Trains.com

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Yard Track Size

4535 views
10 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Somewhere in North Texas
  • 1,080 posts
Posted by desertdog on Thursday, December 31, 2009 1:52 PM

You can't go wrong with code 83 for the main line, code 70 for passing tracks and heavy industry and code 55 for classification tracks and lightly used sidings.  The only problem is finding code 55.  Few shops stock it and you may have to search for it on the web.

John Timm 

 

  • Member since
    August 2004
  • 573 posts
Posted by pajrr on Thursday, December 31, 2009 4:46 AM

As a side note, Lionel's original description of its' 0-27 track was that "0-27 track represents the lighter rail used commonly in yards and brachlines, while our "O" gauge track is of a heavier rail, more suitable to use for mainline runs."

  • Member since
    February 2016
  • 176 posts
Posted by Tugboat Tony on Thursday, December 31, 2009 4:26 AM

 In my shop/service track here we may be an anomalie, We had all new 136 lb CWR laid throughout the facility, the only fish plates are on the switches and anywhere they had to replace a section of rail. The entire service track area is steel ties  (derailmants are more common there) and the shop area is all new wood ties.  From a facility manager point of view I would NEVER go back to 85 lb jointed "rail" we had when I was in Denver. You never knew when the rail head would just break off in a curve or a joint break.

  • Member since
    September 2004
  • From: Germany
  • 1,951 posts
Posted by wedudler on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 11:36 AM

 I would even consider code 55 for a few spurs.

I did this with my old Westport, code 83 for the main, code 70 elsewhere and two storage tracks with code 55.

Wolfgang

Pueblo & Salt Lake RR

Come to us http://www.westportterminal.de          my videos        my blog

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 11:29 AM

Thumbs Up There you go !  

Code 70 would be good for HO scale, standard-gauge track in the middle 20th century.  Code 70 = 0.070'' high x 87.1 = 6.1'' high prototype, which is a little high for 100 lb. rail - more like 105 or 110 lb. - but it'll do.

 Code 55 = 0.055'' x 87.1 = 4.8'', which is typical for a 70 lb. rail, which is too light for most of the 20th century.

A handy chart of rail sections and their dimensions is at -

 http://www.akrailroad.com/OnlineCatalog/RailJointBars/TeeRailSectionsData/tabid/76/Default.aspx 

A pictorial representation of them is at -

http://www.akrailroad.com/OnlineCatalog/CraneRail/RailSections/tabid/82/Default.aspx

- Paul North. 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: Nebraska
  • 1,280 posts
Posted by RedGrey62 on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 10:00 AM

Paul_D_North_Jr

If you'd want to know more about a specific yard, either a conversation or a tour with a knowledgable track person on a 'slow day' would be the best way to get that info.  It may set you back the cost you of a couple of cups of coffee and donuts or lunches, though.  Wink

- Paul North.

I may do that, I know the local TrainMaster for BNSF and duh, it didn't dawn on me to ask him!

Ricky

"...Mother Nature will always punish the incompetent and uninformed." Bill Barney from Thor's Legions
  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 8:38 AM

Yes - you've got it about right.  In general - even major yards would have smaller/ lighter rail than the mainline, and the rail in critical and more heavily trafficked tracks - such as at a hump - would be heavier than in the body tracks.  Even among those, tracks used mainly for storage of empties would be lighter than those used mostly for loads or general through movements.

As some 'for instances' to better illustrate this:  The hump leads and principal turnouts/ switches down through the retarders could well be the same rail section as the main line - such as 130 lb. or heavier, such as 132, 136, or 141 lb. RE - or just slightly smaller, such as a 130 lb. or 115 lb. section, because they are subjected to almost just as much if not more tonnage passing over them, they are critical to the operation, and replacements/ spare parts are more readily available.  The last few turnouts/ switches after the retarders and main body tracks might be the next step down in rail weight - say, a 115 lb. or 100 lb. section.  The other body tracks that are used lightly and storage tracks might be a 100 lb. or 90 lb. or even an 85 lb. section.

The BNSF Design Guidelines for Industrial Tracks and Facilities of Oct. 2007 - at http://www.bnsf.com/tools/fieldengineering/pdf/IndyTrkStds_1007a.pdf at pp. 3, 6-7, and 19  (4, 7-8, and 20 of 55 of the 'PDF' version) - prefer 136 lb. in the mainline turnouts, with 112 lb. to 115 lb. as a minimum.  The tracks themselves are 112 lb. minimum for the larger volume facilities, with 90 lb. being the minimum for smaller volume spurs.

Two other aspects:

1.  While it would have been an extravagance 'back in the day', these days a lot of the yard tracks may be Continuous Welded Rail.  That's because of the sheer volume of CWR that is released and reclaimed from mainline rail replacement projects, but still has a considerable amount of service life left - it's too good to scrap.  Also, the MOW guys and equipment are more set-up to deal with it than the small track gangs with only hand tools 'back in the day';

2.  As a result, the yard tracks may appear to be the same size/ weight as the mainline tracks, but actually have a lesser grade rail - much more head wear and curve/ side wear is permitted, as well as the other various defects such as the size of driving wheel burns, etc.  Again, the one place where that might not hold out to be true is in the hump tracks and turnouts - there, the better fit of the switchpoints and frog guard rails and retarders to the top and sides of the rail head is more critical, so a large amount of wear and consequent mismatch would not be desirable.

If you'd want to know more about a specific yard, either a conversation or a tour with a knowledgable track person on a 'slow day' would be the best way to get that info.  It may set you back the cost you of a couple of cups of coffee and donuts or lunches, though.  Wink

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: Nebraska
  • 1,280 posts
Posted by RedGrey62 on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 8:36 AM

Thanks for the responses folks.  I think I will go with code 70 in my yard project.

Ricky

"...Mother Nature will always punish the incompetent and uninformed." Bill Barney from Thor's Legions
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • From: Milwaukee WI (Fox Point)
  • 11,439 posts
Posted by dknelson on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 8:08 AM

The lower speeds allow smaller rail to be used, and with much of the 20th century involving railroads needing larger and larger rail due to heavier freight cars and axle loadings, yards were a good place to use up the older but still sound rail that was replaced. 

I have seen photos of the Pennsy's Enola Yard taken in the 1930s that showed the rather light rail shockingly wobbly looking, even though the yard was put in new in 1905 or so.  That was a heavily used yard. 

Thinking of some of the local (Milwaukee WI) rail yards, the UP (former CNW) Mitchell Yard on the south side (now largely abandoned) had small rail, certainly smaller than the nearby main.  The yard dated to, I think, the 1920s for the most part, was fairly compact and never extremely busy, and was not much updated.  It would not surprise me to learn that most of the rail was and still is original since it is not likely to really wear out in yard service.   If a piece of rail needed to be replaced, I suspect the CNW/UP would have been hard pressed to find any spare rail of the small size so, yes, I suspect transition joints would have been called for with isolated pieces of heavier rail being used. 

On the other hand, when the BN built the new Galesburg Yard in the 1980s they used heavy and I think all brand new rail, some of it on steel ties, although i suspect the rail was still lighter than the main.   The heavy rail and steel ties indicate that the BN recognized that they did not want to tie up an important yard track or yard lead with track maintenance projects if they could help it.

Dave Nelson   

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • From: Austin, TX
  • 462 posts
Posted by 4merroad4man on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 8:00 AM

Most yards are laid with used or "relay" rail, so it would tend to be lighter  that the main track rail in all but the most recently built and modern yards.

Serving Los Gatos and The Santa Cruz Mountains with the Legendary Colors of the Espee. "Your train, your train....It's MY train!" Papa Boule to Labische in "The Train"
  • Member since
    August 2001
  • From: Nebraska
  • 1,280 posts
Yard Track Size
Posted by RedGrey62 on Wednesday, December 30, 2009 6:39 AM

Generally speaking would major yards have the same or smaller size rail than the mainline?  I'm suspecting that even within a yard, rail sizes would differ, like tracks leading from the hump would be heavier because of the forces exerted on them.  I'm more concerned with the classification tracks and such.

Thanks

Ricky

"...Mother Nature will always punish the incompetent and uninformed." Bill Barney from Thor's Legions

Subscriber & Member Login

Login, or register today to interact in our online community, comment on articles, receive our newsletter, manage your account online and more!

Users Online

There are no community member online

Search the Community

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Model Railroader Newsletter See all
Sign up for our FREE e-newsletter and get model railroad news in your inbox!