Rail Conf Ppt

5/22/2018 Rail Conf Ppt

1/22

2013 WisDOT Freight Railroad Conference November 13, 2013 Tinjum and Edil

Crowne Plaza Hotel Slide 1/16

Geological Engineering Engineering Professional Development Civil & Environmental Engineering

James Tinjum, PE, PhD

Tuncer Edil, PE, PhD

Damien Hesse, MS Candidate

Tolga Dolcek, MS Candidate

Ben Warren, MS Candidate

Remediating Fouled Ballast and

Enhancing Rail Freight Capacity

by Polyurethane Technology

UW-Madison Rail Substructure Research Program


2/22



Background: Railway Track Components

Ballast

Tie

Subballast

Rail

Tie

Shoulder

Compacted Subgrade

Natural Subgrade

SubgradeSubstructure

Super-

strucutur

e

Fastening

System

Deterioration in the substructure leads to permanent deformation in

the track, threatening rail operations

Prevent track deformation while enhancing rail operations

Ballast layer deteriorates under numerous loading repetitions

Problem:

Objective:


3/22



Motivation: Track Maintenance Costs

Maintenance of ballast is $500M/ year

For 150,000 km of Class 1 freight rail in the US,(Chrismer and Davis 2000)

Fouling Level Increases During Service Life of Track


4/22



Types of Fouling

Coal Fouling Mineral Fouling

Clay Fouling

Non-Cohesive Fouling (i.e., between P4 & P200)

Clay/Cohesive Fouling

(i.e., P200)

Frac Sand


5/22



Frac Sand Industry


6/22



Large-Scale Cyclic Triaxial (LSCT)

600-mm

Cyclic loading machine

to simulate railway traffic

Automated data acquisitionsystem (LabVIEW)

Axle load: 20, 30, and 40 tons

Equivalent to:Deviator Stress, = 300 kPa

Confining Stress, = 90 kPa

(Ebrahimi 2011)


7/222013 WisDOT Freight Railroad Conference November 13, 2013 Tinjum and Edil


Ebrahimi, A., Tinjum, M. J., Edil, T. B., 2010, LARGE-SCALE, CYCLIC TRIAXIAL TESTING OF RAIL BALLAST,AREMA 2010 Annual Conference, Orlando, FL.

xamp e esu sDeformational Characteristics of Ballast




Permanent Deformation with Moisture

w= % of moisture

FI= Fouling Index (%)= P4+P200

GT= Gross Tones for Traffic

610

30NMGT

Million Gross Tones =




0.0%

0.5%

1.0%

1.5%

2.0%

2.5%

3.0%

1 100 10,000 1,000,000

PlasticStrain(%)

Number of Cycles

Igneous Ballast, 70/140 Frac Sand

w=0

w=4

w=14

EPD Short Course

J.M. Tinjum

Slide 9

Mitigating and Monitoring Railway Ballast

Fouling Mechanisms

September 24, 2013

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%

8.0%

1 100 10,000 1,000,000

PlasticStrain(%)

Number of Cycles

Dolomite Ballast, 20/40 Frac Sand

w=0

w=4

w=14

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

1 100 10,000 1,000,000

RateofPlastic

Strain

Number of Cycles

Dolomite Ballast, 20/40 Frac Sand

w=0

w=4

w=14

0.00

0.01

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.050.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.10

1 100 10,000 1,000,000

RateofPlasticS

train(%)

Number of Cycles

Igneous Ballast, 70/140 Frac Sand

w=0

w=4

w=14




Leading to the Dip in the Track

Mile marker 74.7 part of the Dayton Dip located near Ottowa, IL




UW-Madison Railroad Research

Mitigating Ballast Fouling Impact and Enhancing Rail

Freight Capacity

Prevent ballast layer deterioration and track deformation

Enhance railway track capacity and maintained capabilities

Polyurethane reinforcement of ballast layer is proposed

SteveReed

Dr. Randy Brown Andrew Keene

BenWarren


12/22



Uretek Polyurethane

Uretek Polyurethane:

High density expandingthermoset resin system

Reaches 90% of full compressive and tensile strength in15 minutes

Research Involves Use of Technology With Rail Ballast


13/22



Materials: Uretek USA Inc. Polyurethane

Uretek Polyurethane: Rigid-Polyurethane Foam

High density, expanding,thermoset, resin system Reaches 90% of full compressive and tensile strength in

15 minutes

Research Involves Use of Technology With Rail Ballast

Rigid-Polyurethane Foam (RPF)Polyurethane-Stabilized Ballast (PSB)


14/22



Methods: Large-Scale Cyclic Triaxial (LSCT)

600-mm

Cyclic loading machine

to simulate railway traffic

Automated data acquisitionsystem (LabView)

Axle load: 20, 30, and 40 tons

Equivalent to:Deviator Stress, = 300 kPaConfining Stress, = 90 kPa

(Ebrahimi 2011)


15/22



Flexural Beam Testing

L = 0.4 m

Unconfined Compressive Strength Testing

L = 0.76 m


16/22



0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

300 350 375 400

CumulativePla

sticStrain,P

(%)

Deviator Stress, d(kPa)

Fouled Ballast, FI 5% & MC 15%

Clean Ballast

PS-Clean Ballast

PS-Fouled Ballast, FI 25% & MC 15%

PS-Recycled Ballast, P25.4 mm & R19 mm

Results: Stabilized and Un-stabilized

MC = % Moisture Content

FI = Fouling Index (%)= P4+P200

Clean Ballast Reference Line

PS = Polyurethane Stabilized

P4 = 4.75 mm

P200 = 0.075 mm

Tested over 200,000 loading repetitions in cyclic triaxial compression


17/22



PSB and Constituent Mechanical Properties

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

PSB RPF Ballast

MechanicalStrengths(kPa)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

Compres

sive

Flexural

Tensile

PSB RPF Ballast

ElasticModuli(MPa)

RPF= 200 kg/m3

b= 1,580 kg/m3

RPF = Rigid Polyurethane Foam


18/22



Material Property Summary

Mechanical Properties

PSB plastic deformational behavior far less than cleanballast, recycled ballast, and fouled ballast

PSB elastic moduli typically less than ballast

Further Considerations and Restated Questions:

Effect of lower modulus on overall track response?

Fatigue lifecycle for PSB layers?

Next Step: Modeling PSB in Track-Substructure


19/22



PSB Model Percolation-Injection


Concept: Modelpercolation-injectionmethod for PSBstabilization

Goal: Determine track elasticresponse

Result: Areas of lower modulusdid not have negative impact


20/22



3DView

Longitudinal View

Lateral View PSB Trackbed Layer

PSB Model Subsurface-Injection

Concept: Model subsurface-injectionmethodfor PSB trackbeds

Goal: Determine strain at base of layer forinput into analytical fatigue model

Result: Strain measured would give PSBfatigue lifecycle at 500-1000 MGT


t = Flexural Strain

(Rose & Konduri 2006)


21/22



Conclusions

Mechanical Properties

PSB outperforms other track-substructure materials

PSB had typically higher elastic deformational behavior

Feasibility of Stabilization in Track-Substructure Stabilization does not have negative impact on elastic response

Injection methods are feasible for track stabilization

PSB can greatly increase track mechanistic lifecycle


22/22


Questions?

Acknowledgements

Center for Freight InfrastructureResearch and Education (CFIRE)

Uretek USA Inc.

UW-Madison Laboratory Staff:

William Lang

Xiaodong Buff Wang

Special Thanks To:

Dr. Ali Ebrahimi Zhipeng Su

References

ASTM Standards, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, ASTMInternational, West Conshohocken, PA

Ebrahimi, A. (2011). Deformational Behavior of Fouled RailwayBallast. PhD thesis, Department of Civil and EnvironmentalEngineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison.

Ebrahimi, A. and Keene, A.K. Maintenance Planning of Railway Ballast,In proceedings of the AREMA 2011 Annual Conference,Minneapolis, Minnesota, September 18-22.

Keene, A. (2012). Mitigating ballast fouling and enhancing rail-freightcapacity. MS thesis, Dept. of Civil and Env. Eng., University ofWisconsin-Madison.

Rose, J.G. & Konduri, K.G. (2006). "KENTRACKA Railway TrackbedStructural Design Program."AREMA 2006 Annual Conference,

Louisville, Kentucky, September 17-20. Gizem Bozkurt Ben Warren

Documents

Rail Conf Ppt