1

Schedule of Dimensions And

Track & Bridge Structurefor

Dedicated Freight Corridor

2

Terms of Reference• A Committee of AMs has been nominated to

decide:- Maximum Moving Dimensions (MMD)-DFC & Feeder

Routes, - Track Loading Density (TLD) and - Axle Load.

• Thus a look at:– Track Structure.– Specification of Bridges for new construction.– Rehabilitation of existing Bridges for feeder routes.

• Board (ME) has nominated a core group for Engineering department, consisting of:

• EDCE(P), EDCE(B&S) & ED/W from Railway Board, • ED/Track & ED/B&S from RDSO and • Dean from IRICEN

3

MMD for Dedicated Freight Corridor

• AM’s Committee has proposed:

• MMD height for Double stack Containers,

• Width of Wagons

• 7.10m (Proposed by Mechanical Dte).

• 3.50m (Proposed by Traffic Directorate).

(Width of a existing containers is 2.44m only.)

4

Proposed MMD for

Dedicated freight

Corridor

9 FEET 6 INCH CONTAINERHT =6.81mtWHEEL DIA 860mm ?

5

Inter-Operability RequirementsON FEEDER ROUTES

• Constraints in running a wagon as per this MMD on feeder routes:

– In Width: platform coping, cover over platform and other track side structures will infringe.

– In Height: All overhead structures including ROB, FOB, Through Girder Bridges, Tunnels, Cover Over Platforms, OHE, Electrical Crossings, Flyovers etc will infringe.

• Sample Study on Western and Eastern Railways has shown:

Western Viramgam-Samakhiali (182km)

3 ROBs, 2 FOBs, 2 COPs and 27 Electrical Crossings.

Eastern Andal-Sainthia-Pakur (151km)

5 ROBs, 12 FOBs, 39 COPs and 1 Fly Over Rail near Andal

+ cost of OHE & S&T

6

Feasibility of Larger Rolling Stock on Feeder Routes

• Due to constraints of existing structures, it may not be feasible to run one standard MMD on all feeder routes.

• It is the practice in US railroads and in Australia to have different MMD for different commodities and run them on identified corridors, cleared for them.

• We can adopt a similar, commodity based approach for different feeder routes.– DSC height shall be implemented on Western

Corridor.– Smaller height may be implemented on Eastern

Corridor .

7

•Following inference can be drawn:– WAGON W=3500, HT=4495/4205(C/S)

• wagon to run at restricted speed at locations where track centers are less than 4570mm and structure distance is less than 2135mm.

• Suitable precautions for safety of passengers standing on the platform.

• The wagons shall be painted with distinctive colour.

CONTD-

8

• Inference (Contd.):– Routes shall be identified and modifications

carried out to COP and over head structures/OHE, where ever required.

– These wagons shall be confined to identified and modified routes only.

CONTD-

9

Proposed SOD for Feeder Routes on Eastern Corridor

Clearance for Electrification is yet to be decided?

10

Proposed SOD for Double Stack

Containers on Feeder Routes

7300

7300

Clearance for Electrification is yet to be decided?

11

Proposed Axle Loads & TLD for DFC

• Formation & Bridges : 30T• Track on DFC : Initially for 25T which can be Upgraded to 30T subsequently

• Track on Feeder routes : 25T

• Proposed TLD :12.00 t/m

(Same as HM loading)

12

• For 30 t axle load, 68 kg (90UTS or Greater) Rail on new design PSC Sleepers, 1660 per km on 350mm ballast shall be used.

• For 25 t axle loads on feeder routes, 60 kg (90 UTS) Rails on existing PSC sleepers, 1660 per km on 300 mm ballast shall be used.

• New PSC sleeper for 30 t axle load to suit 68kg rail are being developed by RDSO. These should be used on DFC.

• Flash butt welding joints to be used

• E-Clip type elastic fastening with improved rubber pad, being developed by RDSO shall be used.

• Thick Web Switches and Swing Nose Crossings in Turnouts.

• PSC sleepers have also to be designed for Points & crossings, Level crossings, SEJs, Bridge approaches.

Track Structure

13

Formation, Gradients & Curvature• Formation width in embankment/ Cutting and

centre to centre spacing shall be as follows:– Single line 6.85m (As existing)– Double line 12.35m– Centre to centre spacing of DFC tracks 5.50m– Centre to centre spacing of DFC track from existing

track shall be 6.00m.

• Suitable thickness of sub-ballast/ blanket /reinforced earth const to be made.

• Curvature should be limited to 700m (2.5 degree).

• Ruling Gadient shall be 1 in 200 compensated.

14

Track and Bridge Maintenance

• A New approach:• Mechanised Track Maintenance shall be formulated and

implemented consisting of:– TRC based Track geometry measurement to decide need for

tamping.– Need Based Mechanised Track Maintenance.– Spurt Car based USFD testing.– Rail Grinding.– On foot inspection by PWM.

• And a similar plan for Bridges.• All maintenance will need a daily track possession of 4

hours.• A Service Road required, all along for facilitating

maintenance.

15

EXAMINATION OF EXISTING BRIDGES

• Superstructure:

Existing structures examined on following premises:

– Actual axle load and axle spacing for moving loads of WAG9 locomotive and 25 T BOXN wagons.

– Coefficient of Dynamic Augment (CDA) for limited speed of 60kmph .

16

STANDARD SPAN(M)

SPEED POTENTIAL OF BRIDGES FOR DIFFERENT LOADING STANDARDS OF EXISTING BRIDGES

BGML LOADING

Axle load 22.9T

TLD 7.67T/M

T. Effort 47.6T

RBG LOADING Axle load 22.5T

TLD 7.67T/M

T. Effort 75.0T

MBG LOADING Axle load 25.0T

TLD 8.25T/M

T. Effort 100.0T

1-25 60kmph 60kmph 60kmph

25-47.25 60 kmph 55 kmph 60 kmph

63.0 60 kmph Strengthening required

60 kmph

78.8 50 kmph Strengthening required

55 kmph

RESULTS OF ANALYSIS:

17

•Substructure: Substructure analysis case by case.

•Bearings: Technical inspection of Bearings to be done by Zonal Railways

for running of 25 T axle load.

•Directions for checking superstructure of non standard spans, bearing and substructure of all bridges issued to Zonal Railways.

•Monitoring:• Through Instrumentation of selected Bridges for fatigue & stress

threshold.

• More intensive Bearing & Substructures Inspection ( will need more manpower)

18

PROPOSED LOADING STANDARDS FOR DFC BRIDGES

• DESIGN CRITERIA:• Loading standard – Heavy Mineral loading

• Locomotives: – Axle load 30.0 T– Tractive effort 60.0 T per loco for double

headed locomotives 45.0T per loco for

triple headed locomotives

– Braking force 25.0 T per loco

• Train load: – Axle load 30.0 T– Track loading density 12.0 T/M

19

20

PROFILE OF BOBR WAGON

21

Track Side Structure Profile for Dedicated

Freight Corridor

22

Infringements on Feeder

Routes, Outside Stations

23

Infringements on Feeder Routes, Inside Stations

24

Infringements on Feeder Routes, for Structures permitted

under Sch-II

25

Relationship between axleload and rail section used

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

10 15 20 25 30 35Axleload (t)

Ra

il S

ec

tio

n (

kg

/m)

Survey of current practices, carried out by JRP-2, initiated by World Executive Council of UIC indicates the following relationship between Rail Section and Axle Load:

Track Structure

26

Relationship between axleload and rail hardness (tangent track)

200

250

300

350

400

450

10 15 20 25 30 35

Axleload (t)

Rai

l Har

dnes

s (H

BN

)

The Survey also indicates that rails with Higher BHN are being used for higher axle loads:

Track Structure

27

Proposed MMD on Feeder Routes of Eastern CorridorWhere no D/Stack

EXISTING WAGONW=3500H3735/4205

WITH KINEMATIC =390

SOME ROBs AND TUNNELS MAY BE EFFECTED