Read Microsoft Word - TSC- 81-RBOrders final text version

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

Railway Board's Orders On Minutes of 81st Meeting Of the Track Standards Committee Held at New Delhi from 1st to 3rd December, 2010

RESEARCH DESIGNS & STANDARDS ORGANISATION LUCKNOW-226 011

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

PREFACE

The 81st meeting of Track Standards Committee was Held at New Delhi from 1st to 3rd December, 2010 .The Minutes of meeting was issued vide RDSO's letter no .CT/C-81 dt10.12.2010 .The Railways Board's order on minutes of above meeting have been received vide letter no2010/CE-II/TSC/1 dt12.05.11. This compilation is being issued incorporating Agenda items, Notes by secretary, Committee's observation, Committee's Recommendations and Railways Board's order for convenience at Zonal Railway level to have all information at one place. In order to ensure ease of use and faster reach, this compilation is being circulated in soft format only. Zonal Railways shall take further follow up action based on Railways Board's orders.

ii

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

INDEX- I

S.N. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Item No. 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 Item Renewal of `D' marked rails Gauge at toe of points & crossing SEJs for curves up to 4 Degree Provision of online printing facilities in PC-based OMS equipment Revision of Specification and fixing life cycle for avoiding frequent failure of glued joints. Push trolley wheels suitable for digital axle counter (i) Experience of tamping based on TM 115 (ii) Experience on Tamping based on TM ­ 115 (iii) TM-115 report has not been implemented on Northern Railway 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 Anomalies in IRPWM & LWR Manual Threshold values for load testing of in service rails by FBW Standards of track maintenance to C&M-(Vol.1) Reflective type indicator boards Extra clearance on curves Clips with higher toe load being used on Indian Railways Restoring whistle board distance from level crossing from 350m to 600m on single line. Ref: Para 916 (1) (i) of IRPWM Review of Pending Items: As per details in INDEX-II Provision of wicket gates for on foot road users Item Proposed by Southern Railway's Email dt:27-08-2010 South Eastern Railway's Email dt:14-09-10 Northern Railway's Email dt:14-09-10 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2008 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2009 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2009 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2009 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2010 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2010 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2010 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2010 Item Proposed in CTE's Seminar-2010 South Eastern Railway's Email dt:22-09-10 IRICEN's letter dt:01-102010 Track Design directorate of RDSO Track Design directorate of RDSO Page No. 1-9 10-11 12-13 14 15-16 17-18 19-22

23-24 25-26 27-29 30-32 33-34 35-43 44-45

15 16

1184 1185

58-95 Northeast Frontier Railway's Fax dt:04-112010 Northeast Frontier Railway's Fax dt:04-112010 As per Rly. Board's order on ITEM No 1008 of 79th meeting of BSC During TSC meeting NWR, during TSC meeting During TSC meeting 46-47

17

1186

Abolition of THOD system

48-50

18

1187

Provision of Pathways on long girder bridge for inspection and Maintenance. Trial policy for track items Provision of Notch at bottom of joggle fish plate Measurement of Rail stresses and stress free temperature of LWR by non destructive portable state of art equipment

51-54

19 20 21

1188 1189 1190

55 56 57

iii

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

INDEX- II

S.N. 1 2 Brief description of item Review of accident proforma LWR/CWR over ballasted deck bridges. (Provision of LWR with SEJ on pier to pier, continuation of LWR on bridges, development of code of practice similar to UIC code 774-3R. Trials of continuation of LWR with multi span bridges with/without ballasted deck.). Possibility of permitting 26 m rails on major and important bridges Modification in design of combination fish plate Change of rail section in LWR/CWR Modification in the lifting barrier assembly for level crossings Machine maintenance of track Non-destructive stress free temperature measurement of CWR by force application method Review of rail stress calculation methodology Reference (1167/1/80) (958/73/02/Safety) (1167/2/80) (982/7th Ext./02/IM/LWR) (1091/77/IM/LWR) (1092/77/IM/LWR) (1093/77/IM/LWR) (1167/4/80) (986/74/JW/SWR) (1167/5/80) (1015/74/FF) (1167/6/80) (1042/75/ IM/LWR) (1167/8/80) (1070/76/EL) (1167/9/80) (1073/76/TM/GL/70) (1167/11/80) (1077/76/IM/LWR/RSM) (1167/12/80) (1078/76/Track Stress/FEM & DG/Research) (1167/13/80) (1087/77/IRPWM) (1167/14/80) (1055/75/IRPWM) (1167/15/80) (1098/78/USFD) (1167/16/80) (1102/78/ACP/RP) (1167/19/80) (1121/79/JE) (1167/20/80) (1124/79/TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/21/80) (1125/79/TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/22/80) (1127/79/MT/GJ) (1167/23/80) (1128/79/GE/GEN/13 TSC VOL-X) (1167/26/80) (1133/79/WELDING/POLICY) (1167/27/80) (1134/79/USFD) (1167/28/80) (1136/79/TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/30/80) (1142/79/PTX) Page No. 58 59

3 4 5 6 7 8 9

60 61 62 63 64 65 66

10 11 12

Revision of Workload of PWIs Criteria for re-alignment of curve Necessity of detailed guidelines for USFD testing of tongue rails and CMS crossings Corrosion on rails at contact points of liners resulting into fractures Maintenance of channel sleeper Standard deviation based track maintenance standards for 130Kmph to 160Kmph and spot values for 140Kmph to 160 Kmph. Improving small track machine organisation Reduction in thickness of end post of glued joints. Formation treatment and recommendations of RDSO for treatment other than blanketing. Issues pertaining to improvement in A.T welding. Use of 700 (2MHz) 8mm probe for detection of half moon crack. Carrying out deep screening by BCM at a speed of 40Kmph. Maintenance problem in 1 in 12 Fan shaped layout.

67 68 69

13 14 15

70 71 72

16 17 18 19 20 21 22

73 74 75 76 77 78 79

iv

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

23 24 25

Yardstick for USFD testing. Visibility requirement for unmanned LCs Discrepancies in IRPWM & USFD Manual regarding provisions pertaining to metallurgical testing of rails/welds. Flaw detected in SKV welds with 3 piece moulds by 450 2 MHz single crystal probe Maintenance of thick web switches Maintenance of Spring Setting Device Emergency sliding boom at level crossing gates Formulation of procedure for testing of vertical flaws in USFD testing. Minimum track centre for new 3rd and 4th Lines Trial of different fastening components on Indian Railways. Inspection and maintenance of points and crossings Increase in top formation width. Criteria for deep screening of ballast

(1167/31/80) (1143/79/USFD) (1147/80/ EL) (1148/80/ IRPWM, USFD & AT Welding Sub Committee) (1150/80/ USFD & Welding/Policy) (1151/80/ TWS) (1152/80/ TWS) (1154/80/ LC/Safety) (1156/80/ USFD) (1157/80/ SD/Rev/BG/MG) (1160/80/ EF/TRIAL) (1161/80/ PTX) (1163/80/ GE/Gen/TSC/13) (1166/80/ GE/Gen/TSC/13) (1168/80/ IRPWM) (1169/80/ PTX/Policy)

80 81 82

26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37

83 84 85 86 87 88 89 91 92 93 94 95

Maintenance tolerance of gauge Modification in F/S Turn Out (1 in 8.5 & 1.12) Drawings.

v

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1170 SUBJECT: Renewal of `D' marked rails (Proposed by SR) CT/Specification/T-12 & CT/RG/RIC

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

Southern Railway vide their email dt:27-08-10 has proposed the item as under: `D' marking of rails was carried out in Bhilai Steel Plant for rails manufactured prior to year 1999. This marking signifies that dispensation with regard to any one or more parameters of IRS T-12 have been granted while inspecting the rails. One of the causes of `D' marking was dispensation with respect to degassing. It is suspected that these rails would be of consequence as regard to transverse flaw in railhead. Two failures in Palakkad division, five failures in Thiruvananthapuram division and two failures in Madurai division have taken place on the major bridge and approaches which were laid with `D' marked rails. A total length of about 1248 km of rails were laid with `D' marked rails over Southern Railway, out of which 47,843 km are on major bridges and approaches. The "D" marked rails are failing prematurely with the combination of defects such as localized corrosion, scabbing, wheel burns etc. There were 52 failures in the stretch of "D" marked rails during the year. Further, during USFD testing defects in rails were observed in 25 locations, defects in welds were detected in 240 locations over Southern Railway. SUGGESTIONS: In view of the above, a policy may be formulated to replace all the `D' marked rails from mainline duly giving priority for renewal of `D' marked rails on bridges and its approaches, curves and high banks. NOTES BY SECRETARY: The Indian Railways Standard Specification for Flat Bottom Rails i.e. IRS T-12/1964 was revised in the year 1988 and designated as IRST-12-1988. This specification was issued vide letter no. CT/Specification/IRST-12 dated 06.03.1989. This specification introduced major changes in the process of steel production and acceptance of rails. 1

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Since adequate facilities for such production were not available in Bhilai Steel Plant, therefore, grace period of two years was granted for introduction of above specification. The rails produced with such dispensation were marked as IRS T-12-88-D vide Railways Board's letter no. Track/21/87/0503/7 dated 25.02.1991. The letter `D' stands for dispensation. The facilities could not be developed in two years time and subsequently relaxation/dispensation was granted vide letter no. CT/Specification/T-12 dated 10/18.03.1991 upto March 1993. The clauses of specification IRST-12-88 on which dispensation was granted along with dispensation permitted are tabulated in Table 1 below. For some of the provisions, dispensation was further extended till March 1994. The specification was further revised in 1996 and IRS T-12-1996 was issued in August 1996. In this specification dispensation was granted upto 31.12.1999 for Hydrogen content, end straightness and on-line ultrasonic testing. The clauses of IRS T-12-1996 on which dispensation was granted along with dispensation permitted are tabulated in Table 2 below. These dispensations were permitted upto 31.12.1998. The dispensation on Hydrogen content were permitted for 52 Kg rails only and no dispensation were permitted for 60 Kg rails. The dispensation for Hydrogen content for 52 Kg rails was further extended till 31.12.1999. In view of problem of multiple fracture on `D' marked rails reported by NF Railway instructions for USFD testing of these rails were issued vide letter no. M&C/NDT/1/5 dated 19.4.2007 and subsequently revised instructions for USFD testing of `D' marked rails were included in Manual for Ultrasonic Testing of Rails vide Addendum & Corrigendum Slip No. 2 to Manual for Ultrasonic Testing of Rails and Welds Rev. 2006. The dispensation in some of the clauses of IRS T-12 were granted in 1991 and 1996 to Bhilai Steel Plant when they were not able to meet revised specifications as the revised specification required introduction of new processes, modification in existing processes and setting of additional units i.e. RH degassing biplanner roller straightening machine and on-line ultrasonic tester etc. The `D' marked rails though have been accepted with dispensation permitted in existing specifications but cannot be termed as defective, if such is the case then all the rails produced prior to revision of specifications should be replaced. The defects of corrosion, scabbing and wheel burns mentioned in the agenda are not related to dispensation permitted to Bhilai Steel Plant. The Committee may deliberate on the issue.

2

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.N. 1.

Clause

Table 1 IRST-88 provisions and dispensations IRS-T-!2-88 provisions

Dispensation

Following relaxations were permitted to Bhilai Steel Plant against the provisions of IRS/T-12-88 specifications up to March 1993. 2. 5.1 The steel for rails shall be of the best quality made by open hearth, basic oxygen or any other process approved by the Purchaser. For grade 880, the steel shall be of fully killed quality and cast in hot topped bottom poured ingots. Blooms produced by continuous casting process may also be used for production of rails. The manufacturer in his offer shall furnish the steel making process including the details of subsequent refining such as vacuum degassing, control cooling of blooms/rails, etc. which he will follow. Hot stamping Not more than 20% of grade 880 rails should be manufactured by top poured ingots from the steel produced by open hearth process

3.

7.2

(i) Existing clause 7.2.1 and 7.2.2 have been relaxed to the following extent till such time necessary facilities for stamping of rails are created by Bhilai Steel Plant: For ingot route Every rail shall be distinctly hot stamped on one side of the web or cold stamped on one side of the head at the lower position of its vertical face at a distance not less than 150*mm from each end. Cast number. `*' (star) on the first rail of the head blooms. c) "Z" on the bottom end rail of the ingot in case of 880 grade." Note - * This should now be read as 250mm For continuous cast route Hot stamping on one side of the web where they shall appear at least once, in a position to be agreed to between the manufacturer and the purchaser and according to a numerical alphabetical or combined alphabetical and numerical code, from which the following information can be obtained: a) b)

4.

7.2.1

For ingot route Every rail shall have distinctly hot stamped on one side of the web or cold stamped on one side of head at the lower position of its vertical face at a distance not less than 150mm from each end. a) Cast number b) Number of the ingot 1, 2, 3 ............. c) The letters A, B .........................Z in order, starting from top of the ingot, Z being reserved for the bottom end rail.

5.

7.2.2

For continuous cast route Hot stamping on one side of the web where they shall appear at least once, in a position to be agreed to between the producer and the Purchaser and according to a numerical, alphabetical or combined alphabetical and numerical code, from which the following information can be obtained.

-

The number of the cast from which the rail has been rolled with letter C. The position of the rail in relation to top of the bloom or continuous cast strand. All other reference positions of the rail in the cast agreed between the producer and purchaser.

-

The number of the cast from which the rail has been rolled with letter C.

3

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Note: In the event of hot stamped identification marks having been removed through cropping, reidentification of such marks shall be made in agreement with the Purchaser. 6. 8.1.1 Tolerances in sectional dimensions

Note ­ In the event of hot stamped identification marks having been removed through cropping, re-identification of such marks shall be made in agreement with the Purchaser." Relaxation in the sectional dimensions has been permitted to the following extent: Overall height of rails : +1.0mm - 0.5mm : +1.0mm -0.5mm

Overall height of rails

:±0.6mm

Width of head This will be measured 14mm below the rail top

:±0.5mm

Width of head This will be measured 14mm below the rail top.

Width of flange

:±1.0mm for sections less than 60 Kg/m

Width of flange : +1.0mm for section less than 60 Kg/m. + 1.0mm -1.5mm. for sections 60 Kg/m and above "Present practice of acceptance of rails based on visual inspection may continue for straightness of the rails. Wavy kinky and twisted rails shall not be accepted. All rails shall have the straightness at the ends checked by means of 1.5m straight edge. The deviation from straight edge both in vertical and horizontal direction, shall generally (for not less than 80% of rails inspected and passed) be not more than 1.00 mm measured as the maximum ordinate on a chord of 1.5m. However, this ordinate shall in no case exceed 1.5mm. This tolerance is allowed only if the deviation raises the end in vertical direction. No tolerance shall be allowed if the deviation lowers the end. Any rail not complying with these requirements may be rectified by the producer and offered for inspection."

:+1.0mm for sections -1.1mm 60 kg/m and above 7. 8.4.1 The straightness of the rail shall be judged by eye but in case of doubt or dispute, the affected portion shall be checked using 1.5m straight edge. The maximum permissible deviation shall be 0.80mm measured as the maximum ordinate on a chord of 1.5m. Wavy, kinky and twisted rails shall not be accepted.

8.4.2

End Straightness Rails shall have the straightness at the ends checked by means of 1.5m straight edge. The deviation from straight edge, both in vertical and horizontal direction shall not exceed 0.70mm measured as a maximum ordinate on a chord of 1.5m. This tolerance is allowed if the deviation raises the end in vertical direction. No tolerance shall be allowed if the deviation lowers the end. Any rail not complying with these requirements may be rectified by the Producer and offered for re-inspection.

8.

15.2

The manufacturer shall, at his own expenses, make and furnish to the Inspecting Officer chemical analysis for the specified limits after rolling from each cast. Extent of test shall be one per cast upto and including 150 tonnes and two per cast for the cast more than 150 tonnes.

The manufacturer shall, at his own expense, make and furnish to the Inspecting Officer chemical analysis for the specified elements after rolling from each cast. Extent of test shall be one per cast up to and including 150t of rails rolled and two per cast for the casts from which more than 150t of rails are rolled."

4

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

9.

15.5.1

The manufacturer shall determine the tensile properties of the steel in accordance with the requirements of IS:1608-1972. Such tests shall be made on standard test pieces taken from position shown in figure below. Diameter D 20.60mm, 14.56mm

The suggestion of Bhilai Steel Plant for permitting diameter of tensile test as 10mm, in addition to the two standard diameters permitted in IRS/T-12-88 was accepted. The stipulation of stress relieving was also agreed but in accordance with provisions of UIC 860-0 which is reproduced below: "Tensile test specimens of grade 900 and 1100 may be maintained at a temperature not exceeding 1000C for a maximum 2 hours before testing."

10.

The minimum tensile strength shall be as given in Table 1, clause 6. Should the test piece break outside the middle half of the gauge length, it may be discarded and such breaks should not be considered as a failure of the test. A fresh test or fresh tests may be made by the manufacturer with a test piece or test pieces taken from rail from the same cast from which the discarded test piece was taken. 15.5.5 For rails from continuously cast blooms When a first tensile test carried out on any of the rail from the same cast does not give satisfactory result, two check tests shall be made. The first check test shall be made on any of the rails from the same strand and the second check test on any of the rails from another strand of the same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory, the cast shall be accepted. When one or both of these two check tests do not give satisfactory result, the causes may be investigated by the Producer and if established to the satisfaction of the Purchaser two further re-tests for each unsatisfactory first retest shall be carried out on other rails represented by the original tests. For rails from ingots route: When a top end or a bottom end print is unsatisfactory, a check test shall be carried out on two more rails from the top end section, of the `A' rail or bottom end section of the `Z' rail from the same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory, all the rails of the cast shall be accepted. If any check test is unsatisfactory, further check tests shall be carried out on top of `Z' rail or on bottom of `A' rail as the case may be. If this second series of check tests is satisfactory, all rails of the cast shall be accepted except `A' or `Z' rails (as the case may be) which shall be rejected.

The minimum tensile strength shall be as given in Table 1, clause 6. Should the test piece break outside the middle half of the gauge length and elongation is less than the minimum specified value, it may be discarded and such breaks should not be considered as a failure of test. A fresh test may be made by the manufacturer with a test piece taken from rail from same cast." "When the first tensile test carried out on any of the rails from the same cast does not give satisfactory results, 2 check tests shall be made on samples taken from any of the rails from same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory, the cast shall be accepted. If one or both of these check tests do not give satisfactory results, the cast shall be rejected."

11.

12.

15.6.4

For rails from ingot route When top end or a bottom end print is unsatisfactory, a check test shall be carried out on two more rails from the top end section, of `*' (star) rail or bottom end section of the `Z' rail from the same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory, all the rails of the cast shall be accepted. If any check test is unsatisfactory, further check tests shall be carried out on top of `Z' rail or on bottom of `*' (star) rail as the case may be. If this second series of check tests is satisfactory, all rails of the cast shall be accepted except `*' (star) or `Z' rails (as the case may be) which shall be rejected.

13.

For rails from continuous cast route: If macroscopic and macro-graphic examination conducted according to 15.6.3 does not give satisfactory results two further samples taken from the same strand shall be tested. These samples shall be taken one from each side of the original sample at positions selected by the manufacturer. At least one of the two re-tests shall be taken from a rail

For rails from continuous cast route If macroscopic and macro-graphic examination conducted according to Clause 15.6.3 does not give satisfactory results, 2 further samples taken from any of the rails of the same cast shall be tested. If two check tests are satisfactory, rails from the cast shall be accepted. If one or both of

5

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

rolled from the same bloom as the failed test and the rails from between the two retest positions shall be rejected. If both retests are satisfactory, all the remaining rails manufactured from that strand of the cast shall be accepted. In the event of failure of one or both retests, the reason for failure may be investigated by the manufacturer. 14. 15.8.4 Check tests If a falling weight test piece gives unsatisfactory result, the following procedure shall be adopted. For rails from ingot route Two check tests shall be carried out, on test pieces taken from top of `A' rails of two other ingots from the same cast. If all the check tests are satisfactory, the cast shall be accepted. If a check test is unsatisfactory, all `A' rails shall be rejected and a second series of four check tests shall be done on samples drawn from bottom end of `A' rails. If all these check tests are satisfactory, the remainder of the cast shall be accepted (rejecting all the `A' rails). If a check test does not give satisfactory results, the cast shall be rejected. 15. For rails from continuous casting route When a falling weight test carried out on a rail does not give satisfactory results, two further tests shall be made on rails from the same strand at either side of the location of the unsatisfactory test, at points chosen with the agreement of the Producer and the Purchaser. At least one of these check tests must be carried out on rails from the same bloom and the rails between the two check test positions shall be rejected. If the two check tests are satisfactory, all the remaining rails, from this strand, shall be accepted. In case of failure of one or more retests, the cast of part cast shall be liable to rejection. However, the reasons for failure may be investigated by the manufacturer and if established to the satisfaction of the Purchaser further check tests shall be made. 16.2 Inspection Before the rails are submitted to the Inspecting Officer for inspection, these shall be properly examined by the manufacturer's inspectors and all defective rails removed and placed in a separate stack for examination by the Inspecting Officer. The analysis of all casts rolled together with a report on the manufacturer's rejections shall be submitted inspection every accepted rail shall be clearly stamped with the Inspecting Officer's stamp at one end in the presence of the Inspecting Officer. In agreement with Inspecting Oficer, all the rails shall be inspected jointly with the manufacturer's inspectors. Cast numbers shall be cold stamped on the faces of the rails at one end.

these two check tests do not give satisfactory results, the cast shall be rejected."

For rails from ingot route Two check tests shall be carried out, on test pieces, taken from top of `*' (star) rails of two ingots from the same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory, the cast shall be accepted. If a check test is unsatisfactory all `*' (star) rails shall be rejected and a second series of four check tests shall be done on samples drawn from bottom end of `*' (star) rails. If all these check tests are satisfactory, the reminder of the cast shall be accepted (rejecting all the `*' (star) rails). If a check test does not give satisfactory results, the cast shall be rejected. For rails from continuous cast route When a falling weight test carried out on a rail does not give satisfactory results, two further tests shall be made on rails from the same cast. If the two check tests are satisfactory all the rails from this cast shall be accepted. In case of failure of one or more retests, the cast shall be rejected."

16.

has been re-worded as follows (taking into consideration difficulty expressed by Bhilai Steel Plant in immediately segregating the defective rails detected as a result of internal inspection):"Before the rails are submitted to the Inspecting Officer for inspection, these shall be properly examined by the manufacturers' Inspectors and all the defective rails shall be distinctly marked. The Inspecting Officer shall only inspect those rails which have been passed by manufacturer's Inspectors. The analysis of all casts rolled together with a report on manufacturer's rejections shall be submitted to the Inspecting Officer at the time of inspection. After inspection, every accepted rail shall be clearly

6

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

stamped with the Inspecting Officer's stamp at one end in the presence of the Inspecting Officer. Cast Nos. shall be cold stamped on the faces of the rails at one end." 17. ------------------In addition, the following important decisions were taken for action by Bhilai Steel Plant: For the rails produced from Open Hearth Route, Bhilai Steel Plant agreed that for generating data, they will check hydrogen content of 5% of the cast from Open Hearth Process for liquid steel. All these rails will be slow cooled. For the rails made from Convertor Shop, hydrogen content in liquid steel is being checked for all casts. It was decided that the heats showing hydrogen content in liquid steel more than 3 ppm should be suitably slow cooled. Rail heats showing hydrogen content in liquid steel less than 3 ppm need not be slow cooled.

18.

--------------------

19.

--------------------

20.

------------------------

21.

------------------------------

Bhilai Steel Plant confirmed that on-line ultrasonic testing equipment shall be commissioned by March 1991. It was also agreed that Bhilai Steel Plant should procure some portable ultrasonic flaw detecting machines which will be useful when the on-line ultrasonic equipment goes out of order Regarding the limits of permissible defects of ultrasonic testing on rails, Bhilai Steel Plant agreed to generate data and to submit to Railways for consideration; and Hardness test would not be mandatory for acceptance of rails. However, hardness test for 10% of the cast shall continue to be conducted by Directorate of Inspection to generate data base. Note ­ These relaxations are in supersession to explanation annexed to IRS/T-12-88 for rails manufactured by Bhilai Steel Plant. Overall height of rails : + 1.0 mm : - 0.5 mm Width of head : 0.5mm This will be measured 14mm below the rails top. Width of flange: +1.0 mm, -

22.

----------------------------

23.

---------------------------

24.

8.1.1

Overall height of rails : + 0.6mm

Width of head : This will be measured 14mm below the rails top.

+ 0.5mm

Width of flange: + 1.0 mm for section less than 60 Kg/m + 1.0 mm - 1.1 mm for sections 60Kg/m and above

+ 1.0 mm for section less than 60Kg/m + 1.0mm -1.5mm for sections 60Kg/m and above

7

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

1.

21.1

Table 2 IRST-96 provisions and dispensations Hydrogen in Liquid Steel (PPM) Up to 2.5 > 2.5 - 3.0 Heat satisfactory

Hydrogen in Liquid Steel (PPM) Heat acceptable without treatment All rails to be slow cooled. All blooms and rails to be slow cooled Heat to be rejected.

Up to 3.0 3.0 to 4.5 4.5 to 5.5 > 5.5

Heat satisfactory if all rails are slow cooled. > 3.0 Heat shall be rejected

The above dispensation is only permitted for 52kg rails and valid up to 31.07.98 the position will be reviewed after exact date of commissioning of degassing plant. First BSP should ensure supply of all 52 kg rails within 3ppm. After all 52 kg rails are being received with hydrogen within 3ppm, order for 60 kg will be placed. 2. 9.4.2 End Straightness Tolerances `A' Class rails 0.7mm over chord length 1.5m 0.5mm over chord length 1.5m Nil `B' End straightness Up to 0.7 over chord length of 1.5m 90% rails

Class rails Horizontal

Vertical a) up sweep b) down sweep 3.

0.5mm over chord length 2.0m 0.4mm over chord length 2.0m Nil

Between 0.8 to 1.2 mm over chord length of 1.5m

10% rails

The manufacturer in his offer shall furnish the detailed method of on-line ultrasonic testing of rails to be followed by him. The limits of permissible defects for ultrasonic testing of rails shall be as follows and the standard test piece shall be as shown in appendix-V. Head :1.5 mm dia through hole Web :2.0 mm dia through hole Web & foot junction Foot :2.0 mm dia through hole :0.5mm deep, 12.5mm long and 1.0mm wide notch (inclined at 20o with vertical axis)

USFD Testing ON-line USFD facilities are to be commissioned latest by December 1998. Manual USFD testing of the rails which has been proposed for 60 kg rails may be started for 52 kg rails, which are only rails to be supplied at present.

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. The existing procedure of USFD testing of `D' marked is able to detect defects in `D' marked rails. CTE/SR suggested renewal of `D' marked rail should be renewed at vulnerable locations. 8

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

3. 4.

The track renewal can be done on condition basis as per existing criteria of renewal. CTE/NF Rly. stated that with double the frequency detection of defects is done properly.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Digital double tester is to be used for testing of `D' marked rails at reduced interval to be decided by CTE of Zonal Railway and USFD should be carried out without any shortfall.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved. Item closed.

9

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1171 SUBJECT: Gauge at toe of points & crossing (Proposed by SER) CT/PTX

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

South Eastern Railway vide their email dt:14-09-10 has proposed the item as under: As per provision of IRPWM, nominal gauge has to be maintained at toe of switch i.e. 1673mm. there is no tolerance given for track maintenance. Keeping exact 1673 mm gauge all the time is not practicable. Therefore, a tolerance of + 3 mm may be allowed under para 237(9) e of IRPWM 2004. NOTES BY SECRETARY: Para 237 of IRPWM for Inspection of points & crossings regarding gauge is as under: 237(1)(g) The Track geometry at the turnout should not be inferior to that applicable to the route. However, gauge just ahead of actual toe of switch shall be nominal gauge/nominal gauge+6. Further, Para-237 (8) is as under: 237(8) Gauge and super elevation in Turnouts a) It is a good practice to maintain uniform gauge over turnouts. b) If gauge of track adjoining the points & crossings is maintained wider/tighter than the gauge on the points & crossings, the gauge on the adjoining track must be brought to the same gauge as in the points & crossings and run out at the rate of 1mm in 3 M to the requisite extent. In the above paras, no tolerances for gauge on points & crossings has been prescribed. IRPWM para-607 (2) regarding the track tolerances state that there is no special specification for gauge variations. The maximum limits for tight and slack gauge should be as indicated in para-224(2). Recently, a correction slip has been proposed for approval of Railway Board for para-224(2)(e) as under : Para 224 (e) (v) : A sub para 224 (e) (v) may be modified in IRPWM as given below : 10

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

" While it is desirable to maintain correct gauge, where due to age and condition of the sleepers, it is not possible to maintain correct gauge, it is good practice to work within the following tolerances of gauge, provided generally uniform gauge can be maintained over long lengths : Broad Gauge a) On straight b) On curves with radius 440 m or more c) On curves with radius less than 440m

-6mm to +6mm -6mm to +15mm Upto +20mm

Note : These tolerances are with respect to nominal gauge of 1676mm. Moreover, the para-224(e)(1) of IRPWM states as under : Preservation of gauge is an important part of track maintenance specially through points & crossings. For good riding, the basic requirement is uniform gauge over a continuous stretch of track and such gauge should be allowed to continue so long as it is within the permissible limit of tightness or slackness. From the above paras of IRPWM, it is very much evident that the tolerances for gauge should be in unison with the approaching and following track i.e. before and after points & crossings. In view of above, committee is requested to deliberate and make suitable recommendation. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. There is a need to have a clarity on the issue of gauge at P&C for the benefit of field supervisors and officers. The wider/tighter gauge at toe of switch and over crossing is not desirable. The gauge at P&C is required to be maintained in light of above considerations. The clause of uniform gauge over continuous stretch of track (IRPWM para 224 (e) (i)) can not be extended to P&C due to the limited length of P&C. Correct gauge mentioned in para 237 (9) (e) of IRPWM is to be defined clearly. This issue can not be decided without further study which should also be supported with field data. Hence, there is a need to form a sub committee which can go in detail and discuss the issue.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: A committee of ED/Track-II, CTE/NR, CTE/SR & CTE/SER is to be constituted to examine the item and give suitable recommendations for approval of Railway Board. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved, Recommendation to be submitted by 30.08.11. 11

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1172

SUBJECT:

SEJs for curves up to 4 Degree (Proposed by NR) CT/JW3

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

Northern Railway vide their email dt:14-09-10 has proposed the item as under: LWR/CWRs are permitted to be laid on curves up to 4 degree. The improved design SEJs can be laid only up to 2 degree. There are many curves of 4 degree where LWR can be laid if improved design of SEJ is available up to 4 degree. This can help avoid laying of Buffer rails.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

The item of SEJs on curves up to 20 was discussed in 76th TSC. Further, in 78th TSC it was recommended by the committee that Southern Railway and West Central Railway have used SEJs manufactured by M/s Rahee, Kolkata & M/s BMW, Jamshedpur and performance is satisfactory, therefore, improved SEJ on curve up to 20 can be adopted. The recommendation of the committee was duly approved by Railway Board. Further, in 79th TSC it was informed to the committee that Railway Board has been asked to communicate modalities for transfer of IPR to RDSO and the same is under process. Therefore, improved design of SEJ can be laid only up to 20. Further, if there is requirement of SEJ's for laying in curve up to 40 , the same can be taken up by RDSO for development. In view of above, the committee is requested to deliberate and make suitable recommendation. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: The trials of improved SEJ of two firm's design up to 20 have been conducted. The performance of these designs has been found satisfactory in field. There is a need to develop SEJs up to 40 as LWR can be continued up to 40. The trial of earlier design of 20 can be extended up to 40. There is a need to develop technology for continuing LWR through Points & Crossings to avoid laying of SEJs on curves. RDSO informed that the same has 12

1.

2. 3. 4.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

been developed and Railway Board is procuring Weldable CMS crossing for this purpose. 5. Ballast resistance will reduce on 40 curve by providing SEJ on curve.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. RDSO should develop the SEJs for laying in curve up to 40 in consultation with Railway Board. SEJs shall be laid on curves of 20 to 40 curvature for trial at E. CoR, NFR and SR.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Will be decided after finalization of design.

13

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1173

SUBJECT:

Provision of online printing facilities in PC-based OMS equipment (Proposed in CTE's seminar 2008) TM/GL/70 (81st)

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2008 as follows:

Item No. Item No.8

Description Provision of online printing facilities in PCbased OMS equipment.

Issue PC-based (laptop)OMS machines do not have facility to take printout of data

Recommendation

Board's Remarks RDSO to validate Agreed the software

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

Draft specification for PC based OMS equipment by incorporating the provision of online printing has been framed. After making the trials, final specification will be issued. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. RDSO to expedite the finalization of specification.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Specification for PC based OMS equipment by incorporating the provision of online printing should be finalized within six months.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved.

14

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1174

SUBJECT:

Revision of Specification and fixing life cycle for avoiding frequent failure of glued joints. (Proposed by CR in CTE's seminar 2009) CT/MT/GJ

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2009 as follows: Item no. & Description 3.5 Revision of Specification and fixing life cycle for avoiding frequent failure of glued joints. (Proposed by CR) Issue CC+6+2 was introduced on Central Railway in Nov.2005 and subsequently CC+8+2 has been introduced. BSL-JL section on Geetanjali route in one of the highest GMT carrying section with annual GMT of 43.98 on DN road and 62.14 on UP track. Since introduction of higher axle load on this section, failures of glued joints have increased considerably. Out of 139 failures, 84 failures (60.4%) have occurred due to failures of insulation and remaining 55 (39.6%) failures are attributed to breakage of bolts & fish plates. In terms of GMT, prior to introductions of higher axle load, average life of glued joints had been about 200 GMT, but the average life has reduced to 80-100 GMT, after introduction of higher axle load. Recommendation Board's Remarks/ Comments RDSO should study the problem of Glued Joint failures and suggest further action.

Railway Board is requested to issue necessary instructions regarding life cycle of glued joints.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

For analysis of fixing life cycle of glued joint the Chief Track Engineers of Zonal Railways were requested vide letter no. CT/MT/GJ dated 30.06.2010 to provide last five years data on failure of glued joints in proforma forwarded by RDSO. However, only Western Railway has provided the same. In absence of details, analysis could not be carried out. Remaining Zonal Railways are requested to expedite submission of glued joint failure data in said proforma. 15

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Design of Glued Joint fish plate to be revised so that normal on track tampers can tamp the track on Glued Joints. Fish plate design of insulated joints is to examined from above aspect and improving strength of Glued Joint. Zonal Rlys to ensure proper maintenance of Glued Joints. GJ clip to be used for required toe load instead of `J' clip. Codal life of Glued Joints has not been prescribed. Looking into failure of Glued Joints, life of Glued Joints can be tentatively fixed at 200 GMT. S.Rly, W.C. Rly and C. Rly. are to provide failure data on Glued Joints urgently. Effort to improve quality of Glued Joints to be continued including providing inspection of Glued Joints fish plates.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. RDSO to undertake revision of design of Glued Joint fish plate so that it can be tamped with normal on track tampers and its strengths is improved. Inspection of fish plates before manufacturing of Glued Joints can be introduced for the present design of Glued Joint. All other items should also be inspected before assembly of Glued Joint. Zonal Rlys. to use GJ clips at Glued Joint and ensure proper packing and maintenance. Life cycle of Glued Joints can be tentatively fixed at 200 GMT. WCR, CR & SR to supply Glued Joint failure data to RDSO at the earliest for the life cycle. Efforts to improve quality of Glued Joint to continue by studying design of other countries and R&D in this regard.

3. 4. 5.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS:

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Approved with proviso that design of fish plate should be such that its functional requirements are not compromised. Approved Approved Approved Approved

16

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1175

SUBJECT:

Push trolley wheels suitable for digital axle counter (Proposed in CTE's seminar 2009) TM/GL/70 (81st)

RDSO FILE REF:

AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2009 as follows: Item no. & Description 5.16 Push trolley wheels suitable for digital axle counter Issue Board's Remarks/ Comments RDSO should Agreed. develop a fresh drawing of trolley wheels on the digital axle counter section based on the report of CR. Recommendation

Railway Board vide letter number 207/SIGM/7 dated 18.06.2007 jointly issued by EDCE (P) and ED (Signal), directed that wheels of trolley with slotted wheels should be replaced by 4/6 spoke wheels as one time measure chargeable to signaling works by the agency executing the axle counter works. The directives were issued considering that digital axle counter are being progressively installed on Indian Railways. S & T directorate of RDSO had issued a drawing for fabrication of these wheels which was modified later as the trials were not successful. The modified drawing (copy enclosed) issued by RDSO vide their letter No.STS/E/AC/Wheel Interaction dated 04.07.07 contemplates dia as 20" with 4 spokes instead of normal wheel of 16". Above letter indicated two vendors for supply of these wheels. WC railway has given procurement order for supply of 15 sets of wheels and axles to 17

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

M/s International Motors, 8 khairu place, Kolkata- 72. Proprietor of the firm indicates that with the use of high graded steel casting and dia of 20" results in extra weight of about 6 to 7 Kg/wheel. Thus increased weight of trolley is as much as 25 Kg. Trial also indicated that additional trolley men will be required to off load the trolley, with wheels as per drawings of RDSO.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

On the basis of detailed deliberations with Signal Dte. of RDSO and the details collected from fields, a tentative drawing of push trolley wheel suitable for digital axle counter zone, has been prepared. Some trials have also been done with different wheels in different railways. Work for finalization of the parameters of trolley wheel are under mutual deliberation with signal Dte. and will be finalized shortly. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. RDSO should also explore the possibility of reducing the weight of trolley. Weight of the wheel should be reduced by RDSO while developing new drawing suitable for digital axle counter zone.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Drawing of push trolley wheel suitable for digital axle counter zone by reducing the weight of the wheel should be developed by RDSO within two months.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Based on the RDSO drawing, Zonal Railway should modify the Push trolley wheels and send the feedback to RDSO.

18

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1176 SUBJECT: (i) Experience of tamping based on TM 115 (ii) Experience on Tamping based on TM ­ 115 (iii) TM-115 report has not been implemented on Northern Railway (Proposed in CTE's seminar 2009 & 2010) RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA: The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2009 as follows: TM/GL/70 (81st)

Item no. & Description 5.22 Experience of tamping based on TM 115

Issue Tamping cycle was stipulated as 2 years or 100 GMT whichever is earlier as per IRTMM 2000 for PSC sleeper. Tamping cycle for other than PSC sleeper was once in a year. In this tamping cycle there was no consideration of whether the running is really downgraded to a level requiring through attention. RDSO vide TM 115(Oct '07) replaced this criteria. Now packing is requiring to be done only if 60% of the track length has got TGI value less than 90 or 80 (depending on sectional speed). The scope of tamping is likely to change on account of this criteria. State of implementation of this criteria along with its effect on the tamping requirement and track condition may be discussed.

Recommendation

The Committee on TGI should also take these considerations while reviewing the TGI formula and should also review the limit of TGI value which can be achievable after tamping as well as the values to be fixed for deciding the tamping requirement. The report should be expedited.

Board's Remarks/ Comments The issue may be examined by the Committee already appointed earlier on the subject matter based on the recommendatio n of TSC.

19

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2010 as follows:

Item no. & Descr iption 5.1.3

Issue

Recommend ation

Experience on Tamping based on TM ­ 115 In Eastern Railway it is found that after tamping the 60% CFD of TGI value more than 115 is not generally achieved on non screened track and due to seasonal effect. ii) On `A' route TRC frequency is 03 months and on `B' route the TRC frequency is 04 months. Hence, yearly planning of through tamping is difficult. iii) Due to high water table on major portion of track of Eastern Railway, the deterioration of track parameters at these locations is very fast. Hence, at these locations tamping should not be linked with TGI parameter. Suggestion: i) The threshold TGI value of 60% CFD after tamping i.e. 115 is on higher side, which is to be reduced. ii) The yearly planning of tamping should be on earlier policy of 02 years or 100 GMT whichever is earlier. TM-115 report has not been implemented on Northern Railway. The tamping plans are prepared on the basis of GMT. TGI values are used for need based tamping. The sections having TGI values less than 35 are tamped on Out of Turn basis. i)

ER

5.1.4

NR

NOTES BY SECRETARY: The item relating to tamping standards i.e. TGI, standard deviation of unevenness, twist, gauge and alignment achieved after tamping was discussed in the 76th meeting of the track standards committee. Railway Board had passed the following orders on Item No. 1073 (Machine Maintenance of Track), which was discussed in the 76th meeting of the track standard committee, "Railways should prepare database regarding TGI, standard deviation of unevenness, twist, gauge and alignment achieved after tamping, for monitoring of quality of work done by track machine and send the same to RDSO for further analysis".

20

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Analysis of data made available by various Railways was carried out & following recommendation were made in RDSO report TM-115 : Speeds greater than or equal to 110 kmph S.No. 1. 2. INDICES 60% CFD before tamping 60% CFD after tamping (i.e. minimum 40% of track length after tamping should have TGI) 10% CFD after tamping (i.e. minimum 90% of track after tamping should have TGI) TGI value < 90 > 115

3.

> 75

Speeds less than 110 kmph S.No. 1. 2. INDICES 60% CFD before tamping 60% CFD after tamping (i.e. minimum 40% of track length after tamping should have TGI) 10% CFD after tamping (i.e. minimum 90% of track after tamping should have TGI) TGI value < 80 > 115

3.

> 75

While making out the recommendation, it is mentioned in the report that all pre tamping works, post tamping works, long level correction etc. are to be carried out, as without proper accomplishment of these works, the recommended level of TGI post tamping cannot be achieved. The various indices proposed in the report are based on the data made available by Zonal Railways. The proposed value mentioned in the report were corrobated by the 5 years data from NCR & NWR. Recommendation of RDSO report were approved by Railway Board vide letter no. 2007/Track III/TK/7 Pt dated 16-01-2008. During the CTE Seminar- 2010 Eastern Railway has raised the point that they are generally not able to achieve 60% CFD of TGI value more than 115 after tamping due to non screened track , seasoned effect & high water table on major portion of track. No other zonal railway has specifically come out about achieving the standard as approved by Railway Board. Other Zonal Railways should also share there experiences with data about the state of implementation of this criteria along with its effect on the tamping requirement.

21

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: The recommended level of TGI post tamping can not be achieved without carrying out pre and post tamping works. Different standard can be developed by considering special features of sections. Review of TGI formula can be done by reassigning weightage to various indices as at present weightage of 6 has been given to alignment. Standard can be developed by mentioning average TGI instead of CFD as it will be easier for field staff to calculate average TGI. Present standard can be implemented on block section basis. COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Zonal Railways should implement the existing instructions seriously and feedback to be given to RDSO. Based on the feedback of Zonal Railways, RDSO should work on developing different standards in different slabs, considering special feature of the sections. Present standard/criteria of tamping can be adopted on block section basis and feedback given to RDSO for study and further instructions if any.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. In view of the feedback available so for in various CTEs Seminars and TSCs, RDSO should immediately review the guidelines and stipulate different target TGI values for different slabs(say three slabs) of existing TGI value .RDSO should submit the revised draft instructions within six month's time . In the meantime, Zonal railways should implement the existing instructions seriously and give feed back to RDSO at the earliest. The present standard/criteria of tamping can also be adopted on block section basis at the discretion of the PCEs of Zonal Railways and feedback given to RDSO for study and necessary review.

2.

22

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1177

SUBJECT:

Anomalies in IRPWM & LWR Manual (Proposed by NWR in CTE's seminar 2010) CT/IRPWM & CT/IM/LWR

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2010 as follows: Anomalies in IRPWM & LWR Manual: a) Supervision of Deep screening: As per para 238 (2) (d) of IRPWM, work of deep screening should not be carried out under the supervision of an official lower than PWI grade-III. Whereas as per annexure VI, item 3 (d) of LWR manual authorized level of supervision for work of deep screening is PWM. (bLifting/lowering of track: As per para 234 (5) of IRPWM, the work of lifting and lowering of track should be carried out in the presence of Permanent way Inspector. Whereas as per annexure ­IV, item (1) (c) of LWR manual, the authorized level of supervision for work of Lifting/ Lowering of track is PWM. (cBallast profile for Single line BG track: As per Annexure- 2/11 Para 263 of IRPWM, ballast profile for LWR track (Single line B.G. is shown) In this the value of dimension E (half of base width of ballast profile in case of curved track) (on outer side of curve only), is shown as 2,510 mm for PRC sleepers. Whereas as per Figure 4.2.1 (a) in LWR manual, this width is shown as 2675 mm for PRC sleepers. These anomalies in above three Para of Pway manual and LWR manual should be corrected.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

(a)

As per IRPWM Para 238(2) (d) Screening Operations ­ General- (i) The work would be done under the supervision of an official not lower in rank than the Permanent Way Inspector Grade III. 23

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

In LWR Manual (Annexure-VI Item 3 (d)) Deep Screening ­ PWM. (b) As per IRPWM Para 234 (5) work of lifting or lowering of track should be carried out in the presence of Permanent Way Inspector. In LWR Manual (Annexure-IV item 1 (c)) Lifting/lowering of track- PWM. (c) As per IRPWM Para 263 Annexure 2/11 shown 2510mm but in LWR Manual fig. 4.2.1 (a) width is 2675mm. In IRPWM depth is fixed as 630 mm. However, in LWR Manual distance calculated on the basis of depth 640mm. There are discrepancies in above provisions of IRPWM & LWR Manual; it is proposed that these provisions of LWR manual be amended in line with that of IRPWM by issuing correction slip to LWR Manual.

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

PWM's competency has improved, so he can be entrusted for supervision of deep screening and lifting/lowering of track so, existing provisions of LWR manual for supervision of deep screening and lifting/lowering of track by PWM may be continued and IRPWM should be amended. Ballast profile in LWR Manual is having flatter slope which is closer to field observations, hence ballast profile of LWR manual should be continued and IRPWM should be amended as per provisions of LWR Manual.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Provisions of LWR manual can be continued for supervision of deep screening and lifting/lowering of track by PWM level. Provisions of IRPWM should be amended. Ballast profile of LWR Manual can be continued and provision of IRPWM should be amended as per LWR Manual.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. Approved with modifications that competency of such PWM's to be certified by Chief Track Engineer. Approved. RDSO should sand draft correction slip to IRPWM & LWR manual.

2.

24

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1178

SUBJECT:

Threshold values for load testing of in service rails by FBW (Proposed by SCR in CTE's seminar 2010) CT/JW/C

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2010 as follows: Present System: The values of breaking load and deflections in transverse load test vide para 10.2.2.1 of Manual of Flash Butt welding of Rails are given only for new rails. As per said para, "the specified load is 100T with minimum deflection of 15mm; the sample should withstand the above load without rupture". But, Manual does not spell the threshold values of these tests for TWR done with mobile flash butt welding plant and in service rails. Problems encountered: TWR work using mobile flash butt welding plant at site and on line is in progress on South Central Railway. During testing of sample welds, though deflection values are satisfactory, one sample recorded breaking load of 98 T and other sample recorded 100 T. The in-service rails are subjected to wear and tear and have already undergone certain fatigue under traffic, and hence may not sustain the test load prescribed for new rails. Suggestions: RDSO may propose revised values of minimum breaking load and deflection in transverse load test under para 10.2.2.1 of Manual for Flash Butt Welding of Rails applicable for in-service rails considering the conditions. Committee may deliberate the above subject and recommend RDSO to issue guidelines.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

South Central Railway vide letter no. W 496/ATWJ/FBWJ/Vol. I dated 10.06.2010 referred the issue of lower breaking load found in one sample out of three samples tested for transverse test (slow bend test) for second hand rails for through weld renewal. The values of transverse breaking load achieved in three samples tested were 118t, 110t and 98t against the minimum specified breaking load of 100t prescribed in Para 10.2.2.1 of Manual for Flash Butt Welding of Rails in respect of 52 Kg rails. In 25

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

this connection it is mentioned that the provision of Para 10.2.2.1 of Manual for Flash Butt Welding of Rails does not distinguish between new rails and second hand rails hence it is applicable for second hand rails also. Since transverse breaking load values of two samples out of three samples tested are well above the minimum specified value and the value of third sample is marginally lower than the minimum specified value and there is no further problem of lower value of transverse breaking load reported so far, therefore, it does not appear to be a fit case for considering lowering of minimum value of transverse breaking load specially when higher axle loads are operating on Railway system. Committee may deliberate on the issue. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. The values of transverse breaking load obtained in test conducted in SCR in two cases are above requisite value of 100 T and in only one case is slightly less than 100 T. On this ground provision of Flash Butt Welding Manual cannot be changed. The existing provisions of Flash Butt Welding Manual should be continued. If rails are worn to such extent that they give lower transverse breaking load then such rail should not be used.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The existing provisions of Flash Butt Welding Manual for transverse load test should be continued. Item may be closed.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved. Item is closed.

26

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1179

SUBJECT:

Standard of track maintenance to C&M-(Vol.1) (Proposed by CR in CTE's seminar 2009) CT/DG/Research

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The item has been referred by CTE's seminar 2010 as follows: 1. As per speed certificates issued by RDSO for various types of locos/wagons, minimum track standards are specified for track maintained to C&M-1 (Vol.1) standard. In this connection, it is observed that recommendation of C&M-1 (Vol.1) regarding standard of track maintenance published in May'1969 has been incorporated in IRPWM-2004 with certain modification vide para 224(E) & 607(2) of IRPWM. Provision of para 607(2) of IRPWM lays down maintenance standard of track for speed above 100 kmph & up to 140 kmph on BG track. The variations in track maintenance standard recommended in C&M-1 (Vol.1) report and that incorporated in para 607(2) of IRPWM is indicated below: Track standard recommendations in RDSO report is for 120 kmph where as the track maintenance standard in IRPWM is for speed above 100 kmph and upto 140 kmph. C&M-1 (Vol.1) stipulates unevenness, 6 mm in general and 10 mm at isolated locations. Further, relaxation upto 10 mm in general and 15 mm at isolated locations has been stipulated in the report to permit higher speed at the material time. IRPWM, however, has adopted relaxed standard of 10 mm in general and 15 mm at isolated locations for speed above 100 kmph and upto 140 kmph. The RDSO report does not specify no. of isolated locations whereas IRPWM defines isolated locations not exceeding 10 no. per km. RDSO report stipulates versine measurement for alignment defect either on floating track or on loaded track. IRPWM, however, stipulates versine measurement under floating condition only. Since relaxed maintenance standard of RDSO report has been incorporated in IRPWM even for higher speed, it may be concluded that track maintained to Maintenance Standard as stipulated in para 224(E) & 607(2) of IRPWM, are 27

2.

(i)

(ii)

(iii)

(iv)

3.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

maintained as per C&M-1 (Vol.1) standard. Track maintained to a standard below IRPWM provisions may be considered as maintained to other than C&M1 (Vol.1). 4. TRC recording is the basis to adjudge whether track is maintained as per maintenance standard. The chord/base adopted for track recording is, however, different in TRC & IRPWM and by extension to track maintained as per C&M-1 (Vol.1). The same is indicated below: S.No. Track parameter As per IRPWM (in M) 3.5 7.5 3.5 As adopted for track recording (in M) 3.6 7.2 3.6

1. 2. 3. 5.

Unevenness Alignment Twist

Track categories for various track parameters of track recording car as per para 607(1) are also not in conformity with maintenance standard as per C&M-1 (Vol.1) or IRPWM. Limit of track categories as indicated below needs to be incorporated in para 607(1) to segregate kilometers where track maintenance is not as per C&M-1 (Vol.1) / IRPWM:-

A 1. 2. 3. Unevenness Alignment Twist No change 0 to 1.2 mm/M

B No change

C 5 to 10mm 2.4 to 3.5mm/M

D >10m m >3.5m m/M

1.2 to 2.4mm/M

6. i.

Following is, therefore, suggested: Speed certificates issued by RDSO should stipulate track maintenance standard as per IRPWM rather than C&M-1 (Vol.1). Category of track parameters for TRC should be modified to track maintenance standard stipulated in 607(2) of IRPWM so 28

ii.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

that track not maintained as per IRPWM can be segregated. iii. Base/chord for measurement of track parameters for IRPWM & TRC are made compatible as suggested in para 5 above.

The above issues need to be reviewed & accordingly correction slip in IRPWM be issued. The matter has been referred to RDSO Vide ECR letter No. W7/632/0/Policy/Pt.I, dt-06.01.10 addressed to ED/Track/RDSO with copy to EDCE(P)/Rly Bd,

NOTES BY SECRETARY: Railway Board has nominated a SAG committee to address the issue.

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Track Geometry Standards of C&M-1 Vol.-I is already a part of Para 607 (2) of IRPWM manual with relaxed provision of Unevenness as 10mm to 15mm. Track Geometry Standards of C&M-1 Vol.-I was for speed of 120 kmph. Track Geometry Standards in IRPWM as per Para 607 (2) needs a relook as the same are not achievable in the field up to 110 kmph as per TGI criteria for track tamping.

2. 3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. TSC is of the opinion that provision of IRPWM 607 (2) should apply for speed of more than 110 and up to 140 kmph. SAG committee should examine the same. Policy circular no.6 of Railway Board for speed potential of Rolling Stock also needs modification as per provision of IRPWM for speed up to 140 kmph. SAG committee nominated by Railway Board should also examine the same.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1& 2 Approved. Report to be submitted within 30 days.

29

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1180

SUBJECT:

Reflective type indicator boards (Proposed by SER) CT/MS/SD/WW

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

South Eastern Railway vide their email dt:22-09-10 has proposed the item as under: 1. Railway Board vide letter No: 94/CE-II/TK/4 dated 17-8-2000 (Copy enclosed) directed that the procurement of reflective type indicator boards should be limited to the Engineering restriction boards which are required to be lit during night. The scope mentioned in the letter does not cover normal boards like W/L, road sign indicator boards of the level crossings and indicator boards required for permanent speed restrictions. 2. Para 808 of IRPWM specifies that temporary indicator boards which are not reflective type should be lit up during the night. 3. With the above instructions, procurement of reflective type indicator boards for level crossings, PSRs etc could not be done by the Railway. With the changed scenario of development, increase in rail/road traffic and availability of the reflective type boards, it is proposed that Railway Board may consider to withdraw the decision of limiting the scope of procurement of Engineering reflective sign boards. 4. It is noted that the reflective sign boards are to be procured as per specification of "encapsulated lens type" issued by the Railway Board.

30

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

With the changed Scenario of development, provision of retro-reflective indication boards in addition to temporary speed restriction boards will certainly help the drivers in safe operation of trains and road vehicle drivers in negotiating level crossings. Committee may deliberate on the issue.

31

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. All Engineering sign boards should be retro reflective boards as per specification approved by Railway Board `Encapsulated type'.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. All Engineering sign boards should be retro-reflective board. The instructions issued vide Railway Board's letter No. 94/CE-II/Tk/4 dated 17-8-2000 should be withdrawn.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved . RDSO should sand a draft letter indicating specification and type of boards to be provided as retro-reflective board.

32

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1181

SUBJECT:

Extra clearance on curves CT/SD/Rev/BG/MG

RDSO FILE REF:

AGENDA:

IRICEN vide their letter dt:01-10-10 has proposed the item as under: As per Schedule of Dimension, Schedule-1, Chapter I, Item 1.0, minimum distance from centre to centre of tracks for new work is stipulated as 5300 mm with the stipulation that this minimum distance from centre to centre takes care of extra clearance for curve upto 5o. For 5o curve extra clearance on inside of curve required is 695 mm and on outside of curve it is 60 mm hence a total additional clearance required for 5o curve comes out to 755 mm. It is understood that the track centre distance from centre to centre of track was increased to 5.3 metres on the requirement of Electrical Department for implantation distance of OHE mast. In order to allow fixing of one OHE mast (width 30 cm) in between the track, the track centre was raised to 5.3 metres (2.5 + 0.3 + 2.5). In such circumstances, if an OHE mast is provided at the centre of curved track of 5o, implantation of 2.5 metres will not be available. In old Schedule of Dimension (Year 1939) in the Chapter I, the minimum distance from centre to centre of track was stipulated as 4265 mm. In this case, the extra clearance of curve required was to be added separately. In such circumstances on curves of 5o, distance between centre to centre of track works out to 5020 mm (4265 + 755). But with present stipulations where a total of 755 mm extra clearance for 5o curve have been accounted for in the track centre of 5300 mm. Hence even by providing track centre of 5300 mm, one OHE mast cannot be provided in between the track. Earlier in old SOD for station yard where some structure like water column, signal post, pier of over bridge was likely to come, recommended track centre was 4725mm with extra clearance for curve to be separately provided. But to maintain extra clearance for curve of 5o in station yard, track centre requirement will be 4725 + 755 = 5480 mm. whereas we are providing only 5300 mm. So the existing provisions are actually reducing the space available. So the provision of schedule of dimension regarding minimum track centre needs revision.

33

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

In IRSOD (BG) revised 2004 distance from center of track to fixed structure is mentioned only 2.36 m for new work and 2.135m for existing work. Considering the dimension of 2.36m the distance worked out to 5.02m (2.36+2.36+.30) for new work. Track centre distance from centre to centre of track was kept to 5.3 metres up to curved track of 50 considering economy point of view as large space will increase cost of land. However, 5.3m track centre distance from centre to centre of track is specified is minimum. For erection of OHE mast in between track, Railways have to obtain Railway Board approval for provision of OHE mast in between track as basis of adoption of 5.3m dimension is not available. In view of this TSC may deliberate the Item. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. 3. 4. OHE mast foundation comes in the range of working of BCM. Implantation of OHE for new works is 2.8m. Centre to centre spacing is 5.3 m should be for straight track. OHE mast and signal should not be provided to infringe the provisions of 5.3 m track centers.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. Condition of 50 curve for track centre to centre distance of 5300 mm is to be removed from SOD 2004. Provision of 5.3 m track centre should be adopted for straight track and extra clearance on curve should be provided as per requirement in addition to this distance. OHE mast and Signal post should not be provided between tracks to infringe this provision of 5.3 m as the same will create problem in maintenance of track by Ballast Cleaning machine.

3.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. 3. Approved. Approved. Approved

34

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1182

SUBJECT:

Clips with higher toe load being used on Indian Railways (Proposed by Track Design Directorate of RDSO)

CT/FD/2/ERC MK-V, CT/EF/Trial & CT/Insp/ERC-G clip/Logwell

RDSO FILE REF:

AGENDA:

1. To decide the requirement of toe load of fastening assembly on Indian Railways for BG track. 2. To decide upon the adoption of ERC Mk-V & G- clip on Indian Railways as regular Fastening for BG track.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

Toe Load Requirement of Elastic Rail Clips for Broad Gauge Track in Indian Railways: 1.1 A perfect holding of rail to the sleepers at all times with or without the traffic is reducing the breathing lengths of LWR track & in containing the gap at fracture. Under loaded condition of track, the fastening should be able to absorb vibrations and hold the rail on to the sleeper under all modes of vibration without falling off, thus ensuring safety. Accordingly, the clip shall offer adequate creep resistance, as the rail tends to move longitudinally due to thermal expansion/ contraction and longitudinal forces due to acceleration & breaking. 1.2 For an ideal fastening system, the creep resistance offered by the clip shall be nearly equal to the longitudinal ballast resistance of track. The approximate toe load requirement on Indian Railway track with 60kg UIC rail and sleeper density of 1660 nos./km works out to be 1045 kg per clips for temperature zone IV. Presently Indian Railway is using ERC MK-III on PSC sleeper. Designed toe load of ERC MK-III is 850-1100 kg at a deflection of 13.5 mm. It is observed with present ERC MK-III, average toe load comes about 700 kg in the field due to tolerances on different fastening components & PSC sleeper. It further decreases during service due to wear of liner, pad, rail foot thickness and cyclic loading on ERC & fastening system. The lower toe load results in longer breathing length to withstand thermal forces, increase in maintenance effort in terms of SEJ gap adjustment, distressing etc. Thus there is a need clip with higher toe load, so that in service toe load of about 1050 kg is available.

1.3

1.4

35

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

2.0 2.1 2.1.1

Efforts made to develop clips of improved toe load: ERC MK-V: With above view, RDSO has designed ERC Mk-V using rod dia as 23mm and having toe load 1200-1500Kg at the toe deflection of 13.5mm. Stress level of ERC Mk-V is lower than ERC Mk-III at same toe deflection of 13.5 mm. This clip can be used on existing sleeper and assembly components which is a major advantage. Details of ERC Mk-V are as under:i) Rod dia of clip portion ii) Toe load iii) Toe deflection iv) Flat size v) Approx. weight 23.00 mm & 20.64 mm for central leg

2.1.2

1200 ­ 1500 kg 13.5 mm 35 x 12 mm2 1.14 kg (rod) 1.08 kg (clip) For trial 25,000 nos. of ERC Mk-V was procured though Railway Board's contract and laid under section of SSE/P.Way/ Kurushetra of Delhi division of NR, Hoshangabad of Bhopal division of WCR & Kottavalsa of Waltair division of ECoR under initial trial. The trial was monitored for one year and report of the same (report no. CT-18) was submitted to Railway Board in June' 2008.

2.1.3

The performance of ERC Mk-V was also discussed in 77th TSC vide item no 1094 S.no.31. After discussion, it was recommended by TSC that extended trial should be conducted by WCR, WR & ECoR in a stretch of 50 km, and the same was approved by Railway Board. `G' CLIP OF FIRM'S DESIGN: As per instruction of Railway Board, initial trial of G clip developed by M/s Logwell Forge Ltd, Gurgaon was also taken up alongwith ERC Mk-V. The design of G clip was such that it could be used on existing PSC sleepers in place of ERC Mk ­ III with existing/assembly components. As informed by firm 'G' clip has toe load of 1000-1300Kg. Rod dia used for manufacture of the clip is 20.64 mm. Weight of the clip as claimed by the firm is 825 gm. Details of `G' clip as informed by the firm are as under:i) ii) iii) iv) v) Rod dia of clip Toe load Toe deflection Flat size Approx. weight 20.64 mm 1000 ­ 1300 kg Not mentioned 36 x 15 mm2 0.825 kg

2.2 2.2.1

2.2.2

For trial 25,000 nos. of G clip was procured and laid under section of SSE/P.Way, of Kurushetra of Delhi division of NR, Hoshangabad of Bhopal 36

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

division of WCR & Kottavalsa of Waltair division of E CoR under initial. The trial was monitored for one year and report of the same (report no. CT-18) was submitted to Railway Board in June' 2008. 3.0 3.1 Trial of clip: As per instruction of Railway Board limited/ initial trial of both types of clips was conducted along with normal ERC Mk-III clip on three zonal railways ie. NR, WCR & ECoR in a stretch of one km for each clip on each railway at following location and details. Rly NR Div. Delhi SSE.P.Way KKDE Clip ERC Mk-V ERC Mk-III 'G' clip ERC Mk-V ERC Mk-III 'G' clip ERC Mk-V ERC Mk-III 'G' clip Between Km UP/DN 158/10-159/10DN 15710-158/10DN 155/0-155/32DN 773B/0-773C/6DN 773D/10-773E/12DN 773C/6-773D/10DN 838/0-839/0UP 837/0-838/0UP 839/0-840/0UP Trial started on Aug.,06 Aug.,06 April, 07 June, 06 June, 06 June, 06 June, 06 June, 06 June, 06

WCR

Bhopal

Hoshangabad

ECo.R Waltair Kottavalsa

3.2

The trial was monitored for one year and report of the same (report no. CT-18) was submitted to Railway Board in June' 2008. Extended Trial The extended trial for ERC Mk-V was ordered to WCR, WR & ECoR and for G Clip, it was ordered in SR, SER, SECR & SWR. ERC Mk-V has been laid under extended trial in WCR only. None of the Railway have given information about trial of G clip, so far. As the work of extended trial for both types of clip is very slow, it is decided by Railway Board to draw conclusion on the basis of performance of the clip laid under initial trial as on date. The trial sites of Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra under initial trial and Gangapur city under extended trial have been visited by RDSO official. Toe load of both types of clip of some sleeper have been measured. Toe load of all the four clips of one sleeper of ERC Mk-V & G clip, which was also measured at site of Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra was taken out for toe load measurement in RDSO lab.

4.0 4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

37

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

4.6

As per comments of ECoR, after 5 years of service since its laying, performance of both types of clips are satisfactory with average toe load of ERC Mk-V and G-clip as 900-1150 Kg & 1000-1250 Kg respectively. Summary of Toe Load evaluation: ERC Mk-V: Average toe load of ERC Mk-V clip measured at Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra site in field condition has been worked out as 910.7 kg and 1167.6 kg respectively on existing GRSP and liner. This indicates that ERC Mk-V clip has some more residual life. As per ECoR report, the average toe load is between 900-1150 Kg. Increase in average toe load of ERC Mk-V from field to lab condition for Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra site has been worked out as 24.1% (average toe load in field & lab condition are 910.7 kg & 1130 kg respectively) & - 6.11% (average toe load in field & lab condition are 1167.5 kg & 1096.25 kg respectively) respectively. This indicates that condition of GRSP & liner at Hoshangabad site is poor. Minus loss of toe load at Kurukshetra site may be due to human intervention, least count of toe load machine, number of reading taken in averaging etc. The difference of toe load measured in field and laboratory is unexpectedly more i.e. 24.1% for Hoshangabad site. Therefore, the measurement of toe load taken at Hoshangabad site should not be taken into consideration. It may be seen that after service of five years, the average toe load of ERC MkV measured in laboratory for Hoshangabad and Kurukshetra are 1130 kg and 1096.25 kg respectively. As per report CT-18, average toe load of ERC Mk-V for Kurukshetra site at the end of trial was worked out as 1016.1kg. This time average toe load has been worked out for the clips of five sleepers which were measured during visit of RDSO official as 1167.6 kg. Above average toe load values are just indicative. Based on the above, it can be said that loss of toe load for the period in between is not substantial/ negligible. G-clip: Average toe load of G clip measured at Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra site in field condition has been worked out as 763.6 kg and 1123.5 kg respectively. This indicates that G clip has some more residual life. As per ECoR report, the average toe load is between 1000-1250 Kg. Increase in average toe load of G clip from field to lab condition for Hoshangabad & Kurukshetra site has been worked out as 28.4% (average toe load in field & lab condition are 763.3 kg & 980 kg respectively) & - 1.76% (average toe load in field & lab condition are 1123.5 kg & 1103.75 kg respectively) respectively. This indicates that condition of GRSP & liner at 38

5.0 5.1 5.1.1

5.1.2 5.1.3

5.1.4

5.1.5

5.1.6

5.2 5.2.1

5.2.2 5.2.3

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Hoshangabad site is poor. Minus loss of toe load at Kurukshetra site may be due to human intervention, least count of toe load machine, number of reading taken in averaging etc. 5.2.4 The difference of toe load measured in field at Hoshangabad site and laboratory is unexpectedly more i.e. 28.4%. Therefore, the measurement of toe load taken at site should not be taken into consideration. It may be seen that after service of five years, the average toe load of G-clip measured in laboratory for Hoshangabad and Kurukshetra are 980 Kg and 1103.75 Kg respectively. As per report CT-18, average toe load of G clip for Kurukshetra site at the end of trial was worked out as 1168.8kg. This time average toe load has been worked out for the clips of five sleepers which were measured during visit of RDSO official as 1103.75kg. Above average toe load values are just indicative. Based on the above, it can be said that loss of toe load for the period in between is not substantial/ negligible. Remarks by Zonal Railway: ECoR: ERC Mk-V:

5.2.5

5.2.6

6.0 6.1 6.1.1

6.1.1.1 The present toe load after service of about 5 years is in the range of 900 to1150 kg. 6.1.1.2 No falling or breakage of ERC Mk-V has been noticed. Also no special problem during driving/ extracting/ oiling & greasing of clip has been noticed. No falling of rubber pads and metal liners is noticed. 6.1.1.3 Corrosion on the clip is negligible. Corrosion in liner contact area is same as that of ERC Mk-III. 6.1.1.4 No sleepers are damaged during removal of clip. 6.1.1.5 TGI during last run in the section is in the range of 120 to 130. 6.1.2 G clip:

6.1.2.1 The present toe load after service of about 5 years is in the range of 1000-1250 kg. 6.1.2.2 Insertion & removal of clip is easy. 6.1.2.3 Less corrosion, less liner biting as less obstruction to toilet dropping. 6.1.2.4 Very good performance in place of J- clip & in crossing and glued joint area. 6.1.2.5 Performance of G clip is better than ERC Mk-V with regard to toe load, maintainability, driving weight etc.

39

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

7.0 7.1 7.2

Conclusion: Basic requirement of toe load as 1045 Kg in the field has already been described in para 1.2. In the initial trial report submitted to Railway Board, it was mentioned that the condition of track at Hoshangabad has not been good due to which the % of toe load loss has been more. WCR (Hoshangabad site): Due to poor condition at site as explained in para 3.0 above, the toe load measured at site should not been considered for appraisal. The lab results for average toe load of the same samples are 1130 kg for ERC Mk-V and 980 kg for G-clip.

7.3

7.4

NR (Kurukshetra site): Average toe load of ERC Mk-V clip measured at site in field condition and in lab have been worked out as 1167.6 kg and 1096.25 kg on existing GRSP and liner. This indicates that ERC Mk-V clip has some more residual life. Average toe load of G clip measured at site in field condition and in lab have been worked out as 1123.5 kg and 1103.75 kg. This indicates that G clip has some more residual life.

7.5 7.5.1 7.5.2 7.6

ECoR site: As per ECoR report, the average toe load of ERC Mk-V measured at site is between 900-1150 kg. As per ECoR report, the average toe load of G-clip measured at site is between 1000-1250 kg. No case of falling of clips, creep & abnormal variation in track gauge have been reported, hence functioning of both the clips are satisfactory at different traffic conditions. Both the above clips are serving purpose of toe load required for track even after about 5 years of service.

40

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Annexure-I A. Toe load of ERC Mk-V & G laid under initial trial

i) Hoshangabad site: a. ERC Mk-V Sleeper Left out 1 436* (ERC Mk-III) 2 897 3 846 4 1060

Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 874 786 956 1012 1045 912 698 1026

Right in 908 743 1034 864

*The clip laid in the stretch of ERC Mk-V was ERC-III. b. G clip Sleeper 1 2 3 4 Left out 602 642 1009 1080

Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 702 910 531 635 481 993 763 823

Right in 882 1034 665 465

ii) Kurukshetra site: a. ERC Mk-V Sleeper Left out 1 943 2 1240 3 1310 4 1208 5 1283 b. G clip Sleeper 1 2 3 4 5 B. Left out 1012 1113 1140 1203 1084

Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 1343 941 1387 1106 1269 1006 1209 1121 1046 1143

Right in 1131 1224 1179 1017 1246

Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 1135 1083 1150 1020 1193 1218 1127 1103 1051 1340

Right in 1135 1145 1231 1147 1140

Toe load of ERC Mk-V & G laid under extended trial i) Gangapur City site a. ERC Mk-V Sleeper Toe load (kg) Left out Left in Right out 1 1275 1295 1250 2 1242 1280 1310 3 1372 1310 1280 4 1253 1300 1320

Right in 1342 1295 1245 1260

41

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

Annexure-II Toe load values of clips in field & lab condition i) Hoshangabad site a. ERC Mk-V Toe lload measured in Site condition Lab condition Left out 436* 565* Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 874 786 1050 1090 Right in 908 1250

*The clip laid in the stretch of ERC Mk-V was ERC-III. b. G clip Toe load measured in Site condition Lab condition ii) Kurukshetra site a. ERC Mk-V Toe load measured in Site condition Lab condition b. G clip Toe load measured in Site condition Lab condition Left out 1040 1125 Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 1193 1218 1280 900 Right in 1231 1110 Left out 943 950 Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 1343 941 1205 1215 Right in 1131 1015 Left out 602 1010 Toe load (kg) Left in Right out 702 910 950 1050 Right in 882 910

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. ERC Mk-III is giving toe load in the range of 700-800 kg in the field which is considered inadequate. The toe load requirement of 1045 kg on LWR consideration for 60 kg UIC Rail and 1660 sleeper/Km for Zone-IV.

2.

42

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

3.

The performance of ERC Mk-V and G-clip has been found satisfactory since it is laid in initial trial five year back. The required toe load is achievable and sustainable in both the clips. As per CTE/ECoR, the performance of G-clip is better than ERC Mk-V with regard to toe load, maintainability, driving weight etc.

4. 5.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Toe load requirement of 1045 kg on LWR consideration which is not being achievable by ERC Mk-III and since both the clips are (ERC Mk-V & G-clip) meeting the requirement of toe load under field condition after service of five years, these should be adopted on Indian Railways for regular use.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS:

Board's order on the above have already been issued vide board's letter No 2010/CE-II/TSC dated 19.01.11.

43

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1183

SUBJECT:

Restoring whistle board distance from level crossing to 600m on single line. Ref: Para 916 (1) (i) of IRPWM. (Item proposed by RDSO) CT/IRPWM & CT/LC/Safety

RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA:

The whistle board distance in Para 916 (1) (i) of IRPWM from level crossing on single line was reduced from 600m to 350m vide correction slip no. 100 to IRPWM issued on 21.06.2006. This distance is inadequate, as warning time given by whistle of approaching train from 350m is insufficient for slow moving vehicles i.e. tractor trolley, loaded trucks and bullock carts etc., to enable them to cross the track and reach to safety. The original whistle board distance of 600m needs to be restored. Time taken by train running at 100 kmph to cover 600m distance to reach level crossing = 60 x 60 x 600/(100 x 1000) = 21.6 i.e. 22 seconds Time taken by train running at 100 kmph to cover 350m distance to reach level crossing = 60 x 60 x 350/(100 x 1000) = 12.6 i.e. 13 seconds Time required by slowest vehicles to travel from stop board to gate post on other side (without stopping) = 09 seconds (SL) Reaction time = 03 seconds Time taken for starting the vehicle = 04 seconds. Time taken by slowest vehicle to travel from stop board to other side gate post and clearing the vehicle = 03 + 04 + 09 = 16 seconds Warning time of 13 seconds (in case of 350m distance of whistle board from level crossing), is insufficient for slow moving vehicles to travel from stop board to other side of gate post by following procedure of crossing the unmanned level crossing. Therefore, it is suggested that whistle board distance from level crossing be restored to 600m.

NOTES BY SECRETARY:

44

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. It is agreed that whistle board distance from level crossing provided in para 916(1) (i) of IRPWM should be restored to 600m and drivers should be instructed to whistle continuously. 600 m distance is required so that adequate reaction time is available for road users regarding approaching train. The provision of 600m is already existing for double line.

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The provisions of para 916(1)(i) should amended so that distance of whistle board from level crossing on single line is restored to 600m. Instruction should be issued to drivers to whistle from whistle board up to level crossing continuously for warning to road users regarding approaching train.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: RDSO should send the draft correction slip to IRPWM. Item is to be closed after issue of correction slip to IRPWM.

45

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1185 SUBJECT: Provision of wicket gates for on foot road users. (Proposed by NFR) (IRPWM) RDSO FILE REF: CT/IRPWM AGENDA: As per item no. 4 of Annexure 9/1 (Para 904) of IRPWM wicket gates need not be provided in C class level crossing gates. However there is practical problem for on foot road users, as C class gates are normally closed to road traffic as per item no. 9 of Annexure 9/1 (Para 904) of IRPWM. The item was discussed in CTE's seminar (Session No.:10307) from 5th to 7th Aug 2010 at IRICEN, Pune & was discussed as follows"Provision of wicket gate will also help to allow road users on foot to pass road when Level crossing is closed ". NOTES BY SECRETARY: As per item no. 4 of Annexure 9/1 (Para 904) of IRPWM provision of wicket gates in level crossing are as follows. Item Details Dimensions and details for various classes of crossings Special `A' `B' `C' `D' class class class class To be To be To be Not to be Not to be provided provided provided provided. provided. except except except where where where foot foot over foot over over bridges bridges bridges are are are provided. provided provided . . Remarks

4

Provision of wicket gates for foot passengers

Design of Wicket gate should be such that trespassing by cattle is prevented.

Committee may deliberate on the issue. 46

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. The provision of wicket gates does not exist in IRPWM Annexure 9/1 of para 904 for `C' class level crossing. Requirement of wicket gate should be assessed on each level crossing and if needed the same should be provided.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Requirement of wicket gate should be considered on need basis and provision of IRPWM Annexure 9/1 of Para 904 should be amended accordingly for `C' class level crossing.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. RDSO should send the draft correction slip to IRPWM. Item is to be closed after issue of correction slip to IRPWM.

47

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1186 SUBJECT: Abolition of THOD system. (Proposed by NFR) (IM/LWR) RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA: The role & duties of SAG officers of Engg. Department Working in Open Line of Zonal Railways have been specified vide Railway Board's letter no. 2010/EDCE(G)/Misc./8, dated 14.09.2010. After its implementation SAG officers of Engg. Department will no longer work as THODs & they will only be acting as functional HOD. With the implementation of above concept, relevant Para of LWR Manual viz., Para No. 3.4, 8.2.5, 9.1.8(iv), & Bridge Manual Para No. 1104 & other stipulations related to THODs, needs to be reviewed & corrected. NOTES BY SECRETARY: Provisions of MANUAL OF INSTRUCTIONS ON LONG WELDED RAILS(1996) are as under:Para 3.4 Approval of Chief Engineer: Installation of LWR/CWR or change in its constitution at a later stage shall have the approval of the Territorial Chief Engineer concerned in each case, on a detailed plan prepared in accordance with Para 5.1.3. However, for any deviation from the provisions of this Manual, the approval of Chief Engineer shall be obtained. Para 8.2.5 AEN will analyse the observation of each LWR/CWR in his jurisdiction and give a certificate at the end of LWR/CWR register before onset of summer regarding satisfactory behavior of all LWR/CWRs. DEN/Sr.DEN will scrutinize observations of each LWR/CWR, initial each page and send exception report to Territorial Chief Engineer for his decision/orders. Para 9.1.8 Divisional Engineer/Senior Divisional Engineer iv) He shall scrutinize LWR/CWR registers of his jurisdiction every year in the month of February and record his certificate about satisfactory behavior of LWR/CWR in his jurisdiction. He shall refer the details of all LWR/CWR to territorial Chief Engineer where he requires his orders/ decision. CT/IM/LWR

48

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

As per Railway Board's letter no. 2010/EDCE(G)/Misc./8 dated 14.09.2010 the word Territorial Chief Engineer may be replaced by Chief Track Engineer. Proposed Para are as under: Para 3.4 Approval of Chief Engineer: Installation of LWR/CWR or change in its constitution at a later stage shall have the approval of the Chief Track Engineer concerned in each case, on a detailed plan prepared in accordance with Para 5.1.3. However, for any deviation from the provisions of this Manual, the approval of Chief Engineer shall be obtained. Para 8.2.5 AEN will analyse the observation of each LWR/CWR in his jurisdiction and give a certificate at the end of LWR/CWR register before onset of summer regarding satisfactory behavior of all LWR/CWRs. DEN/Sr.DEN will scrutinize observations of each LWR/CWR, initial each page and send exception report to Chief Track Engineer for his decision/orders. Para 9.1.8 Divisional Engineer/Senior Divisional Engineer iv) He shall scrutinize LWR/CWR registers of his jurisdiction every year in the month of February and record his certificate about satisfactory behavior of LWR/CWR in his jurisdiction. He shall refer the details of all LWR/CWR to Chief Track Engineer where he requires his orders/ decision.

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. With the abolition of THOD system in engineering department, the provisions of LWR Manual need amendments. In Para 3.4 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer' and word `Chief Track Engineer' should be replaced by `Principal Chief Engineer'. In Para 8.2.5 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer' but this Para should be reworded the extent the exception report to be submitted only when orders of Chief Track Engineer are required. 49

2.

3.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

4.

In Para 9.1.8 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer'.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. In Para 3.4 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer' and the word `Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Principal Chief Engineer'. In Para 8.2.5 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer' but this Para should be reworded to the extent that the exception report to be submitted only when orders of `Chief Track Engineer' are required. In Para 9.1.8 of LWR Manual the word `Territorial Chief Engineer' should be replaced by `Chief Track Engineer'.

2.

3.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. RDSO should send the draft correction slip to LWR manual. Item is to be closed after issue of correction slip to LWR manual.

50

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1187 SUBJECT: Provision of Pathways on long girder bridge for inspection and maintenance. (Proposed by Railway Board) (SD/REV/BG/MG) RDSO FILE REF: CT/SD/REV/BG/MG

AGENDA: As per Railway Board's order on ITEM No 1008 of 79th meeting of BSC, Bridge directorate of RDSO has referred the item as under: NOTES BY SECRETARY of BSC: Due to increase in axle load, increase in speed potential and GMT on Indian Railways. It is necessary to strengthen the maintenance of bridges and ensure their regular repairs to achieve our goal of higher speeds and higher load carrying capacities. While carry out maintenance it is also necessary to provide proper inspection facilities to the staff for efficient working and their safety. Presently pathway are provided between rails for walking of staff and trolley refuges are provided for safe place on the face of approaching train. The provision of pathways on long girder bridges proposed by Western Railway was also discussed in CBE Seminar held on 6th & 7th June 2001. The item was: "Traditionally central footpath plates and man/trolley refuges have been provided on long girder bridges. Now there is demand for providing side pathways on such bridges by other departments of Railways to facilitate movement of staff in case of hose uncoupling, train parting etc. The cost of such works will be huge in addition to increase in regular maintenance efforts. This may lead to trespass through Railway Bridge by outsiders, as is already prevalent on many important bridges where such facility exists on date. The practice being followed in other Railways and suggestions in this regard may please be discussed." In PCE's Conference held on 15th & 16th March 2004, provision of footpath on girder Bridges was discussed and responsibility for safety and maintenance of bridge, trolley/main refuges and footpath was given to CBE/Zonal Railway. The same agenda was proposed by SECR in Chief Bridge Engineer's Seminar held on 13th & 14th September 2007. In this seminar the item was: "In case of Alarm Chain Pulling (ACP) on long bridges, access of loco pilot is restricted, as there is no connection available between loco and rear coaches. On bridges loco pilot cannot detrain to reset the ACP system. Keeping in view of running of 24/26 coaches passenger trains, access should be provided by provision of pathways by the side of bridges, as a normal feature." Railway Board vide letter no. 2006/CE-I/BR/Seminar/3-Pt dated 3051

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

05-2008 has conveyed their orders as "Accepted". In this regard nothing has been heard regarding the progress of the same on Zonal Railways to RDSO. This issue has also been raised by AM/CE vide his letter no. 2009/CEI/BR/Safety(MR) dated 08-12-2009. As per item no. 276 of IRPWM, "over all girder bridges, foot walks should be provided in the centre of the track over sleepers to help the engineering staff for inspection". But mere provision of foot walks in the centre of track shall be found lacking in case of long span Open Web girders, especially in case the inspecting officials are near the mid of span and a high speed train is approaching the bridge. This problem is compounded on high GMT traffic routes. Provision of pathways for long span bridges shall not only ensure unhindered inspection of such bridges but also reduce the occurrence of tragic accidents. As per item No. 15 (i) & (ii) of Schedule I of SOD Maximum distance apart of trolley refuges : (i) (ii) On bridges with main spans of less than 100m = 100m On bridges with main spans of 100m or more = A refuge over each pier

Approximate time required for reaching to nearest trolley refuge, considering walking speed of 3 kmph and 2 second reaction time will be approximate 75 second, if the staff has to walk for 60 meters. Considering train speed of 120 kmph, the train will cover 1500 m in 75 secs. Such long visibility over bridges is generally not available. Hence it is very difficult to reach to trolley refuges against fast approaching train. RDSO'S VIEW RDSO is of view (A) To modify Item 15 (i) and (ii) of Schedule I of SOD as under : Maximum distance apart of trolley refuges: (i) (ii) (B) (C) On bridges with main spans of less than 45m = 45m On bridges with main spans of 45m or more = A refuge over each pier A pathway of minimum 0.75m be provided on long bridges. A bridge of overall length 100m or more should be treated as long bridge. Consider the provision of pathways on long girder bridges and make suitable recommendations. Define the long bridges for the purpose of providing pathway. Decide minimum width of pathway to be provided. 52

Hence the committee may (i) (ii) (iii)

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

(iv)

Location of pathway.

Bridge Standards COMMITTEE'S OBSERVATIONS: There is a need to provide pathway for movement of staff for maintenance & inspection. The spacing between trolley refugee should be reduced. Bridge Standards COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS: Following recommendations are made: (A) Indian Railway Schedule of dimension Item 15 (i) and (ii) is recommended for amendment as under: Maximum distance apart of trolley refuges: (i) On bridges with main spans of less than 50m = 50m (ii) On bridges with main spans of 50m or more = A refuge over each pier

(B) A pathway of minimum 0.75m be provided on all major bridges. RDSO should develop GAD for provision of pathway. Zonal railways should send their practices and drawings on the subject for study and development of drawing. RAILWAY BOARDS ORDERS: (i) (ii) Recommendations be discussed in TSC. RDSO to develop GAD for provision of pathway.

NOTES BY SECRETARY of TSC:

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Pathway should be for PSC bridges also and for all type of bridges especially major and important bridges in addition to trolley refuges. In existing bridges it should be provided wherever possible and for new bridges is must be provided. For existing bridges strengthening of bridge may be required. Pathways are required for Gangmen and Keymen. 53

2.

3. 4.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

5. 6. 7.

Pathway should not be accessible for Motorcycle. SR, WCR and SECR will send drawing of Pathway for steel and PSC bridges. Providing Pathway inside of girder beyond sleeper.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Pathway should be provided on all existing major and important bridges wherever possible and on all new major and important bridges to ensure safety and maintenance requirement. Pathway should be provided inside of the track on through girder bridges to avoid misuse by public and accordingly proper design may be developed by RDSO.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

54

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1188 SUBJECT: RDSO FILE REF: AGENDA: To decide trial policy for track items. Trial policy for track items. CT/Policy

NOTES BY SECRETARY: Committee may decide the trial policy for track items to expedite the field trial on Zonal Railways. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: There is a problem of fund for trial of components in the field, provision of fund should be made for field trials to expedite the field trial on Zonal Railways. COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: There is a constituted committee of Railway Board to frame trial policy for all R&D items, the matter of arrangement of funds and other issues related to locations etc. for trial should be referred to the committee for deliberations and necessary recommendations to Railway Board for expediting field trial on Zonal Railways.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved

55

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1189 SUBJECT: Provision of Notch at bottom of joggle fish plate. (Proposed by NWR) CT/FF

RDSO FILE REF:

AGENDA: North Western Railway has proposed the item as under:As per Para 429 & Para 277 (A) (T) of IRPWM AT welds are to be joggle fish plated on outer rails of curve and on bridge approaches. Joggle fish plating of AT welds is also to be carried out on `DFW' welds. On NWR, there have been some welds failures with horizontal fracture at rail web at the location of weld resulting in a gap at fracture site to an extent of 200-225mm which can be a potential cause for derailment. On investigation, it is found that this type of fractures occurred due to point load transferred by joggle fish plates at the weld collar on bottom flange at the location of riser projecting above the weld collar. Existing design of joggle fish plate provide for only 10mm notch at the bottom to allow for weld collar. In field there are imperfections at the location of riser due to improper and premature removal of mould while doing the welding. This type of problem is seen more in case of old gauge converted sections where as welding was resorted to en masse. Hence it is suggested that notch provided at bottom of fish plate should be at least 20mm on the radius of rounded portion in the centre should be increased ensuring that no portion of joggle fish plate come in contact with weld collar. NOTES BY SECRETARY: Committee may deliberate. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: Presentation on failure of joggled fish plate AT welded joints was made by CTE/NWR in which photographs of broken joints were shown. These failures of AT welding joints are due to improper finishing of joints after welding i.e. improper removal of riser. The provision of 20mm notch will make the fish plate weaker. Instead, execution of weld by following laid down procedure should be ensured: COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: The provision of 20mm notch in joggled fish plate will make the joggled fish plate weaker. Instead, AT welding should be done by following laid down procedure. In case of improperly finished joints, joggled fish plate should be provided after finishing the joints properly. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved. Item is closed. 56

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1190 SUBJECT: Measurement of Rail stresses and stress free temperature of LWR by non destructive portable state of art equipment.

RDSO FILE REF:

AGENDA: Measurement of Rail stresses and stress free temperature of LWR by non destructive portable state of art equipment. NOTES BY SECRETARY: RDSO has sent global EOI to Railway Board for approval. COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: Committee observed that instead of procurement of equipment for measuring rail stresses and stress free temperature service contract for same may be done. When system is established its procurement can be considered. COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Committee recommends that instead of procurement, service contract should be done. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: RDSO should take further action in the matter for validation of technology/Equipment.

57

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

ITEM NO.1184 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF PENDING ITEMS

S. No.1: SUBJECT: Review of accident proforma for measurement of Rolling stock. (958/73/02/Safety) (1167/1/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

Revised accident proforma for measurement of Rolling stock sent by RDSO to Railway Board was shown to the committee and committee expressed satisfaction on important items included in said proforma. Committee requested Railway Board to finalise the issue.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.

Railway Board is requested to finalise the proforma for measurement of Rolling stock.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved . Matter under consideration with Board.

58

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.2: SUBJECT: LWR/CWR over Ballasted Deck Bridges. ( Provision of LWR with SEJ on pier to pier, continuation of LWR on Bridges, development of code of practice similar to UIC code 774-3R. Trials of continuation of LWR with multi span bridges with/without ballasted deck.). (982/7th Ext./02/IM/LWR) (1167/2/80) (1091/77/IM/LWR) (1167/2/80) (1092/77/IM/LWR) (1167/2/80) (1093/77/IM/LWR) (1167/2/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. The issue is being deliberated by HAG committee. The presentation on issue of additional rail stresses coming in rail due to track bridge interaction in respect of total stresses coming on rail along with possible solutions i.e. provision of NCC and Cu-MO rails was made and discussed. Committee should expedite finalization of its recommendations.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.

HAG committee is requested to finalization of its recommendation and submission of report to Railway Board.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: HAG committee to expedite and submit report within 60 days.

59

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No. 3: SUBJECT: Possibility of permitting 26m rails on major and important bridges. (986/74/JW/SWR) (1167/4/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

Since the draft correction slip to IRPWM has been sent Railway Board. Railway Board is requested to expedite its approval and issue.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.

Railway Board is requested to approve and issue the correction slip.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Advance correction slip no 125 dt 21.02.11 vide board's letter no 2009/CE-II/CS/1 has already been issued Item is closed.

60

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No. 4: SUBJECT: Modification in design of combination fish plate (1015/74/FF) (1167/5/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

CTE/SER informed that so far agency for designing and fabrication of modified combination fish plate could not be found. CTE/SER assured that he will further try to locate agency for design and fabrication of modified combination fish plate.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. CTE/SER is requested to expedite design and fabrication of modified combination fish plate. CTE/SER should send the detailed of modified combination fish plate to RDSO within three months for technical check of design and further action.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. SER should expedite design and fabrication of modified combination fish plate. SER should submit the details of modified combination fish plate to RDSO May 2011 for technical check of design and further action. by

61

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No. 5: SUBJECT: Change of Rail Section in LWR/CWR. (1042/75/ IM/LWR) (1167/6/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

None of the Zonal Railways have submitted demand of junction forged rails to Railway Board. Zonal Railways should expedite submission of demand of junction forged rails to Railway Board.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.

Zonal Railways should submit the demand of junction forged rails to Railway Board within a month.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Zonal Railways should submit the demand of junction forged rails to Railway by May 2011. Board

62

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.6: SUBJECT : Modification in the lifting barrier assembly for level crossings. (1070/76/EL) (1167/8/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. CR, SCR, WR and WCR have not done trial of modified lifting barrier. Zonal Railways are using drawing of Signal Directorate of RDSO for provision of lifting barriers at level crossing and procuring the same through approved list of vendors of Signal Directorate of RDSO so that same lifting barrier can be used for interlocking with least modification and least additional expenditure. In view of the same, no further trials need to be conducted.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Item may be closed in view of availability of drawing of lifting barrier of Signal Directorate of RDSO and its usefulness for interlocking due to increase in TVU. Item will be referred to S&T directorate for comments on the design of SR.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. In view of committee's recommendation in para 1. above, no further action is required. Item is closed.

63

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No. 7: SUBJECT: Machine Maintenance of Track (1073/76/TM/GL/70) (1167/9/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS:

1.

In depth study of world wide practices of other world Railways should be carried out by RDSO. In this regard various World Railways can be approached and help of Railway Advisors may also be taken. Literature study to be completed in six months time positivel.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: RDSO should further carry out in depth study of world wide practices of other world Railways and put up technical report to the committee formed for this purpose within six months time positively.. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: While reviewing the recommendation of 80thTSC ,Railway Board had ordered that "RDSO should collect the data through internet/correspondence and study of literature and put up to the committee for the purpose. Recommendations should be submitted to Board by June 2011." RDSO should expedite the study, finalization of committee,s recommendations and submit the report by june,2011.

64

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.8: Non-destructive stress free temperature measurement of CWR by force application method. (1077/76/IM/LWR/RSM) (1167/11/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. CTE/NER informed that equipment with Lucknow Division of NE Railway was out of order which has been repaired by bringing spare parts from Manmad Workshop. The trial to validate the equipment can be conducted on nominated section of NE Railway within a month. Other Zonal Railways should conduct further trials to validate the equipment. SUBJECT:

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. NE Railway to expedite and conduct trial within a month in association with RDSO to validate the equipment as per trial scheme prepared by RDSO. Other Zonal Railways should continue trial of equipment for measurement of non-destructive stress free temperature by force application method and submit report to RDSO about the reliability of the equipment.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS:

1. 2.

Approved. NE Railway should conduct trial at the earliest. Approved. Report to be discussed in next TSC.

65

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.9: SUBJECT: Review of Rail Stress Calculation Methodology (1078/76/Track Stress/FEM & DG/Research) (1167/12/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. There is a need to study management of contact stress in rail top to reduce RCF defects on heavy axle load by control of rail wheel interaction by rail grinding. CTEs should send the details as per the monitoring format of rail profile grinding for test sites on SCR, NCR & ECoR before and after grinding to RDSO.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. CTEs should send the details after introduction of rail grinding as per the monitoring format of rail profile grinding for test sites on SCR, NCR & ECoR before and after grinding to RDSO for study of reduction in contact stress. Increase in Rail life will also be studied by RDSO on account of control of contact stress and RCF by rail grinding.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

66

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.10: SUBJECT : Revision of work load of PWIs. (1087/77/IRPWM) (1167/13/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: Railway Board order on 80th TSC recommendation are awaited from Railway Board.

1.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Railway Board is requested to issue orders on 80th TSC recommendations already sent.

1.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Item is under consideration in Railway Board.

67

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.11: SUBJECT : Criteria for re-alignment of curve (1055/75/IRPWM) (1167/14/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Presentation on RDSO's reply to issues raised by Railway Board was made along with revised draft correction slip suggested by RDSO. Railway Board may take further decision. Rate of change of lateral acceleration should be 1.0m/sec.3 on circular portion.

2. 3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1.

Railway Board is requested to give further decision on the basis of draft correction slip suggested by RDSO vide letter no. CT/IRPWM dated 16.11.2010 for modification in the same for rate of change of lateral acceleration as 1.0m/sec.3 on circular portion for speed up to 160kmph.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: RDSO should send detailed technical comments on the recommendation made by TSC to decide the matter.

68

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.12: Necessity of detailed guidelines for USFD testing of Tongue Rails and CMS crossings. (1098/78/USFD) (1167/15/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. During normal USFD testing, SEJ tongue rail is not tested but hand probing is done as per para 11.8.2 of USFD manual. During normal USFD testing, flaw is not detected in SEJ as per procedure laid down in para 11.8 of USFD Manual 2006. M&C directorate of RDSO should check whether USFD testing of SEJ is effective or not as per procedure laid down in USFD manual 2006. Roughness on machined portion on SEJ should be monitored to avoid sudden fractures. SUBJECT:

2.

3.

4.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Sample of fractures of tongue rail and CMS crossing along with fracture investigation replies should be sent to RDSO by zonal Railways for finalizing guidelines for USFD testing of tongue rail, SEJ tongue rail and CMS crossings. RDSO should finalise the USFD testing method for tongue rail, SEJ and CMS crossing on the basis of non detected flaws observed in fractures of these components. This should be done within next three months or early. Till such time procedure is evolved hand probing of SEJ tongue rails should continue as per provision of USFD manual.

2.

3.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. 3. Approved. Approved. Approved.

69

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.13:

SUBJECT:

Corrosion on rails at contact points of liners resulting into fractures (1102/78/ACP/RP) (1167/16/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Railway Boards orders on 80th TSC recommendation along with action taken on them were discussed. Action on them is to be monitored. Vossloh type fastening which is liner cum fastening system has already been tried in IR and performing satisfactory. This fastening may be adopted. RDSO is also trying to develop the liner free fastening system for existing PSC sleeper and fastening assembly.

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. 3. Action on Rly. Board orders to be expedited and monitored closely. Vossloh type fastening system or similar may be adopted. RDSO expedite the development of liner free fastening system for existing PSC sleeper and existing fastening assembly.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. 3. Approved. Approved. Approved

70

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S. No.14: SUBJECT : Maintenance of Steel channel sleeper (1121/79/JE)(1167/19/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Committee consisting of ED/B&S/RDSO, ED/Track-II/RDSO, CTE/SWR, CTE/SECR & CTE/SCR has finalized the proposed new para to be included in IRPWM for maintenance of Steel channel /H beam sleeper. CTE/SWR presented the new para to the members of TSC. All the members agreed to the recommendations of committee for introduction of new Para in IRPWM for steel channel sleeper.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. The proposed new para for maintenance of Steel channel/H beam sleepers should be sent to Railway Board for approval as a correction slip to IRPWM. After approval of Railway Board, this item may be closed.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Not approved.

71

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No. 15: SUBJECT : Standard deviation based track maintenance standards for 130Kmph to 160Kmph and spot values for 140Kmph to 160 Kmph. (1124/79/ TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/20/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: RDSO should expedite the fixing of transition coupling in LHB coaches of RDSO and thereafter conduct the trial.

1.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Trial to fix standard deviation based track maintenance standard should be conducted within next six months after fixing the transition coupling in LHB coaches of RDSO.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved. Trial should be done at the earliest and report should be submitted to Railway Board.

72

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No. 16: SUBJECT : Improving small track machine organization (1125/79/TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/21/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: S.No. 1 (A to H except C) ­ Correction slip to Indian Railways Small Track Machine Manual is being issued by RDSO which should be issued within 15 days. S.No. 1 C ­ RDSO should regularly review the specification of Small Track Machine. S.No. 2 ­ Board has already issued instruction for pilot project of MMU. COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: S.No. 1 (A to H except) ­ Recommended for closure as correction slip to Indian Railway Small Track Machine Manual is being issued. S.No. 1 C ­ Recommended for closure. S.No. 2 ­ Recommended for closure. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: S.No. 1 (A to H except C) ­ Approved. Item should be closed after issue of correction slip. S.No.1 C S.No. 2 Closed Closed

73

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No. 17: SUBJECT : Reduction in thickness of end post of glued joints. (1127/79/CT/MT/GJ) (1167/22/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. The use of better material for end post to reduce its thickness to 6mm has to be done in conjunction with improvements the glued joints to enhance its service life, hence this item needs to be clubbed with item no. 1174. The process for invitation of Global EOI for developing improved glued joints for better service life along with reduced thickness of end post should be expedited by RDSO.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. This item may be clubbed with item no. 1174 regarding improvement in design of improved glued joint. RDSO to expedite the process of development of improved glued joint with reduced thickness of end post and improved material.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

74

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.18:

SUBJECT :

Formation treatment and recommendations of RDSO for treatment other than blanketing. (1128/79/GE/Gen/13 TSC Vol-X) (1167/23/80)

COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Committee discussed the issue and asked SCR to complete the trials for geogrid form the available 15 types of geogrids. SCR assured to complete the trials with in 6 months as per the scheme given by RDSO. Railway Board may procure high performance formation treatment machine which can lay geogrid also.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. SCR to carry out trials of available geogrid 15 in nos. within six months and send trial report to RDSO. Railway Board may procure high performance formation treatment machine.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1&2 RDSO should review the item afresh and carry out cost benefit analysis. RDSO should also find cost effective method of deep screening after 10-12 years in locations having geogrid without any damage to the geogrid.

75

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.19: SUBJECT : Issues pertaining to improvement in A.T.Welding. (1133/79/CT/Welding/Policy) (1167/26/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. M&C directorate of RDSO is to submit the trial report by March 2011. SCR should submit the detailed report of thermometer and its specification for trial by RDSO.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. SCR should submit the detailed report of thermometer and its specification for trial by RDSO. RDSO should finalize the issue and send correction slip of thermit welding manual to ensure proper heating of rail ends and as additional check by digital rail thermometer in addition to prescribed pre heating time for pre heating of rail ends in the manual.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

76

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.20: SUBJECT : Use of 700 (2MHz) 8mm probe for detection of Half Moon Crack. (1134/79/CT/USFD) (1167/27/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Correction slip for detection of half moon crack using side looking probe has been issued by RDSO vide letter no. CT/USFD dated 26/28.05.2010.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Item may be closed as correction slip no. 05 of May 2010 to USFD manual has already been issued.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. Approved.

77

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.21: SUBJECT : Carrying out deep screening by BCM at a speed of 40kmph. (1136/79/TM/GL/70 79th) (1167/28/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Draft correction slip to IRPWM submitted by RDSO is under consideration of Railway Board. Correction slip should be revised to include 4 hours effective traffic block during day 5 hrs during night.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 RDSO will revise the correction slip to include 4 hours effective traffic block requirement during day 5 hrs during night.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: As per Board's extant instructions, minimum duration of block for BCMs is 3 hrs Railways have been provided with DTS machines for opening the track at 40 kmph. Necessary lighting should be arranged for night working .Instructions should be implemented irrespective of day or night working.

78

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.22: SUBJECT : Maintenance problem in 1 in 12 fan shaped layout. (1142/79/CT/PTX) (1167/30/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. RDSO has modified the drawing for special bearing plates at sleeper no. 24, 25, 26 & 27 for holding tongue rail by steel shoulder (RT-7074). This drawing has been circulated to all zonal railways vide letter no. CT/PTX dated 22.06/16.07.10. CTE/SWR informed the committee that the special bearing plates as per modified drawing are functioning satisfactorily in field.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Since the performance of special bearing plates at sleeper no. 24, 25, 26 & 27 for holding tongue rail as per modified drawing is satisfactory; all zonal railways should adopt the modified drawing for special bearing plates on fan shaped layout. This item is recommended for closure.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

79

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.23: SUBJECT : Yardstick for USFD testing. (1143/79/CT/USFD) (1167/31/80) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Central, Western and N.F Railway to expedite the work study report using analogue as well as digital rail/weld tester. Committee has not met even once.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Central, Western and N.F Railway to under take the work study using analogue as well as digital rail testers/weld testers and submit report to RDSO for consideration by committee. Committee should finalize the report of work study within next three months and submit to Railway Board for consideration.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

80

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.24: SUBJECT : Visibility requirement for unmanned LCs (1147/80/ EL) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Draft correction slip to IRPWM submitted by RDSO is under consideration of Railway Board.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Railway Board is requested to expedite approval and issue correction slip to IRPWM.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Item is to be closed after issue of correction slip to IRPWM.

81

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.25: SUBJECT : Discrepancies in IRPWM & USFD Manual regarding provisions pertaining to metallurgical testing of rails/welds. (1148/80/ IRPWM, USFD & AT Welding Sub Committee) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. 2. Draft correction slip to IRPWM is under consideration of Railway Board. RDSO to expeditiously submit draft correction slip to USFD manual and AT welding on issue of correction slip to IRPWM.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Railway Board is requested to expedite approval and issue correction slip to IRPWM. RDSO to expeditiously submit draft correction slip to USFD manual and AT welding manual to Railway Board for approval after issue of correction slip to IRPWM by Railway Board in reference to item 1 above.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. RDSO should submit draft correction slip to USFD manual and AT Welding manual for approval after issue of correction slip to IRPWM by Railway Board in reference to item 1 above.

82

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.26: SUBJECT : Flaw detected in SKV welds with 3 piece moulds by 450 2 MHz single crystal probe (1150/80/ USFD & Welding/Policy) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: Matter may be closed as there is improvement in results obtained by testing of AT welds using digital AT weld testers.

1.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. Item may be close as procedure has already been issued by RDSO. Digital weld testers should be used to avoid false DFW flaws in welds.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

83

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.27: SUBJECT : Maintenance of thick web switches (1151/80/ TWS) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. RDSO has developed a proforma for inspection of thick web switches with location of wear measurement and this proforma has been circulated to all zonal railways vide letter no. CT/PTX dated 30.7.2010 for their comments. However, none of the zonal railways have sent comments to RDSO till now. CTE/CR informed that recording of knife edge included in proforma is not required in case of thick web switches. Members of the TSC observed that there should be only one proforma for inspection of Points & Crossings for both overriding and thick web switches.

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Zonal railways should send comments to RDSO on the proforma developed by RDSO for maintenance of thick web switches . After getting the comments, RDSO should finalize the proforma for inspection of thick web switches.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved.

84

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.28: SUBJECT : Maintenance of Spring Setting Devise : (1152/80/ TWS) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. As decided in the last meeting, zonal railways have not sent report on maintenance problem of SSD in field. Nor did they suggest maintenance procedure to RDSO. However, RDSO has developed laying and maintenance instructions along with proforma to record the performance of SSD. The same has been circulated to all zonal railways vide letter no. CT/PTX/TWS/Design dated 23.11.2010.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Zonal railways should send their comments on laying and maintenance instructions developed by RDSO at the earliest. After getting the comments from zonal railways, RDSO should finalize the laying and maintenance instructions of SSD. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved

85

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.29: SUBJECT : Emergency sliding boom at level crossing gates. (1154/80/ LC/Safety) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. CTEs felt that provision of additional boom is not required and existing chain arrangement is sufficient. The item may be closed.

2.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Railway Board is requested to close the item as the existing safety chain arrangement is adequate as an emergency lifting barrier on level crossing.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved. Item is closed.

86

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.30: Formulation of procedure for testing of vertical flaws in USFD testing. (1156/80/ USFD) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. SCR has conducted trial to detect vertical transverse flaw with 73.5o and WR with 73o and this will replace 70o probe. Results are satisfactory as conducted by 73.5o by SCR and 73o probe by WR for detecting vertical flaws. RDSO has suggested some more study with flat bottom artificial vertical transverse defects. SUBJECT :

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. SCR and WR should submit detailed report as desired by RDSO vide letter no. CT/USFD dated 17.09.10 and 03.11.10 respectively for testing of vertical flaw. On getting report from SCR and WR, RDSO should standardize 73o/73.5o probe for testing of transverse flaws including vertical transverse defects in rail head.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

87

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.31: SUBJECT : Minimum track centre for new 3rd and 4th lines. (1157/80/ SD/Rev/BG/MG) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. If track center to center distance is not increased then safety of trackmen will be endangered. No trolley on middle line inspection is going on. In suburban section trolley is not operated. Mega block should be introduced on suburban sections for push trolley inspection of track as well as multiple lines.

2. 3. 4.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. Centre to Centre distance of track for 3rd and 4th lines should be 7.8 m from safety consideration of trackmen doing track maintenance for new lines. 2. Mega block should be introduced on suburban sections and multiple lines for inspection of track by push trolley as center to center distance can not be increased for the existing tracks. 3. Area should be demarcated outside the moving dimensions of the train in both directions for use of patrol man & keyman on multiple lines. RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Board's orders on the matter have already been issued vide no 1157 of 80thTSC wherein this recommendation of TSC was not approved.

88

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.32: SUBJECT : Trial of different fastening components on Indian Railways. (1160/80/ EF/TRIAL) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Thermoplastic elastomeric pad has been laid by NR, NCR, ECoR, SCR and CR and about one year time has passed. The pads laid in NCR has been inspected by RDSO for six months performance. Improved Rubber pad trial can be deferred for the time being as testing machine of impact attenuation and inclined repeated load test are being procured by M&C Directorate of RDSO. CTE/CR proposed that these tests can be done in laboratory out side India. If Central Railway get these tests done outside India in any Lab, they can procure the item for trial. Nylon cord reinforced GRSP for turn out have not been procured by zonal Railways. Some Zonal Railways have called tenders. Trial of this item should be expedited. Rail pad developed by M/s Rawatsons - Only SCR has laid these pads. Other railway are in process of procurement. SCR should send the report on proforma in one month. Insulated metal liner developed by M/s Rawatsons - Only SER has procured these insulated metal liner. Other railways are in the process of procurement. ERC Mk-V and G-clip has been discussed in TSC as separate item (item no. 1182). PSC sleepers for 25 t ­ ECoR and SER have placed PO. Laying of these sleepers is to be done at the earliest. Insulated fitting for steel channel sleeper ­ Joint performance report has not been sent by any railways except SCR. SCR has reported satisfactory performance of these fittings. The performance of insulated fittings of M/s Shree Bihari Ji Corporation has not be reported by Northern Railway. Other zonal railways should also sent joint performance to RDSO. The trial need to be expedited to reach conclusions and take benefit out of it. There is still problem of indent vetting in CR regarding funds and allocation. There is need to frame policy for trial. Railway Board ordered that trial should be charged to DRF/Revenue. One committee consisting of Railway Board officials and RDSO official including Finance member exists for formulating uniform trial policy. 89

2.

3.

4.

5.

6. 7.

8.

9. 10.

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. 2. Trials should be expedited to arise at conclusions. The trial of improved rail pad may be deferred due to non-availability of testing facilities in India. However, if railway can arrange for testing of pads from out side India, they can go ahead with trial. Concerned zonal railway should send the performance report for the item Thermoplastic elastomeric pads and Insulated fittings for steel channel sleeper. Concerned zonal railway should expedite the trial for the item Nylon chord reinforced GRSP, rail pad developed by M/s Rawatsons, Insulated metal liners developed by M/s Rawatsons and PSC sleepers for 25t. Finalisation and issue of uniform trial policy being dealt by committee should be expedited.

3. 4.

5.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Approved. This issue is under consideration of board. Approved. Approved. Approved.

90

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.33: SUBJECT : Inspection and maintenance of points and crossings (1161/80/ PTX) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. IRICEN/Pune is modifying the proforma for inspection of points & crossings. Accordingly Sr. Professor/IRICEN/Pune presented the revised proforma to the Members of TSC. Members of TSC observed that the revised proforma should be circulated to all zonal railways for their comments first, then only it can be scrutinized in detail. IRICEN/Pune should involve RDSO also for development of proforma.

2.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: IRICEN/Pune should circulate the revised proforma to all Zonal Railways and RDSO for their comments. Zonal railways should send comments to IRICEN at the earliest after receiving the draft proforma for inspection of points & crossings.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Approved

91

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.34: SUBJECT: Increase in top formation width (1163/80/ GE/Gen/TSC/13) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: Members discussed the issue afresh and have the opinion that the increase in formation width from two criteria below is based on purely technical reasons. 1. 2. Increase in ballast cushion from 300mm to 350mm. The side slope of ballast haunches/profile 1.5H :1V, should be adopted keeping in view the ballast cushion of 350mm and stability requirement for lateral stability. The increase in the width based upon above both criteria will be one meter both in single line as well as in double line (in formation and cutting). The increase in cess width from 1065 mm to 1200 mm can be dispensed with for time being as it will increase the cost of project as per the view of Railway Board.

3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: Committee recommends that formation width be increased as under: 1. In Embankment ­ Single line 6.85 to 7.85 m Double line 12.16 to 13.16m 2. In Cutting Single line 6.25 to 7.25m

Double line 11.55 to 12.55 m RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Board's orders on the matter have already been issued vide item no 1163 of 80th TSC wherein the recommendation of TSC was not approved.

92

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.35: SUBJECT : Criteria for Deep Screening of ballast (1166/80/ GE/Gen/TSC/13) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. The issue was discussed. RDSO apprised that no Rly. has given the requisite information to evaluating the criteria for deep screening though proforma was sent in Feb. 2010. However WCR mentioned that the same had been given by them to RDSO in Sept. 2010. Director/IRICEN also mentioned that some data available with Shri Manjul Mathur/Chief Engineer/S.Rly. can also be taken by RDSO. Director/IRICEN has also suggested RDSO should improve upon the proforma by incorporating maintenance effort put in the track between two deep screening.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Committee recommends that RDSO should issue new proforma which include maintenance efforts put in by the Rly. in the track between two deep screening. The revised proforma should be issued to Rly. within one month i.e. Jan. 2011. Contamination Index evolved by RDSO should be validated based on frequency of tamping between successive deep screening.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: RDSO is to evolve new criteria of deep screening which incorporates maintenance efforts.

93

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.36: SUBJECT : Maintenance tolerance of gauge (1168/80/ IRPWM) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. Draft correction slip to IRPWM submitted by RDSO is under consideration of Railway Board.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 Railway Board is requested to expedite approval and issue of correction slip to IRPWM.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: Vide Board's letter no.2010/CE-II/CS/1 dt.01.10.2010,RDSO was asked to send correction slip to para 1404 of IRPWM as it was decided not to change maintenance tolerance of gauge and keep provision for special slack gauge sleepers for curves sharper than 40 in para 1404.RDSO should send correction slip within a fortnight.

94

81st MEETING OF THE TRACK STANDARDS COMMITTEE ­ DECEMBER, 2010

S.No.37: SUBJECT : Modification in F/S Turn Out (1 in 8.5 & 1.12) Drawings. (1169/80/ PTX/Policy) COMMITTEE's OBSERVATIONS: 1. The design of longer sleeper have been completed and drawing issued to N.C. Railway. RDSO should issue the drawing to other Zonal Railway also. The use of longer sleeper will improve the maintenance of Points and Crossing in regard to machine tamping.

2. 3.

COMMITTEE's RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. RDSO should issue drawings of longer sleeper for 1 in 8.5 fan shaped turnouts and 1 in 12 fan shaped turnouts to all other Zonal Railways. Since the design of longer sleepers has been completed by RDSO and drawing issued to NCR, the item may be closed after issue of drawings to other Zonal Railways also.

2.

RAILWAY BOARD's ORDERS: 1. 2. Approved. Approved.

95

Information

Microsoft Word - TSC- 81-RBOrders final

100 pages

Find more like this

Report File (DMCA)

Our content is added by our users. We aim to remove reported files within 1 working day. Please use this link to notify us:

Report this file as copyright or inappropriate

299644


You might also be interested in

BETA
Microsoft Word - Yearend2009.doc
Microsoft Word - TSC- 81-RBOrders final