no Effective Hours
Quantity Unit Hr Required
1 RUB 109 No. 0.17 654
2 Provision of 60kg rail 68 TKM 0.26 262
3 Provision of 60kg sleepers 68 TKM 0.2 340
4 Deep screening 222 Km 0.2 1110
5 Lifting of track 2682 TKM 1.2 2235
6 Provision of Thick Web Switches 1908 No 0.3 6360
7 Improved Switch Expansion Joints 414 No 0.8 518
8 Replacement of Bridge Sleepers 43474 No 20 2174
9 OHE Modifications 3040 TKM 2 1520

Assuming a project completion period of 3 years and all other activities carried out in the
shadow of most critical activity, we will require ~9 hours block per day for continuous 3 years
to complete the work. Clearly, such type of traffic interruption is not sustainable on any route,
much less on a Rajdhani route.
 Challenges
•Work to be done on the busiest routes of Indian Railways: 300+ Passenger
trains; 125+ Freight Trains.
•Challenge is to minimize requirement of traffic suspension/ regulation

Speed Scale Synergy Skill Supply

Doing one unit of -Number of units Combine different -Adequate Trained Material:
activity in the least of one activity atactivities together: manpower -Availability
possible time same site - At one location -Procurement
-Role of -Length over which - At multiple
Technology, same activity can locations -Transport
Machinery & be taken together
Systems

Optimum combination of these factors can be a game changer!

THANK YOU