BNSF has delivered continuous welded rail to the rail line from Sioux Falls, to Madison, S.D. This line serves an ethanol plant, a unit grain loader, and 4 or 5 really small elevators. It might see a train once a week in the busy season.
It surprised me to see the CWR. Are all rail replacements now typically weled rail?
Typically today, nearly all replacement rail is CWR. On the line you describe this is probably 2nd hand relay rail…it could be relaying rail that was originally installed as CWR or it could be CWR of rail that was originally laid as stick rail and upon removal from that service, went to a rail plant to have the battered ends cropped and welded to make CWR for relay purposes.
Relaying rail? So, it was used on another line, then pulled up and replaced? If it wasn’t good enough for the other spot, how is it good enough for this one?
The relaying of rail is not uncommon and has been a practice for many years. As to the other spot(s), maybe they no longer exsist as a rail line or siding; or it may have been replaced main line track that was “recycled” and now meets the spec’s for use on a secondary line or some type of siding. Used rail can also be found installed on sidings that are owned by the business being served and not the railroad, making good use of a product that still has some life in it and at a cheaper cost.
Relaying rail is nothing new or unusual at all. When the Southern Pacific double-tracked sections of the Sunset Route through SE Arizona in the early-to-mid-1990’s they used rail lifted from Donnor Pass according to the narration on a Pentrex Video entitled, “The Stormy.”
The relaying of rail as CWR is economical, too, because railroads don’t have to buy new rail all the time. There are many reasons why CWR is more economical: first that there are fewer joints to maintain, fewer “bumps” to the wheels and trucks, fewer railheads getting hit and split…and the list goes on. I believe it is often a lighter weight rail can be used in CWR system.
Murphy
As indicated in the posts above, relaying “used” rail at a new location has been going on probably since the invention of railroads. As you know, rail life is primarily a function of the tonnage that has been run over the rail. Suppose the railroad has a stretch of track that sees an average of 20 trains a day (140 per week) and the MOW people determine that during the work season the rail in that stretch will have less than a year’s life. For illustration, let’s say that with three more months in service, the rail will not be considered good for what is probably a high speed freight operation. Relay that rail on your line with 2 trains per week (one out, one back) or 1/70 of the tonnage and, in theory at least, the rail on the low density line will be good for another 17.5 years.
Our our railroad engineering department friends can confirm or tell me I am full of it, but I suspect that there may be tighter specs on rail in 60-80MPH track speeds (ClassV) than what may be for a 45MPH branch line. With that the rail might be used on the branch for much longer than suggested in the illustration above.
This has been discussed previously, but what are the factors which affect the longevity of rail? Certainly gross tonnage does, but does extreme weather ranges? Does the type of tonnage affect the rail…heavy loadings such as coal or grain?
In another way of asking…does rail have x amount of tonnage which it can handle before it reaches a do not use status? CN is dropping rail this month around my area and it was just a couple of years ago they did the same. Perhaps different line segments, but what is the expected life of rail?
ed
I’d have to believe that train speed, especially of heavt trains, plays a big factor as well.
Things that are factored into calculating rail life include tonnage, speed, degree of curvature.
In territory with a lot of curvature along with a lot of tonnage and max speeds for the curvature it is normal for the high rail (presuming that there is some degree of superelevation in the curve) to experience a greater degree of wear than the low rail. The first progression of handling rail wear will be for the high and low rails to be transposed ie. the guage face of the high rail becomes the away from guage face of the low rail and vice versa. When the high rail has both sides of the rail head worn beyond the specification then new rail will be installed on the high rail. Generally, after both guage faces of the head of the rail have been worn beyond the spec, the rail is scrap.
In territory with no or minimal curvature the primary factor of rail life is accumulated tonnage handled.
jeaton has it exactly right as far as the rationale and mathematics that are used to justify and explain the ‘cascading’ of worn main track rail down into branch lines and main line sidings, and then into yard tracks and industrial spurs, where it will last seemingly forever.
One other unspoken but nevertheless real-world practical factor that may be driving these rail replacement programs - the availability or even a surplus of worn main line rail. There are a lot of main lines and hence a lot of main line rail, and it gets worn out pretty quick - much faster than in the locations where it goes for replacement, as jeaton’s numbers above so aptly illustrate. I suspect that proportionately, although there’s way more siding, branch, yard, and industrial sidetrack track-mileage than main lines, the service life of rail there is so much loinger that the supply of CWR is greater than the demand, or actual need. That said, no respectable track person would ever turn down an opportunity to obtain even well-worn main line rail for such locations, and there’s not much else that could be done with it. So if such rail is available and ‘needs a home’ - ‘‘Yeah, sure, I’ll find some places for it - be glad to’’.
BaltACD’s explanantion of the curve wear and transposItion process is ‘right on the money’, too. Just FYI - ‘‘the away from guage face’’ - around here in eastern Pennsylvania, it’s usually called the ‘‘field side’’ or ‘‘outer side’’, to distinguish it from ‘‘gage face’’, ‘‘gage side’’, ‘‘inner side’’, etc. Incidentally, that spelling of ‘guage’ is not wrong - but is archaic, and in my experience its use is usually limited to descriptions of e
I think the mis-conception of “worn out” CWR having no second life has been put to rest. Cascading down of second-hand rail has gone on about as long as there has been railroads in this country. It happened with jointed rail as well (look in just about any yard)…Wouldn’t be surprised to see the rail, once installed, getting a major rail grinding to get the railhead profile right and the the branch would most likely never see a rail grinder again for the life of the rail.
It’s fine that the rail was delivered…Got the replacement OTM to go along with the rail? That rail may sit out on the shoulders for a while if the proper sized anchors and tie plates are not there to go with the rail. (131-141 # rail won’t fit in the tie plates for 112-119# rail by half an inch, below 112# rail the base widths are all over the map.) An awful lot of used tieplates come from concrete tie projects.
Any idea of what the before and after weight of rail is? Most folks don’t know how hard it is to find servicable anchors, tie plates, frogs and switch points for rail less than 112/115 # anymore.
(an adzing machine may get a serious workout as well to accomodate new plates)
Being a branchline, the existing turnouts and some road crossings won’t be replaced in any hurrry.
Wouldn’t the tie plates get pulled up, and shipped out with the rail being removed?
I’m not sure of the weight of the existing rail. The line was never more than a mixture of GN and Milwaukee grain lines. A couple of years ago, a switchman on the BN told me that in the heat of the summer, the grain was hauled off this line at night. Otherwise, they had to putt along at 10 mph because, in his words, “the rails were all over the place”.
If the rail has the same base width, such as upgrading from 132# to 136#, usually the tie plates will be left in place. One exception is where larger plates are desired, usually in sharper curves, to absorb the stresses of heavy tonnage. If the plates are changed, usually the old ones need to be sorted to separate the broken or damaged plates from those that are reusable. They won’t get picked up at the same time as the CWR or ever travel together.
John
Other than the situation mentioned by cx500 - larger plates in the curves, etc. - or an upgrading of the main line to a larger rail with a wider base width - no, the tie plates probably would not get pulled up and be shipped out along with the rail.
With concrete ties, there aren’t any tie plates per se anyway - just pull the clips, lift out the old rail, drop the new into place, and reinstall the clips.
For wood ties, the process can be similar, especially if the tie plates have 2 [or more] outer ‘plate-holding’ spikes that stay in place while the inner ‘rail-holding’ spikes are removed to change the rail. Then it’s pretty similar to the concrete tie operation, except for plugging the old holes from the rail-holding spike before driving the new rail-holding spikes [and assuming that the tie plates for the new rail don’t need to be regauged since a badly curve-worn rail is being replaced with a full-section rail].
See if you can get close enough to the track at a ‘legal’ location - grade crossing, mostl likely - to read what the ‘brand’ or ‘mill mark’ on the rail is. Or maybe ask the rail gang, if you see them actually doing the work. Someone there oughta know. It might be real interesting stuff . . . [:-^]
The line near me was relaid at some point with CWR that is obviously relay, 39’ sticks welded together, with the bolt holes intact. I don’t remember the specifics, but I seem to recall some 1940’s rail in the mix.
I can legally get up close and personal with the rail on our line. I’ll have to see what we’ve got there.
Great example [tup] - from ‘will be completely worn out in 3 more months’ to ‘good there for the next 17 years’ - that’s pretty good trade-off.
Confirm. Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, FRA doesn’t have any specific requirements with regard to rail weight or wear for any of the ‘Classes’ of track, to the best of my recollection, and a brief review today didn’t find anything like that, either. See Title 49–Transportation, CHAPTER II–FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, PART 213–TRACK SAFETY STANDARDS, at -
Larry/ tree68 - Just from knowing your territory and that it is most likely an ex-NYC line, I’ll take a guess at it being one - or more - of these:
105 or 127 lb. ‘Dudley’ = ‘DY’ or ‘DYM’ section most likely, perhaps also the 115 lb. DY; or -
110, 112, or 115 AREA = ‘RE’ section.
Thanks Paul.
I recently looked at the FRA regs on track, but just to check authorized speeds. Since I don’t have to build it…
I don’t believe I’ve ever seen intact bolt holes in welded rail. I think they were always cropped on the NYC.