Bad train pictures

[edblysard]

Hi Nora,

One of the main reasons deal with the fact that mechanical engineers want the maximum amount of strength from the minimum amount of material.
If you made rail square, or a triangle, the amount of steel would double or tripple per yard, manufacturing cost follows suit, as does transportation and installation.

The contact surface between rail head, (ball) and wheel is quite small, you could cover the area with a dime.

In cross section, the top of the rail is slightly rounded, and the wheels have a slight taper, they are bigger towards the flange side, and taper to a smaller dia. towards the outside.

This allows the contact area to be small, and allows the wheels to track, or follow the rail.

The wheel set is smaller between the flanges from wheel to wheel than the rails are set apart from rail to rail, to allow some sideways play and prevent binding in curves.

The railcar balances on the wheels, which balance on the rails, if the flanges were in constant contact with the rail, they would wear away in one trip.

The shape of the rail is designed to allow it to bend, if it was a thick solid shape from top to bottom, you would have to cast or fabricate each section of a curve, as it is now, you can bend the rail into the curve, then spike it to the ties, if it was any more "solid" it wouldnt bend or flex.

Keep in mind the top of the rail will wear away, so why add more material under the part that is wearing away if you dont have to?

The weight of the cars is transmitted to the ball, or crown of the rail, then through the tang of the body of the rail to the foot then the ties to the roadbed.

Any more material added to the sides wouldnt help in any respect, all the weight, for the most part, goes straight down, what we currently use handles the job of transferring the weight to the ground quite well.

And the way rail is made allows for quick, cheap production.

Hot bar stock is run throught rollers, which use many tons per square inch to roll, or shape the rail.

Because its shape allows for flexability, you can run as long a piece of rail as you want.

As for steel shapes, what we think of as heavy rail is really quite light, averages about 135 lbs per yard.

Making it thicker, square or triangle shaped as noted, would make it much heavier, easily upwards of 200 lbs per yard, and require even more heavy duty equipment to make, transport and install it.

The reason rail transportation is so efficent is due completly to the fact that friction between the steel wheels and steel rail is so small.

Again, the contact area between the wheel tread and the rail head is about the size of a dime.

In contrast, your most efficent automobile still has a contact area between the rubber tire and road surface about the size of a coffee cup sacuer.

Next time you see a Dash 9 roll by, think about this.
You just watched 440,000 lbs (220 tons) run by you, balancing all that weight, on 12 dimes.

Its already as efficent as it can get.

We can make it all bigger, heavier rail and more massive machines, but the basic wheel and rail shapes have reached to top end of the design curve.

Ed

[edblysard]

Hi Nora,

One of the main reasons deal with the fact that mechanical engineers want the maximum amount of strength from the minimum amount of material.
If you made rail square, or a triangle, the amount of steel would double or tripple per yard, manufacturing cost follows suit, as does transportation and installation.

The contact surface between rail head, (ball) and wheel is quite small, you could cover the area with a dime.

In cross section, the top of the rail is slightly rounded, and the wheels have a slight taper, they are bigger towards the flange side, and taper to a smaller dia. towards the outside.

This allows the contact area to be small, and allows the wheels to track, or follow the rail.

The wheel set is smaller between the flanges from wheel to wheel than the rails are set apart from rail to rail, to allow some sideways play and prevent binding in curves.

The railcar balances on the wheels, which balance on the rails, if the flanges were in constant contact with the rail, they would wear away in one trip.

The shape of the rail is designed to allow it to bend, if it was a thick solid shape from top to bottom, you would have to cast or fabricate each section of a curve, as it is now, you can bend the rail into the curve, then spike it to the ties, if it was any more "solid" it wouldnt bend or flex.

Keep in mind the top of the rail will wear away, so why add more material under the part that is wearing away if you dont have to?

The weight of the cars is transmitted to the ball, or crown of the rail, then through the tang of the body of the rail to the foot then the ties to the roadbed.

Any more material added to the sides wouldnt help in any respect, all the weight, for the most part, goes straight down, what we currently use handles the job of transferring the weight to the ground quite well.

And the way rail is made allows for quick, cheap production.

Hot bar stock is run throught rollers, which use many tons per square inch to roll, or shape the rail.

Because its shape allows for flexability, you can run as long a piece of rail as you want.

As for steel shapes, what we think of as heavy rail is really quite light, averages about 135 lbs per yard.

Making it thicker, square or triangle shaped as noted, would make it much heavier, easily upwards of 200 lbs per yard, and require even more heavy duty equipment to make, transport and install it.

The reason rail transportation is so efficent is due completly to the fact that friction between the steel wheels and steel rail is so small.

Again, the contact area between the wheel tread and the rail head is about the size of a dime.

In contrast, your most efficent automobile still has a contact area between the rubber tire and road surface about the size of a coffee cup sacuer.

Next time you see a Dash 9 roll by, think about this.
You just watched 440,000 lbs (220 tons) run by you, balancing all that weight, on 12 dimes.

Its already as efficent as it can get.

We can make it all bigger, heavier rail and more massive machines, but the basic wheel and rail shapes have reached to top end of the design curve.

Ed

[cherokee woman]

Another question: What is "hooping up orders"?

[cherokee woman]

Another question: What is "hooping up orders"?

[Anonymous]

Here's a stupid question. What would happen if you were hooping up orders and you missed them?

[Anonymous]

Here's a stupid question. What would happen if you were hooping up orders and you missed them?

[CShaveRR]

That one's easy, Nora...If you had rail in the shape of a rectangle, or trapezoid, you'd have a lot of added weight without much added strength. The ability to transport and handle these huge rails would not be as much of a problem now as it was in the past, but cost would still be a factor. Besides, without the flat part on the bottom, how would you spike it down?

[CShaveRR]

That one's easy, Nora...If you had rail in the shape of a rectangle, or trapezoid, you'd have a lot of added weight without much added strength. The ability to transport and handle these huge rails would not be as much of a problem now as it was in the past, but cost would still be a factor. Besides, without the flat part on the bottom, how would you spike it down?

[Nora]

Why is rail shaped the way it is (cross-section wise)? Why not just have it straight on the sides instead of having the skinny part? (I'll just be grateful if that makes sense to anyone, actually...I shouldn't even be awake at this hour, much less trying to communicate with humanity...)

--Nora

[Nora]

Why is rail shaped the way it is (cross-section wise)? Why not just have it straight on the sides instead of having the skinny part? (I'll just be grateful if that makes sense to anyone, actually...I shouldn't even be awake at this hour, much less trying to communicate with humanity...)

--Nora

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

I'm not sure that there is that much of a difference between road slugs and yard slugs since the tractive effort curve falls off at the same rate for either service and both are for extra tractive effort at low speeds.

The major difference that comes to mind might be that yard slugs usually have Type A trucks and road slugs would have Type B or other road trucks. Some slugs carry auxiliary fuel tanks (SP and others) and some have cabs (CSX & BNSF), either of which would be useful in road, yard or hump service.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

I'm not sure that there is that much of a difference between road slugs and yard slugs since the tractive effort curve falls off at the same rate for either service and both are for extra tractive effort at low speeds.

The major difference that comes to mind might be that yard slugs usually have Type A trucks and road slugs would have Type B or other road trucks. Some slugs carry auxiliary fuel tanks (SP and others) and some have cabs (CSX & BNSF), either of which would be useful in road, yard or hump service.

[Anonymous]

Ok, a new slug question [}:)]

I was at a Rock Island web site and noticed they had two catagories of slugs. One was Road Slug, and the other was Yard Slug. I know that slugs would borrow power from another locomotive and the slug was useful in helping to start the train moving, at around 20 mph or so the slug would cut out as the power then was needed by the host loco. Is there a difference between yard slugs and road slugs. Are road slugs able to operate at a higher mph than yard slugs?

[Anonymous]

Ok, a new slug question [}:)]

I was at a Rock Island web site and noticed they had two catagories of slugs. One was Road Slug, and the other was Yard Slug. I know that slugs would borrow power from another locomotive and the slug was useful in helping to start the train moving, at around 20 mph or so the slug would cut out as the power then was needed by the host loco. Is there a difference between yard slugs and road slugs. Are road slugs able to operate at a higher mph than yard slugs?

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Another issue of an apparent downgrade that's really an upgrade would be that of SD40's rebuilt to SD38-2's for hump and transfer service. Turbochargers are a high maintenance item so replacing them with a roots blower makes economic sense when the extra horsepower isn't needed for low-speed service.

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

Another issue of an apparent downgrade that's really an upgrade would be that of SD40's rebuilt to SD38-2's for hump and transfer service. Turbochargers are a high maintenance item so replacing them with a roots blower makes economic sense when the extra horsepower isn't needed for low-speed service.

[edblysard]

No, not downgraded at all, in fact, from some points of view, its a big up grade.
The 20 cyl diesel was prone to crankchaft whip and failure, the 16 cyl was pretty rock solid.
Keep in mind, 20 cyl vs 16 means four more cylinders worth of moving parts to maintain, and the 600 hp difference ended up not being worth the maintainance headaches nor the extra fuel consumption.
Also realize the parts inventory for the 16 cylinder was on hand, everybody had SD40s and SD40-2.
As for the electrical upgrade, it mostly consisted of replaceing a lot of relays with modular cards.
When something failed, you didnt have to test each relay one at a time to find the short, you could ask the simple on board fault code system what was wrong, then pull and replace that card for that subsystem.
Very much like the computer in you mid 80s automobile, it really isnt a computer, but a series of fault code chips and control modules.
When the rebuild was finished, you in essence had a brand new SD40, with all the new stuff on it, good for another million miles of service anywhere you would have used a SD40.
As for down graded service, would you invest that much time and money in a machine you didnt plan on using every chance you could?

Stay Frosty,
Ed

[edblysard]

No, not downgraded at all, in fact, from some points of view, its a big up grade.
The 20 cyl diesel was prone to crankchaft whip and failure, the 16 cyl was pretty rock solid.
Keep in mind, 20 cyl vs 16 means four more cylinders worth of moving parts to maintain, and the 600 hp difference ended up not being worth the maintainance headaches nor the extra fuel consumption.
Also realize the parts inventory for the 16 cylinder was on hand, everybody had SD40s and SD40-2.
As for the electrical upgrade, it mostly consisted of replaceing a lot of relays with modular cards.
When something failed, you didnt have to test each relay one at a time to find the short, you could ask the simple on board fault code system what was wrong, then pull and replace that card for that subsystem.
Very much like the computer in you mid 80s automobile, it really isnt a computer, but a series of fault code chips and control modules.
When the rebuild was finished, you in essence had a brand new SD40, with all the new stuff on it, good for another million miles of service anywhere you would have used a SD40.
As for down graded service, would you invest that much time and money in a machine you didnt plan on using every chance you could?

Stay Frosty,
Ed

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by northwesterner

Thanks for your prompt reply, Mike.
One more: The rebuild from SD45 to SD40-2 entails putting in a lower h.p. diesel but updated -2 controls? Is that because the engine in question is being put into downgraded service?
I'm confused (but who isn't).

I would like to hear this one answered. [:p]

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by northwesterner

Thanks for your prompt reply, Mike.
One more: The rebuild from SD45 to SD40-2 entails putting in a lower h.p. diesel but updated -2 controls? Is that because the engine in question is being put into downgraded service?
I'm confused (but who isn't).

I would like to hear this one answered. [:p]

[northwesterner]

Thanks for your prompt reply, Mike.
One more: The rebuild from SD45 to SD40-2 entails putting in a lower h.p. diesel but updated -2 controls? Is that because the engine in question is being put into downgraded service?
I'm confused (but who isn't).

[northwesterner]

Thanks for your prompt reply, Mike.
One more: The rebuild from SD45 to SD40-2 entails putting in a lower h.p. diesel but updated -2 controls? Is that because the engine in question is being put into downgraded service?
I'm confused (but who isn't).

[rrnut282]

You're going to hate this, but the answer to the rebuilds question is, it depends. It depends on the amount of money the RR (bean counters) are willing to spend, what parts are available, if they are trying to fix a problem (like crankshafts prone to failure or electrical faults) or just want to get another milliion miles out of their investment. Most of the time a rebuilt unit looks like it came from the factory as most of the changes will be internal. Sometimes, like #551 you mention, the RR reconfigures the appliances on a merger unit to standardize on locations and parts to save maintanence money. Sometimes, like on GP10's (rebuilt GP9's) there are sizable bulges (newer style air filters) in different locations on the body to distinguish it.

To answer your other question, a SD45 rebuilt into a SD40-2 means the3600h.p. V20 prime mover has been replaced with a 3000h.p. V16. The electrical controls are also replaced to use as much of the -2 components as possible. Externally, there will be few clues that it is a rebuilt unit, unless they change fuel tanks or relocate air resevoirs, but there isn't any reason to do those things.

[rrnut282]

You're going to hate this, but the answer to the rebuilds question is, it depends. It depends on the amount of money the RR (bean counters) are willing to spend, what parts are available, if they are trying to fix a problem (like crankshafts prone to failure or electrical faults) or just want to get another milliion miles out of their investment. Most of the time a rebuilt unit looks like it came from the factory as most of the changes will be internal. Sometimes, like #551 you mention, the RR reconfigures the appliances on a merger unit to standardize on locations and parts to save maintanence money. Sometimes, like on GP10's (rebuilt GP9's) there are sizable bulges (newer style air filters) in different locations on the body to distinguish it.

To answer your other question, a SD45 rebuilt into a SD40-2 means the3600h.p. V20 prime mover has been replaced with a 3000h.p. V16. The electrical controls are also replaced to use as much of the -2 components as possible. Externally, there will be few clues that it is a rebuilt unit, unless they change fuel tanks or relocate air resevoirs, but there isn't any reason to do those things.

[northwesterner]

I'm not an expert on modern locomotives, so does a rebuild (an SD45 rebuilt as an SD40-2) look like the original model or the new one? More basically, are there external differences between the models? Or can you tell only by noting the engine # and checking out that RR's roster?

I see UPY #551 almost daily switching cars at the yard paralleling the JFK expressway in Chicago, and I found out that it was originally CNW #4406, with the bell on the nose of the short hood. As UPY #551, the bell is somewhere else, and it looks relatively new. So how extensive are rebuilds, generally?

[northwesterner]

I'm not an expert on modern locomotives, so does a rebuild (an SD45 rebuilt as an SD40-2) look like the original model or the new one? More basically, are there external differences between the models? Or can you tell only by noting the engine # and checking out that RR's roster?

I see UPY #551 almost daily switching cars at the yard paralleling the JFK expressway in Chicago, and I found out that it was originally CNW #4406, with the bell on the nose of the short hood. As UPY #551, the bell is somewhere else, and it looks relatively new. So how extensive are rebuilds, generally?

[dharmon]

So here's a question....how much does it cost to ship by rail, say vs truck? If I wanted to have a boxcar delivered to my plant in San Diego and pick up a load of ...I don't know..sun tan oil to go to Chicago..like they need it....what would it cost me. Do they charge by carload, weight, distance or a combination?

[dharmon]

So here's a question....how much does it cost to ship by rail, say vs truck? If I wanted to have a boxcar delivered to my plant in San Diego and pick up a load of ...I don't know..sun tan oil to go to Chicago..like they need it....what would it cost me. Do they charge by carload, weight, distance or a combination?

[mudchicken]

Mikeygaw:

Nothing is truly abandoned until the Federal Government says so via the Surface Transportation Board ("STB", the old Interstate Commerce Commission/"ICC") - state laws take a backseat to federal rules and many state rules are unenforcible. If there is not an AB- or FD- docket with an attached decision out there, it most likely is NOT abandoned. There are multiple cases out there where a local entity declared a lined abandoned only to be overruled by the Feds.

To start, take a look at http://www.stb.dot.gov....toggle into the "Electronic Reading Room" , "publications" and "FAQ" areas and start reading. ... to see where states and local government misinterpret the law, use the STB search engine and type in "Lees Summit" and "Kent, Washington" for openers (there area at least a dozen similar related cases in recent history as well)

Dave H. hit the nail on the color of title issue in his last 6 sentences. There are far to many people out there with a warped or totally wrong view of what abandonment is. A large part of my job is involved in sorting out messes created by others who guessed (wrongly so) that a rail line was abandoned or had reverted. Between the screwed-up view of the railroads taught in schools in their history classes and "old wives tales" that get more bizarre in each succeeding generation, the general public is often clueless when the abandonment issue comes into play.

I deal with, almost daily, certain county officials, civil engineers, surveyors and landmen who should never be turned loose around railroads. Some will listen when you try to teach how things are supposed to work and others won't. The ones that won't listen are in need of having their license revoked and be told to do something else for a living (for the public's long term benefit)...

Mudchicken[banghead][banghead][banghead]

[mudchicken]

Mikeygaw:

Nothing is truly abandoned until the Federal Government says so via the Surface Transportation Board ("STB", the old Interstate Commerce Commission/"ICC") - state laws take a backseat to federal rules and many state rules are unenforcible. If there is not an AB- or FD- docket with an attached decision out there, it most likely is NOT abandoned. There are multiple cases out there where a local entity declared a lined abandoned only to be overruled by the Feds.

To start, take a look at http://www.stb.dot.gov....toggle into the "Electronic Reading Room" , "publications" and "FAQ" areas and start reading. ... to see where states and local government misinterpret the law, use the STB search engine and type in "Lees Summit" and "Kent, Washington" for openers (there area at least a dozen similar related cases in recent history as well)

Dave H. hit the nail on the color of title issue in his last 6 sentences. There are far to many people out there with a warped or totally wrong view of what abandonment is. A large part of my job is involved in sorting out messes created by others who guessed (wrongly so) that a rail line was abandoned or had reverted. Between the screwed-up view of the railroads taught in schools in their history classes and "old wives tales" that get more bizarre in each succeeding generation, the general public is often clueless when the abandonment issue comes into play.

I deal with, almost daily, certain county officials, civil engineers, surveyors and landmen who should never be turned loose around railroads. Some will listen when you try to teach how things are supposed to work and others won't. The ones that won't listen are in need of having their license revoked and be told to do something else for a living (for the public's long term benefit)...

Mudchicken[banghead][banghead][banghead]