Technical Paper

Author: Lachlan Daniel

Permanent Way Design

A simplified empirical design method

Sinclair Knight Merz Pty Limited ACN 001 024 095 ABN 37 001 024 095 100 Christie Street PO Box 164 St Leonards NSW Australia 1590 Telephone: +61 2 9928 2100 Facsimile: +61 2 9928 2500

COPYRIGHT: The concepts and information contained in this document are the property of [Copyright] . Use or copying of this document in whole or in part without the written permission of constitutes an infringement of copyright.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

1. Introduction
This paper presents a simplified empirical track design procedure which provides a first order estimate that is suitable for an initial assessment of track standard requirements. The design procedure is suitable for concept design and has been accepted on projects such as the New Southern Railway (Sydney, Australia) where it was used, together with performance based specifications, to enable the client to call tenders for detail design and construct contracts. A more detailed analysis using sophisticated design procedures, eg computer models, should be undertaken before establishing the final track requirements.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

2. The Permanent Way

What does the term The Permanent Way actually mean?
The permanent way derives its definition from the time when railways were first constructed as it seemed that the track structure of a railway represented a far more permanent construction than that of other types of roads of the time. The track structure is composed of the rails, the fastening system, the sleepers and ballast. In some rail systems the term permanent way is used to refer to the total railway reserve (Right of Way) as well.

What is the purpose of the permanent way?

Apart from providing a dedicated guidance system for the proposed rollingstock the permanent way provides a track structure which is capable of transferring train loads to the formation. Load transfer works on the principle of stress reduction, layer by layer, as depicted schematically in Figure 1.0. The greatest stress occurs between the wheel and the rail and is in the order 300,000 kPa. Between rail and sleeper the stress is two orders smaller and again diminishes between sleeper and ballast bed down to about 300kPa. Finally the stress on the formation, as a result of the track structure provided, is in the order of 60kPa.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

3.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

3.0 Permanent Way Design

3.1 Introduction

The nature of the rail business will determine the type of traffic that uses the track and thus the main elements of its loading. Types of traffic include: Freight Fast (eg. Interstate services) Heavy (eg. coal, iron ore) Passenger Express or Commuter In most rail systems a mixture of all of the above is found resulting in an array of loadings on the track. Table 1.0 shows some representative combinations of axle load and speed for the types of traffic noted above.

Table 1 Type Fast Freight Heavy Haul System NSW Canada Mt Newman NSW Lamco NSW BR TGV* NSW LRT * KL Axle Load (t) 19 25 35 25 31 18 17 17 15 7 Speed (km/hr) 115 105 75 80 60 160 200 300 115 50

Express Passenger

Commuter * Track for exclusive use

Density of traffic is also an important element in the loading characteristics of the permanent way as it will affect the life expectancy of the chosen components and the probabilities of the loading variations. The route of the track will also impact on the loading characteristics, specially the lateral loads developed in tight horizontal radius curves. Track loadings can also vary greatly due to the type of rollingstock used in operations. The type of vehicle, its mass, loading and suspension are all important contributors to this variation.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

Passenger cars, for instance, are usually light vehicles with relatively long wheelbases whereas the typical ore car is rugged and compact with a short wheel base resulting in a much higher loading intensity. Wheel arrangement can also affect the loads on the track structure. A locomotive with long wheel base bogies will usually generate higher curving forces on sharp curves compared to those with shorter wheel base. Characteristics of the track also affect track loading especially those relating to its uniformity. For design purposes it is usual practise to adopt estimates of track stiffness which are assumed uniform and then, as the design proceeds, test the estimates by iterative process. Rollingstock speed can also have a significant affect on the loading characteristics. If the wheel and the rail were perfectly smooth and of uniform stiffness there would be nothing to generate variation of response and vertical track loading would reman constant for all speeds. The reality is that the wheel and the rail are not perfect and hence significant variations are produced which are directly proportional to rollingstock speed.

3.2

The Design Process

The permanent way is an extremely elastic structure which is not readily analysed by simple design methods. However, with vast years of experience and testing of permanent way materials, empirical methods have been established which permit the track designer to produce a first order estimate that is suitable for an initial assessment of track standard requirements. The empirical methods are described in detail in the following sections and follow the methodology described in the flow chart shown overleaf.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

Vehicle Parameters (Weight and size)

Assumed Roadbed Support Modulus

Dynamic Impact Factor Dynamic Wheel Force

Train Speed

Rail Wear Analysis

Sleeper Size and Spacing Analysis

Track Modulus

Beam on Elastic Foundation Analysis Rail Bending Stress

Rail Electrical Requirements Rail Size Selection Rail Cost & Availability Rail Thermal Stress

(Yes)

Exceeded ?

Allowable Rail Bending Stress

Track Condition Experience Factors

Rail Yield (No) Rail Deflection

Sleeper Support Analysis

Sleeper Plate Load

Sleeper Bending Stress Analysis

(Yes)

Exceeded?

Allowable Sleeper Bending Stress

Sleeper Strength Data

(No)

Sleeper Plate Load

Ballast Pressure Analysis

Ballast Pressure (Yes) Exceeded? Ballast Strength Data

Allowable Ballast Pressure

(No) Subgrade Pressure Analysis

Vary Ballast Depth (Yes)

Subgrade Pressure

Exceeded?

Allowable Subgrade Pressure

Soil Test

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

(No)

Final Ballast Depth

Flow Chart for Conventional Ballasted Track Structure

3.3

Dynamic Loads

The nominal vehicle axle load is usually measured for the static condition, but in the design of the permanent way the actual stresses in the various components of the track structure and in the rollingstock must be determined from the dynamic vertical and lateral forces imposed by the design vehicle moving at speed. The major factors affecting the magnitude of the dynamic vertical load have been identified in section 3.1 and are summarised below: Train speed Wheel diameter Vehicle unsprung mass Track condition (including track modulus, track geometry, joint condition) Track construction Static wheel load Vehicle condition

The general method used in the determination of the design vertical wheel load is to express it empirically as a function of the static wheel load, ie: P = .Ps Where P = design wheel load (kN) Ps = static wheel load (kN) = dimensionless impact factor (always > 1)

The dynamic loading on the track structure has been subject to extensive investigations throughout the world which has led to numerous formulae being developed which take into account the vehicle and track characteristics. Table 2 summaries the main formulae which are used in determining the dynamic wheel load. The AREA (American Railway Engineering Association) method of determining the impact factor to apply to the static wheel load is simple and often used for continuously welded rail. Impact factor (AREA) Where V = vehicle speed (km/hr) D = wheel diameter (mm) = 1 + 5.21.V / D

Alternatively for general track analysis of CWR track the Eisenmann formula is considered quite appropriate, whereas the British Rail formula would be more appropriate for the examination of vehicle unsprung mass effects.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

Vehicle and Track parameters

VEHICLE Loco Maintenance condition Centre of Gravity fo Vehicle

TRACK Track Maintenance Condition X X X X X X Cant definciency in curves

Unsprung Wheel Mass

Track joint dip angle

Static Wheel Load

Wheel Diameter

Track Modulus

Track Stiffness

FORMULA AREA Eisenmann ORE

IMPACT FACTOR 1 + 5.21 V/D 1 + .. 1 + ('+ '+ ')

1 + 8.784(a1 +a2)V

X X X Dj.Pu / g X k ) X X X X X

BR IR GERMAN SAR Clarke WMATA

Ps 1 + V / (58.14 1+V / 3.E

2 4

X X

1 + 4.94 V/D 1 + 19.65 V/(D. k) (1+3.86 E .V )

-5 2 2/3

X X X

TABLE 2

VEHICLE & TRACK PARAMETERS INCLUDED IN IMPACT FORMULAE

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

Curve radius

Train Speed

The Eisenmann formula adopts a statistical approach to determine the distribution of the loading applied to the track and is considered appropriate where non discrete wheel or rail defects are involved. Impact factor (Eisenmann) The value is determined by the quality of the track and the following values have been suggested for use: Where = 0.1 for track in very good condition 0.2 for track in good condition 0.3 for track in average condition 0.4 for track in poor condition 0.5 for track in very poor condition 1 for speed up to 60 km/hr 1 + (V-60) / 140 for speeds > 60 km/hr = 1 + ..

= =

The value depends on the upper confidence limits (UCL) defining the probability that the maximum stresses will not be exceeded. = 0.0 for UCL = 50% 1.0 for UCL = 84.1% 2.0 for UCL = 97.7% (normally used) 3.0 for UCL = 99.9%

By far the most comprehensive method of determining the impact factor is that developed by the Office of Research and Experiments of the International Union of Railways (ORE) which is based upon measured track results of locomotives. The impact factor is defined in terms of the dimensionless speed coefficients , , and . Impact factor (ORE) The coefficient is dependent upon: Vertical track irregularities Vehicle suspension Vehicle speed In a perfectly levelled track is virtually zero. In tangent track with poor surface and very fast traffic was found to approach 0.35, whereas in curved track values of did not exceed 0.18. can be expressed empirically as: = 0.04 (V/100)3 where V = vehicle speed (km/hr) = 1 + + +

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

10

The coefficient is dependent upon: Vehicle speed Cant deficiency of the track The location of the centre of gravity of the vehicle The coefficent is the contribution resulting from the wheel load shift in curves, and may be defined by either: = 2d.h / G2 (SCNF) = [V2.(2.h+c)/127.R.g] - [2c.h/G2] (DB) where G = horizontal distance between rail centre lines (m) h = vertical distance from rail top to vehicle centre of mass d = cant deficiency (m) c = cant (m) g = gravitational acceleration (m/sec2) R = curve radius (m) V = vehicle speed (km/hr)

The two formulae are approximately equivalent however the SCNF formula may lead to significant errors at high speed or in sharp curves. The coefficient is dependent upon: Vehicle speed Track condition Vehicle design Maintenance condition of the locomotives As a first approximation the following formula can be used if experiential data is not available. = 0.10 + 0.017.(V/100)3 where V = vehicle speed (km/hr) If the effects of other variables (eg. Locomotive and track maintenance) are to be incorporated then the above formula can be generalised as: = o.ao.bo where o = value determined in the equation above ao = locomotive factor relating to maintenance condition bo = track maintenance factor For normal track with a maximum permissible speed of up to 140km/hr: o = 0.11 ao = 2.0 bo = 1.3 For special track with an authorised speed of 200 km/hr, and new rollingstock: o = 0.24 ao = 1.5 bo = 1.2

ORE have observed that the maximum value of the impact factor occurs in tangent track and consequently the impact factor can be simplified and expressed as: 11

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

 = 1.29 + 0.04.(V/100)3

3.4

Rail Contract Stresses

It is essential to limit wheel/rail contact stresses if rail surface and sub surface defects such as shelling and transverse defects are not to occur on the rail running surface, the gauge corner, or body of the head or the rail. An initial approach is to check that the static wheel load / wheel diameter ratio (Ps/D) does not exceed 0.11 kN/m. If this ratio is exceeded a simplistic analysis is necessary to check the shear capacity of the rail as follows: T max. = 410 (2Ps/D)05 T all. = 0.3. tensile strength

3.5

Track Stiffness

When considering the analysis or selection of track components such as rails, the track structure can be thought of as a beam on an elastic foundation. The stiffness of the total track structure is known as the track modulus (k) and is defined as the force per unit deflection per unit of track length per rail, ie: k = Ps/Y.s10-3 where Ps = static wheel load (kN) Y = summed total rail deflection at all sleeper locations at which deflections occur (mm) s = sleeper spacing (mm) The following track modulus values are typical for 1435mm standard gauge track, however in practice there can be considerable variation at different locations along the track as well as seasonal conditions.
Rail Size (kg) 31 41 47 or 50 53 60 60 60 Ballast & Sleeper 150mm, timber or steel 200mm, timber or steel 200mm, timber or steel 250mm, timber or steel 250mm, timber or steel 250mm, concrete 300mm, concrete Track Modulus (k) 8 10 12 15 20 25 30

For 1067mm narrow gauge track the track modulus values are generally 5 Mpa lower than those indicated in the above table, especially for the heavier rail sizes.

3.6

Rail Stresses

The AREA method for estimating rail size assumes the beam on an elastic foundation theory with rail bending moments calculated as follows:

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

12

M = P / 4B Where

P = dynamics wheel load B = (k/4.E.I)0.25 k = track modulus I = second moment of inertia of the rail E = Youngs Modulus

The AREA allowable stress formula follows: Fall. = fb/(1+A1).(1+B1).(1+C1).(1+D1) Where fb = allowable bending stress A1 = stress factor for lateral bending (20%) B1 = stress factor for track condition (30%) C1 = stress factor for rail wear (15%) D1 = stress factor for unbalanced cant (15%)

Figure 2 for rail selection is based on this formula and is suitable for a non rigorous first analysis.

3.7

Rail Seat Load

The exact magnitude of the load applied to each rail seat of the sleeper depends upon the following: The rail weight The sleeper spacing The sleeper stiffness characteristics The track modulus The amount of play between the rail and the sleeper The amount of play between the sleeper and the ballast, and Proud sleeper plates (in the case of timber sleepers) The rail seat load (q) is critical in determining sleeper bending stresses, ballast depth and formation pressure and is determined by the formula: Q = S.k.y.F Where S = sleeper spacing (m) k = track modulus (MPa) y = maximum rail deflection caused by the superposition of all adjacent wheel loads (mm). F = factor of safety to account for varying ballast support to the sleeper associated with the standard of track maintenance.

The above formula can be simplified as follows: Q = 0.75.P.B.S. Figure 3 can be used to estimate B (in lieu of formula previously given) for a given rail size.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

13

350.000

300.000

Max. Allowable Single Dynamic Wheel Load (kN)

250.000

200.000

150.000

100.000 AS1085-41 AS1085-47 50.000 AS1085-50 AS1085-53 AS1085-60

0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

Track Modulus (N/mm)

Determination of Rail Section - Figure 2.0
I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

14

20

18

16

14

12 Beta (10000 mm-1)

10

8 AS1085-31 AS1085-41 AS1085-47 AS1085-50 AS1085-53 4 AS1085-60

0
5 5 5 10 12 .5 15 17 .5 20 22 .5 25 27 .5 30 32 .5 35 37 .5 40 42 .5 45 47 .5 50 52 .5 55 57 .5 2. 7. 60

Track Modulus (N/mm)

Determination of Beta Factor '' - Figure 3.0

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

15

Figure 4 can be used to derive the rail seat load for a given sleeper spacing, with a factor of safety (F) = 1.5. Generally the maximum rail seat load will not exceed 0.5 to 0.6 of the dynamic wheel load.

3.8

Ballast Contact Pressure

The average ballast contact pressure (p) between the sleeper and the ballast is critical in the calculation of sleeper bending stresses and in assuring the ballast structure is not over stressed. Ballast Contact Pressure can be calculated by the following formula: p = q / b.l Where b = breadth of the sleeper (m) l = effective length of the sleeper under one rail (m)

For Australian sleeper dimensions the following relationships generally apply: p = 6.2q p = 5.5q p = 6.4q p = 5.4q p = 5.8q p = 4.7q timber sleepers, narrow gauge concrete sleepers, narrow gauge steel sleepers, narrow gauge timber sleepers, standard gauge concrete sleepers, standard gauge steel sleepers, standard gauge

However, with the development of a new sleeper types, it is recommended that the ballast contact pressure is calculated using the formula which takes into account the effective sleeper support beneath the rail seat. ie: p = q / b.l. A significant amount of research has been carried out in order to derive the effective length of the sleeper under one rail. It is recommended that the following formulae are adopted: For standard and / or broad gauge sleepers L=Lg where L = total sleeper length (mm) where g = distance between the centre line of the rail seats (mm)

For narrow gauge sleepers In = 0.8 (L g)

Generally speaking the average contact pressure between the sleeper and the ballast (p) should not exceed 350 kPa for manually tamped track and 475 kPa for machine tamped track with high quality abrasion resistant ballast. The AREA design manual recommends a maximum allowable contact pressure (p) of 450kPa for timber sleepers and 590 kPa for concrete sleepers. In both cases this limit was suggested for high quality, abrasion resistant ballast and should be reduced appropriately if inferior ballast materials are used.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

16

400 380 360 340 320 300 Single Dynamic Wheel Load x Beta - (kN/mm/1000) 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 10 0 11 0 12 0 13 0 14 0 15 0 16 0 17 0 18 0 19 0 20 0 21 0 22 0 23 0 24 0

Sleeper Spacing (500mm) Sleeper Spacing (600mm) Sleeper Spacing (700mm)

Single Rail Seat Load (q) - (kN)

Determination of Single Seat Load - Figure 4.0

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

17

3.9

Depth of Ballast

Figure 5 indicates the depth of ballast required based on allowable formation pressure, loading and sleeper dimensions. The plots are based on the Boussinesq solution for stress at a point in an elastic, homogenous, isotropic medium below a circular plate. Suggested safe average bearing pressures for subgrade are: Alluvial soil, non compacted ground Soft clay, firm sand, sandy clay Dry clay, firm sand, sandy clay Dry gravel soils Compacted soils 70 105 kPa 110 140 kPa 145 210 kPa 215 to 275 kPa 280 kPa

Queensland Rail currently specify new embankments must have a CBR not less than 20. (approximates to 210kPa). An alternative method for establishing ballast depth and/or formation bearing pressure is to adopt the following empirical relationships: For standard and / or broad gauge sleepers (developed by Talbot in 1919).

z = Pa (1/5.9.z 1.25) were z = maximum vertical formation pressure Pa = average pressure between the sleeper and the ballast (ie. Pa = 2.q/A where q = rail seat load (kN) and A = entire ballast contact area of the underside of sleeper (m2). z= ballast depth (m)

For narrow gauge sleepers (developed by the Japanese National Railway)

z = Pa [58 / (10 + (100z) 1.35)]. Clarke (1957) recommended that the maximum subgrade pressure should not exceed 83kPa for uncompacted formations and 139 kPa for compacted formations.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

18

7.000

6.000

Broad Gauge Max. Allowable Formation Pressure/Rail Seat Load (m-2) 5.000 Standard Gauge Narrow Gauge

4.000

3.000

2.000

1.000

0.000 0.050 0.075 0.100 0.125 0.150 0.175 0.200 0.225 0.250 0.275 0.300 0.325 0.350 0.375 0.400 Depth of Ballast (m)

Determination of Depth of Ballast - Figure 5.0

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

19

4. Track Design Examples

4.1 Greenvale Line, Ore Traffic, North Queensland
Axle load = 20 tonne Maximum train speed = 60 km/hr Wheel Diameter = 850 mm Determine rail size, sleeper spacing and ballast depth Contact Stresses Ratio Ps/D = 100/850 = 0.12 (which is not less than 0.11, check shear capacity) T max = 410 (2Ps/D) 0.5 = 410 (200/850) 0.5 = 199 Mpa = 0.3 UTS = 0.3.800 for 41, 47, 53 kg/m rail = 240Mpa

Tall

Tmax<Tall. ok. Dynamic Wheel Load AREA: = 1 + 5.21 V/D = 1 + (5.21.60/850) = 1.37 Eisenmann = 1 + .. = 1 + (0.25 x 1 x 2.0) for good average track & 97.7% UCL = 1.5 = 1.29 + 0.04.(V/100)3 = 1.29 + 0.04 (60/100)3 = 1.299 = 1.39 P = 1.39 x 100 = 139 kN

ORE

Adopt impact factor

Rail Selection Assuming a track modulus (k) of 12 MPa, Figure 2 indicates a minimum rail size of 47 kg/m. Rail Seat Load From Figure 3, B = 9.7 x 10-4 mm -1 Alternatively B = (k/4.E.I) 0.25 = (12 / 4. 2x105. 15.92 x 106)0.25 = 9.85 x 10-4 mm -1 B.P = 9.7 x 10-4 x 139
I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

20

= 0.134 kn/mm Assuming a sleeper spacing of 610mm, Figure 3.0 indicates: q = 60 kN Ballast Contact Pressure p = 6.2q for timber sleepers, narrow gauge = 6.2 x 60 = 372 kPa pall. = 475kPa for machine tamped track Ballast Depth q = 60kN Assume safe average bearing pressure of 200 kPa Ratio safe bearing to rail seat load = 200/60 = 3.33 From Figure 5.0 minimum depth of ballast required = 200mm Alternatively adopt JNR equation *:z = Pa [58/(10 + (100z)1.35)] * JNR equation applies for narrow gauge track only z = [((116q/z.A) 10) 0.74074]/100 z = 209mm Workshop Exercise What would be the impact on the permanent way if the operation requirements were changed such that: Axle loads increased to 25 tinne Vehicle speed increased to 80 km/hr (clue: assume track modulus (k) = 15; P = 179kn)

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

21

5. Conclusion
This paper provides only a brief introduction to the very extensive subject of permanent way design and is aimed at providing a basic understanding. The design procedures presented in this paper are only approximate solutions that can be used as a guide to track component selection as a first order estimate. More detailed analysis will, in general, be necessary before selection of the track structure can be established. In addition this paper has only dealt with the structural engineering aspects of the permanent way; of equal importance in the selection of the track structure and its components are the economic factors relating to capital expenditure, life cycle replacement costs and maintenance costs. With sophisticated technical / economic analyses it is possible to select the optimum economic solution for a range of technical alternatives.

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

22

6. References
ROA ROA PWI Hagaman, B.R. Broadley, J A review of track design procedures Volume 1 Rails A review of track design procedures Volume 2 Sleepers and Ballast British Railway Track design, construction and maintenance Track Design Track Loading

I:\INFR\RAIL\Rail1.doc

23