For cargo like coal that will absorb water and get heavier when wet, do the shippers/loaders load the car light to allow for the increase in weight if the cars get caught in a storm?
NO!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
For a long train (150+ cars, I don't know if that's considered a long coal train), could this change in weight cause a problem with getting the train slowed down in an emergency? Or would the possible change in the overall weight of the train be factored when it was assembled?
Perry BabinFor a long train (150+ cars, I don't know if that's considered a long coal train), could this change in weight cause a problem with getting the train slowed down in an emergency? Or would the possible change in the overall weight of the train be factored when it was assembled?
Remember - Railroad weights are measured in 100 pound increments.
In today's world, coal is weighed at the time the Shipper loads the car. Shipper's Certified Weights. In many cases, coal is loaded wet from a designated wash plant, to minimize the dust and 'fines' in the load. Shippers in some locations are required to spray a specific 'topping' on the load to minimize the 'coal dust' that can be blown off the cars during transit.
Consignees are paying for the product that the Shipper is selling. Incidental weather encountered during the trip, doesn't change the amount of the product, it may change the weight of the car carrying to product on rail, BUT it doesn't change the amount of the product.
The tonnage ratings carriers place upon different classes of locomotives when traversing the various ruling grades that trains may encounter are not truly exact measures. Tonnage ratings are subject to variations in train length upon which the tonnage is distributed.
A territory I worked, a 10K ton ore train would stall on a particular grade where a 10K ton merchandise train would have no troubles at all. The 10K ton ore train was less than 5K feet long; the merchandise train was 10K feet long. The grade had a 10 MPH PERMANENT slow order at its bottom and was joined by similar grade degree and length on the 'other' side. The grade was a mile long - the ore train would end up with its entire weight on the grade. The merchandise train, with its head end cresting the grade still had about half its train shoving it down the incoming side of the grade.
If a product is in a gondola it doesn't matter whether or not rain is absorbed, the rain that falls in the car is going to stay in the car.
Water weighs 62#/ cu ft. A 40' by 10' gondola with 12" or rain would weigh an extra 24,800#.
MidlandMikeIf a product is in a gondola it doesn't matter whether or not rain is absorbed, the rain that falls in the car is going to stay in the car. Water weighs 62#/ cu ft. A 40' by 10' gondola with 12" or rain would weigh an extra 24,800#.
You are presuming that gons will hold water - in my experience sending gons to Bethlehem Steel at Sparrows Point by the hundreds each week - very few will hold water - many were rejected because they wouldn't even hold steel beams or steel plates.
MidlandMikeWater weighs 62#/ cu ft. A 40' by 10' gondola with 12" or rain would weigh an extra 24,800#.
A side effect is that these can form fairly effective 'rocket stove' intakes for fires in flammable contents...
I don't know that coal (and coke), taconite, ballast, and similar materials are going to be greatly affected by water, as such.
Surface tension may hold some water within the load (which is why unloading facilities often have heaters), but most of the water will just run through.
Grains are generally not going to be allowed to get wet - not good for the product. Plastic pellets aren't going to be absorbent, but are likely to blow out of the car if exposed, which is why they also go in covered hoppers.
The biggest problem, IMHO, would be sand and gravel. They aren't absorbent, as such, but will still hold water due to surface tension, etc. One doesn't often see them on long hauls, though.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68I don't know that coal (and coke), taconite, ballast, and similar materials are going to be greatly affected by water, as such.
Yes, they can be greatly effected! We had a coal train one day after a very very hard rain and the water was actually shoshing out of the tops of some cars that could be seen from the head end. We couldn't get that train three miles out of Roanoke, Va. heading north!
.
BigJimWe had a coal train one day after a very very hard rain and the water was actually shoshing out of the tops of some cars that could be seen from the head end.
Need some of Balt's leaky gons....
I was thinking in terms of the product soaking up the water. Sounds like you had some watertight cars there.
BigJim tree68 I don't know that coal (and coke), taconite, ballast, and similar materials are going to be greatly affected by water, as such. Yes, they can be greatly effected! We had a coal train one day after a very very hard rain and the water was actually shoshing out of the tops of some cars that could be seen from the head end. We couldn't get that train three miles out of Roanoke, Va. heading north!
tree68 I don't know that coal (and coke), taconite, ballast, and similar materials are going to be greatly affected by water, as such.
When the CSX Terminal Services Center was being installed at Newport News in the 1980's it occasioned a FULL on the ground check of every track in the terminal. The check 'found' about ten cars of 'coal' that had been 'lost'. According to the 'side cards' that were attached to the cars - they had arrived five years prior to the time of the check. But that isn't the unique thing - the cars had trees three and four inches in diameter and about 20 or 25 feet tall growing out of the 'coal'.
I have also seen 'coal' that the Consignee's inspectors had rejected - the quality of the coal was more on the order of black painted dirt. All coal is not the same and the Shippers and Consignees are dealing with commodities that are expected to have specific metalurgical properties - if the consignees inspection finds the load is not up to the appropriate standard they will reject it.
Sometimes they get lighter.
Over 60,000 Pounds Of Ammonium Nitrate Goes Missing From Train
https://news.yahoo.com/over-60-000-pounds-ammonium-152000456.html
I would think coal gons would be tight so as to not leak coad dust. Whereas old gons used to haul scrap steel would probably have a lot of holes knocked thru the bottoms.
rdamonSometimes they get lighter. Over 60,000 Pounds Of Ammonium Nitrate Goes Missing From Train https://news.yahoo.com/over-60-000-pounds-ammonium-152000456.html
60K pounds is a part load in today's railroading. I have doubts that it was ever loaded. You don't load 100 ton cars with 30 tons of product.
MidlandMike BigJim tree68 I don't know that coal (and coke), taconite, ballast, and similar materials are going to be greatly affected by water, as such. Yes, they can be greatly effected! We had a coal train one day after a very very hard rain and the water was actually shoshing out of the tops of some cars that could be seen from the head end. We couldn't get that train three miles out of Roanoke, Va. heading north! I would think coal gons would be tight so as to not leak coad dust. Whereas old gons used to haul scrap steel would probably have a lot of holes knocked thru the bottoms.
At B&O's Curtis Bay after coal hoppers were emptied - rotary car dumper - the cars would be inspected to see if they were in sufficient condition to haul imported iron ore that was unloaded from vessels at the Curtis Bay Ore Pier - some times the ore would be loaded directly into cars at the ore pier, other times the ore would be loaded from 'ground storage' locations around Curtis Bay (ore could be loaded into dump trucks at the pier and driven to the storage locations for later movement to the destination mill).
Bottom dump coal hoppers don't have to be and are not water tight.
Rotary gondolas have little drain holes with float plugs along the bottom of the car. The weight of the load presses the plug into the hole and closes it, but if the car is empty and starts to fill with water the plug will float up a bit and allow the water to drain out.
They aren't perfect seals, a little bit of product often leaks out and a during winter a hot load like coke or sulphur fresh out of the plant can lead to some spectacular icicles along the bottom of the car if there was snow inside.
Sometimes the plugs fall out along the track or when the car is emptied, leaving a hole that the product will most definitely spill out of. This is just one of many things that loading facilities watch for when they inspect newly arrived empty cars.
Hopper doors are most definitely not watertight.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
BaltACD rdamon Sometimes they get lighter. Over 60,000 Pounds Of Ammonium Nitrate Goes Missing From Train https://news.yahoo.com/over-60-000-pounds-ammonium-152000456.html 60K pounds is a part load in today's railroading. I have doubts that it was ever loaded. You don't load 100 ton cars with 30 tons of product.
rdamon Sometimes they get lighter. Over 60,000 Pounds Of Ammonium Nitrate Goes Missing From Train https://news.yahoo.com/over-60-000-pounds-ammonium-152000456.html
I wonder if it was a 3 or 4-bay hopper with about 30 tons in each bay, and only one was found to be empty.
Leaking hoppers are a common occurrence, and spills of everything they haul are common sights along the track and in yards.
I've seen some pretty old and dilapidated looking hoppers in fertilizer service out here. If they haul ammonium nitrate they will carry dangerous placards (oxidizer).
MidlandMike I would think coal gons would be tight so as to not leak coad dust. Whereas old gons used to haul scrap steel would probably have a lot of holes knocked thru the bottoms.
Well, normal coal hoppers are not water tight. But, if you are concerned about losing coal dust, then you haven't taken into account all of the dry coal dust that blows out of the tops of the cars during transit! Years and years of dust gone with the wind!
I was pushing one coal train at fifteen mph through downtown and the coal dust cloud was horrible. I felt sorry for pedestrians walking close by. Of course this amount of dust was rare, but, once a coal train got up to speed it was rare to not have to close the windows. Pusher units coupled next to the train collected a lot of dust.
BigJimBut, if you are concerned about losing coal dust, then you haven't taken into account all of the dry coal dust that blows out of the tops of the cars during transit!
IIRC, this has been a problem along the powder river route, with those selfsame fines contaminating the ballast.
We don't usually see many coal trains along the CSX Chicago Line through Utica. I happened to catch one several years ago. It was enveloped by a black cloud.
That Powder River Basin coal is low-rank, almost if not actually subbituminous, and is lamentably friable. What blows out early in the 'trip' is the fines generated during loading (which are considerable). I have seen arguments over the years that something like roller tarping ought to be adopted to keep this down... one point being that it would provide comparatively little help holding it in.
Something fun to observe is what happens if water gets into a load of good Pocahontas-style bituminous, and the load bounces around a while. Some very pronounced spontaneous-combustion-type oxidation can get started, and then you see steam and smoke rising up from the hoppers -- sometimes to a distressing extent.
OvermodThat Powder River Basin coal is low-rank, almost if not actually subbituminous, and is lamentably friable. What blows out early in the 'trip' is the fines generated during loading (which are considerable). I have seen arguments over the years that something like roller tarping ought to be adopted to keep this down... one point being that it would provide comparatively little help holding it in. Something fun to observe is what happens if water gets into a load of good Pocahontas-style bituminous, and the load bounces around a while. Some very pronounced spontaneous-combustion-type oxidation can get started, and then you see steam and smoke rising up from the hoppers -- sometimes to a distressing extent.
I thought (I know that can get me in trouble) a decade or so ago, after BNSF & UP had to rebuild the PRB joint coal line after the ballast stopped draining account of the accumulated 'fines' from the multitude of coal trains that had operated over the line - they jointly required the shippers to spray some form of plasticizer on the tops of the loads to minimize coal dust blowing from the cars.
That's probably true about Wyoming coal being sprayed. Someone recently posted pics of a couple of eastern coal trains rolling along in really obvious dark clouds, which I don't think happens out west.
I think there was once an outfit that advertised "blue coal" as a result of such an overspray. Whatever they sprayed on the coal in the cars was blue.
I've seen videos of coal either being washed or sprayed as discussed.
Euclid I wonder how long it takes this coal train to lose 100 lbs. of coal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECfgeXZbGJE
Might just as well have been steam loco powered!
BigJim Euclid I wonder how long it takes this coal train to lose 100 lbs. of coal: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ECfgeXZbGJE Might just as well have been steam loco powered!
I have never seen that much coal dust coming off of a train, but what most surprised me about the video is the amount of coal blowing off that is not fine dust. It sounds like 1/4 – 1/2 -inch size. You can hear them popping and cracking kind of like the start of a hail storm.
BaltACD I thought (I know that can get me in trouble) a decade or so ago, after BNSF & UP had to rebuild the PRB joint coal line after the ballast stopped draining account of the accumulated 'fines' from the multitude of coal trains that had operated over the line - they jointly required the shippers to spray some form of plasticizer on the tops of the loads to minimize coal dust blowing from the cars.
Yes, there was a spare of derailments in (I believe) the mid-aughts, caused by track surface problems attributed to coal dust in the ballast. BNSF stepped up its undercutting program and introduced a new provision into its tariffs requiring shippers to reduce fugitive coal dust by a certain amount. The STB ruled that this tariff provision was unreasonable because a shipper wouldn't know if they were compliant until after the shipment was done. BNSF added a "safe harbor" provision saying that shippers could comply by a.) profiling the load in a certain way that experimentally has been show to reduce dust and b.) spraying it with a surfactant. The STB approved this approach and it has been in effect ever since, see https://www.bnsf.com/ship-with-bnsf/energy/coal/coal-dust.html.
I believe that BNSF added at least one "respray" facility (operated by BNSF rather than by the shippers) at an intermediate point as well, to re-apply the surfactant before passing through an environmentally-sensitive area.
Dan
dpeltier BaltACD I thought (I know that can get me in trouble) a decade or so ago, after BNSF & UP had to rebuild the PRB joint coal line after the ballast stopped draining account of the accumulated 'fines' from the multitude of coal trains that had operated over the line - they jointly required the shippers to spray some form of plasticizer on the tops of the loads to minimize coal dust blowing from the cars. Yes, there was a spare of derailments in (I believe) the mid-aughts, caused by track surface problems attributed to coal dust in the ballast. BNSF stepped up its undercutting program and introduced a new provision into its tariffs requiring shippers to reduce fugitive coal dust by a certain amount. The STB ruled that this tariff provision was unreasonable because a shipper wouldn't know if they were compliant until after the shipment was done. BNSF added a "safe harbor" provision saying that shippers could comply by a.) profiling the load in a certain way that experimentally has been show to reduce dust and b.) spraying it with a surfactant. The STB approved this approach and it has been in effect ever since, see https://www.bnsf.com/ship-with-bnsf/energy/coal/coal-dust.html. I believe that BNSF added at least one "respray" facility (operated by BNSF rather than by the shippers) at an intermediate point as well, to re-apply the surfactant before passing through an environmentally-sensitive area. Dan
Glad my snyapses are still firing and making sense.
The only way rain or snow could affect the shipper and consignee would be for freight rates to be based on Destination Weights where the weight of the Gods elements get included in what is unloaded. However, the unloading actions in most cases will separate water from the load before the weight gets measured.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.