How did railroads handle the crossings of different classification of tracks - e.g. a secondary road crossing a mainline? Wouldn't the rail weights (sizes) be different? Would the lighter weight secondary road rise to and dip from the crossing of the heavier weight rail of the mainline? Thanks in advance.
Tom
https://tstage9.wixsite.com/nyc-modeling
Time...It marches on...without ever turning around to see if anyone is even keeping in step.
A diamond crossing is always built using one size of rail (with matching frog castings,) usually the heavier of the two rail sizes if the approach tracks have been laid with different weights of rail.
The offset would have been handled by transition joint bars, and the better-maintained line would be level through the diamond while the less-maintained line might have a 'hump.' Note that the lighter rail line might be the better maintained - think light rail crossing a Class 1 industrial lead at grade on private right-of-way.
It is also possible that the diamond might be built with rail heavier than that used on either of the crossing tracks. This is a case where the railroad will accept a higher up front cost to minimize maintenance expenses later.
Chuck (modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
The lighter line wouldn't necessarily have a "hump". I would rather doubt it. They would just surface the track so the main was smooth across both lines.
The tracks would approach the crossing and like any other place where the rail size changes, it would step up or down (as need be) to the size using "compromise" joint bars. They fit one size of rail on one end and another size on the other end.
Dave H.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
You guys are right on the money!
The frogs are one piece and all the same code in each direction. This is a pretty old diamond and some spare parts sitting a few feet away. Notice how the rails are angled next to the frog and the webbing at the 90 degree points. Interesting, huh?
Impressive, Philip. Thanks for posting the images. I have them saved.
Never seen the like.
-Crandell
Thanks, Brother Philip.
You've made my point as well. The two crossing tracks are both considerably lighter rail sections than the crossing itself.
Crossings in Indiana rang a bell in my tired ole brain.
In 1971 I had to call on a customer in Northern Indiana from a Chicago suburb. I was perusing a map when I noticed a place where several railroads crossed. This I had to see. When I got there, I saw the most complicated railroad crossing I have ever seen. Three railroads crossed at the exact same place.
Two of them crossed at near 90 degrees and the third one intersected the center of their crossing. Must have been a track maintenance foreman's nightmare.
As they say... there's a prototype for everything!!!
BigRusty wrote: Crossings in Indiana rang a bell in my tired ole brain. In 1971 I had to call on a customer in Northern Indiana from a Chicago suburb. I was perusing a map when I noticed a place where several railroads crossed. This I had to see. When I got there, I saw the most complicated railroad crossing I have ever seen. Three railroads crossed at the exact same place.Two of them crossed at near 90 degrees and the third one intersected the center of their crossing. Must have been a track maintenance foreman's nightmare. As they say... there's a prototype for everything!!!
On it's Harbor line, the Pacific Electric had a three way crossing on a timber trestle!! Talk about maintaince headaches!!!
Dave