78-FOOT RAIL VS 39-FOOT RAIL

The economies resulting from the use of 78-foot rail as compared with conventional 39-foot rail was studied. Test stretches were installed at three locations. Each location included one mile of track laid with 78-foot rail and one mile of track laid with 39-foot rail. Test results indicate that there has been a saving by the use of 78-foot rail. There should be an increase in savings credited to 78-foot rail when the need for reformed bars develops. Relatively larger joint gaps on the 78-foot rail as compared to the 39-foot rail have not as yet shown an appreciable effect on rail end batter or surfacing costs. End hardening of rail has apparently prevented excessive batter. The additional rail anchors applied to the test stretches in 1954, have been successful in preventing further accumulation of wide joint gaps in the 78-foot rail, and have also prevented welds from moving into tie plate areas.

• Corporate Authors:

  Penn Central Transportation Company

  Transportation Center, 6 Penn Center Plaza
  Philadelphia, PA  United States  19104
• Authors:
  • Code, C J
• Publication Date: 1961-10-23

Media Info

• Features: Figures; Photos; Tables;
• Pagination: 16 p.

Subject/Index Terms

• TRT Terms: Concrete hardening; Costs; Economics; Hardness; Maintenance management; Maintenance of way; Rail joints; Railroad rails; Technology; Welded rail
• Uncontrolled Terms: Maintenance costs
• Geographic Terms: United States
• Old TRIS Terms: Rail end batter
• Subject Areas: Economics; Finance; Railroads;

Filing Info

• Accession Number: 00040342
• Record Type: Publication
• Report/Paper Numbers: Test No. 552 Prog Rpt
• Files: TRIS
• Created Date: Jul 8 1994 12:00AM