OERM is in the process of getting bids for its next carhouse. We hope to put up a 6-track wide building that is 600 feet long. In case you're wondering, yes, it will have fire sprinklers.

My question today concerns developing per foot costs for different types of track construction. What is the most economical way of getting 3,600 feet of track inside a building? Is there a method of construction that will be less expensive than constructing track in traditional fashion on top of wooden ties with ballast that might also get you a hard surface floor at the same time?

As a storage (as opposed to display) building, a ballasted floor would be acceptable, but if the construction method used gets us a hard surface floor at the same time, that's fine too. We have the rail on hand, but we don't have enough ties, so before we undergo the expense of buying the ties (thats 2,057 ties based on 3600 track feet on 21" centers), we're wondering if there's a better approach. I gather that new fastener systems are constantly being developed for use with concrete surfaces, but not being a track person I'm not aware of what's out there that people have actually used for track construction.

When we built our 3' gauge enginehouse over ten years ago, concrete footers were poured for the two rails. The footer had bolts sticking out of them to which the rail was then attached. A second concrete pour filled in the space between and the end result was a level concrete floor with rails (appropriate for this building which is very much a display area). I don't know if I want to try 3,600 track feet of this, however.

I would appreciate any suggestions for alternate methods of track construction inside buildings that some of you may have utilized or may otherwise be aware of. Any examples of recent costs would also be welcome.

Thanks in advance for any suggestions.

Orange Empire Railway Museum
jsmatlak@earthlink.net

You could do it the way SEPTA (Philly) and the TTC (Toronto) construct street track. They weld T rail together and then bolt it to steel ties. You could probably bolt the rail together instead of welding it. Once everything is surfaced properly, order lots and lots of concrete to fill in the whole thing. I think SEPTA does one pour while the TTC uses two pours (steel ties rest on first layer of concrete.)

That's a quick and dirty description that could give you an idea. It's probably not cheap though.

Matthew Mummert

Rockhill Trolley Museum
mlmummert@suscom.net

John -

great question. I'll be interested in the resulting discussion.

Several years ago, I brought up a civil engineer. He recommended a 12" wide by 18" deep ditch, with two rails, one on top of the other supported by steel clips. Make sure the bottom rail is up off the dirt with concrete blocks (to avoid rust). Also, a rail sideways makes a good flang. You could make one pour to support the rails, or, poor the entire floor.

WOW! This is one large building. What will it be constrcuted of? Also - close track centers for better storage?

One final thought - for simple storage - if you use wood ties - I would use 24" centers for ties at a max - maybe even 30-36", depending on the weight of the items stored.

Keep us posted on other ideas.

Jim

Pacific Southwest Railway Museum Homepage
Jim@sdrm.org

> John -

> great question. I'll be interested in the
> resulting discussion.

> Several years ago, I brought up a civil
> engineer. He recommended a 12" wide by
> 18" deep ditch, with two rails, one on
> top of the other supported by steel clips.
> Make sure the bottom rail is up off the dirt
> with concrete blocks (to avoid rust). Also,
> a rail sideways makes a good flang. You
> could make one pour to support the rails,
> or, poor the entire floor.

> WOW! This is one large building. What will
> it be constrcuted of? Also - close track
> centers for better storage?

> One final thought - for simple storage - if
> you use wood ties - I would use 24"
> centers for ties at a max - maybe even
> 30-36", depending on the weight of the
> items stored.

> Keep us posted on other ideas.

> Jim

Jim- you raise a good question on the tie spacing. Obviously this is not the BNSF main line, mostly we're talking about things sitting in the same spot for long periods of time. What are the trade offs involved in trying to extended your tie spacing inside carbarns? Has anyone done this and were you happy with the results?

To answer your question, it is a steel building, not unlike our existing Carhouse Four. Nothing fancy, just the basics. Track centers are 15' except between tracks 3 and 4 where the spacing is 18' to permit use of a center column.

Orange Empire Railway Museum
jsmatlak@earthlink.net

> Jim- you raise a good question on the tie
> spacing. Obviously this is not the BNSF main
> line, mostly we're talking about things
> sitting in the same spot for long periods of
> time. What are the trade offs involved in
> trying to extended your tie spacing inside
> carbarns? Has anyone done this and were you
> happy with the results?

The two functions of the crossties are support
of the load and gauge restraint. With concrete
poured around the track, the gauge isn't going
to go anyway, and on straight track with almost
0 speed it doesn't matter much anyway.

How you spread the load depends on what's under
the concrete. Probably the cheapest way to
construct this is to have a ballast layer,
with ties completely in the ballast, then a
concrete pour up to the rail head, using a strip
of expendable wood to block out the flangeway.

Depending on the weight of rail being used, you
could easily go 36-48" on center with the ties.
You'll have a nice firm layer of ballast directly
under the base of the rail to provide further
support.

6 tracks x 600'...wow, that is one HUGE building!
Will that house almost everything you have
outside?

webmaster@bera.org

> 6 tracks x 600'...wow, that is one HUGE
> building!
> Will that house almost everything you have
> outside?

To answer for John, no it will not "house almost everything" we have outside. We have more than 200 rail vehicles total in our collections and utility fleets. It will allow OERM to make significant progress toward that goal. It will allow us to:

1) reconfigure the storage/exhibits in our existing 4-track, steel car storage building,

2) place more cars in need of conservation undercover

3) change the use of some track from "storage" to "operating."

Brian Norden

> To answer for John, no it will not
> "house almost everything" we have
> outside. We have more than 200 rail vehicles
> total in our collections and utility fleets.
> It will allow OERM to make significant
> progress toward that goal. It will allow us
> to:

> 1) reconfigure the storage/exhibits in our
> existing 4-track, steel car storage
> building,

> 2) place more cars in need of conservation
> undercover

> 3) change the use of some track from
> "storage" to
> "operating."

> Brian Norden

To reduce the problem to its lowest common denominator, I would suggest putting down a layer of 6" pit run gravel over your native ground and putting down ties at 30" on centre, without ballast and spiking the rail direct to the ties. For alignment, I would drive in a piece of rebar through every fifth tie into the gravel sub grade. Also, the gravel sub grade should be rolled out with a vibrating roller to achieve a good level of compaction. When you get around to a concrete floor, this will give you a good base upon which to set ot your final track and concrete floor. If the building is strictly long term storage, then I wouldn't go much farther that this for now.


gandmferguson@shaw.ca

I hope this suggestion is helpfull. A few years ago, I went to Knott's Berry Farm and paid lots of attention to the 36" steam train, enough to get offered a cab ride. What I noticed was that where the rails crossed the large, paved open area in the center of the park, they had used a very heavy, modern rail.

In other words, while the rest of the line was laid with a jointed "scale rail", appropriate for narrrow gauge operations, the track that was buried under the asphalt was WAY oversized for the loads. Obviously, they did not want to ever be bothered with track maintenance issues beneath the asphalt area that sees thousands of people walking on it every day.

It was clearly visible where they joined, as the weld looked like a joint between 2/3 scale rail and full-sized rail. The difference in the width and depth was amazing.

As a mechanical engineer, the suggestion boils down to this: get the heaviest rail you can, as it will allow you to somewhat skimp on tie spacing, ballast, etc, since it is so darn stiff in vertical and horizontal load capacity. Overkill the rail and go easy on the support system. The rails will never fail, but the supports will fail eventually.

Perhaps you can get some "old" heavyweight rail from Metrolink or UP or BNSF? Any rail that is near its end of life by their tonnage accumulation/profile wear standards would last forever in you carbarn.

The suggestion for welding another rail for extra strength alongside the working rail seems like a good one for the same reason. You could use "worn-out" or "condemmed" rail as the backer. I would also consider adding some 4-6" steel channel sections to the available rail to spread the load and add stiffness.

John:

I agree with the 30" spacing and keeping it simple. If you plan to pour the concrete floor immediately and make the floor at least 4 inches below the rail to embalm it, then the ties are really just to hold gage till the concrete sets. In that case the ties can be even further apart, say 36". I would go for 5,000 psi concrete in this case with a wire grid in the concrete. I have laid similar floors in engine houses and stored locomotives on the tracks with no problems.

Gary Landrio

Stone Consulting & Design
garylandrio@stoneconsulting.com

> John:

> I agree with the 30" spacing and
> keeping it simple. If you plan to pour the
> concrete floor immediately and make the
> floor at least 4 inches below the rail to
> embalm it, then the ties are really just to
> hold gage till the concrete sets. In that
> case the ties can be even further apart, say
> 36". I would go for 5,000 psi concrete
> in this case with a wire grid in the
> concrete. I have laid similar floors in
> engine houses and stored locomotives on the
> tracks with no problems.

> Gary Landrio

If we are talking about ordinary track construction (no concrete) what size rail is required in order to broaden out the tie spacing beyond 21" on centers? I'm keeping in mind the fact that we will be storing large mainline equipment on these tracks. I have been told that smaller rail (70 lb.) should have 21" tie spacing.



Orange Empire Railway Museum
jsmatlak@earthlink.net

Let's get back to one of the basic questions that John asked. The question has to do with concrete slab floor vs. ties. The carbarn will have six (6) tracks that are 600' long. This takes up a large amount of ties. The museum has rails but not the ties for the entire project.

Would it be more economical to do:
A. a concrete slab and either 1)clamp rails to it or 2) embed rails into the slab.
-or-
B. go with a conventional rail/ties/ballast construction
-or-
C. modified conventional (wider spacing of ties)
-or-
D. any other ideas.

Another consideration is wheather a slab would be better because journal oil, etc. would not seep out of boxes and through the gravel into the soil.

Brian Norden

I don't know of the price, but this would work.

1. Pour a concrete foundation, like you did before, but without anchors. Possibly with a scrap rail turned upside down for extra support, flange base even with top surface of foundation.

2. Every 10-15' place a 4"x4" groove across the slabs.

3. Lay the rail on the slabs and use gauge bars to set the gauge. Pass the bars through the aforementioned grooves. With the gauge bars, I am talking about the 1.5 inch bolts with cast clamping heads that the railroad use to keep the rail in gauge, in high wear spots and curves, or when they want to defer track maintenance, see linked picture.

4. Cast your main floor around the rail, with the dirt grade at least 6 inches below the slab's top surface, and 1 foot wide, to lock all the floor pieces together.

5. Cast the gauge slab (slab between rails) 2-3 inches below the floor slab's level, to act as a catch basin for spills, and to allow someone to crawl under a car. This is by far more comfortable then laying on the balast even with a sheet of plywood, also allows the use of a garage creeper to get into those hard to reach spots.

Just for reference, the list price for 4'-8.5" double clamp gauge bars from Aldon is $44 (Website catalog), they also make narrow gauge, if you need it.

This is probably comparable in price to ties under concrete, but will last a whole lot longer with heavier loads.

Another thought, if the rail foundations continued under the gauge slab, then car jacks could be used to lift the cars for journal work, if spots were marked and reinforced.

Just a thought,

Rich Cizik


Gauge bars
rcizik5519@earthlink.net

Gauge bars are expensive. Here is a cheaper way. that is mechanically sound, and pretty close to "code".

Use your rail drill, and drill a hole in the rail web every 5 feet or so. Get some 1 inch mild steel bar about5 1/2 foot long, and have the junior volunteers learn to thread on the lathe, about a foot on each end. Put broken joint bars on the band saw, and make some rail joints with only one hole about 6 inches long, one threaded bar, four heavy hex nuts, and four joint bar pieces, and the track is in gauge. Since you are paving to top of rail, the cross rod will be covered in concrete, and will not be a trip hazard. Instead of $44, these may cost only $5 for the nuts and the 1" barstock. For narrow gauge, make shorter, for dual gauge, thread on end further, or see if a screw and bolt company will donate some 1" (or even 3/4 or 7/8") all thread.

I have used the proper rail clips, and a 10 foot piece if 1 1/8" alloy allthread to hold 4 rails of a switch in alignment when some switch ties went gunny sack mid season. This is definately a Class 1 track repair though.



nwstaybolt@reachone.com

> Let's get back to one of the basic questions
> that John asked. The question has to do with
> concrete slab floor vs. ties. The carbarn
> will have six (6) tracks that are 600' long.
> This takes up a large amount of ties. The
> museum has rails but not the ties for the
> entire project.

> Would it be more economical to do:
> A. a concrete slab and either 1)clamp rails
> to it or 2) embed rails into the slab.
> -or-
> B. go with a conventional rail/ties/ballast
> construction
> -or-
> C. modified conventional (wider spacing of
> ties)
> -or-
> D. any other ideas.

> Another consideration is wheather a slab
> would be better because journal oil, etc.
> would not seep out of boxes and through the
> gravel into the soil.

> Brian Norden
I'd vote for a direct fixation method. Simple metal clips and threaded inserts in the slab. We already have an example on the pit track in the standard gauge barn; if a true Class I design needs to be referenced, a SP plan from MKM, then at 1 Market, should be lying dormant in the OERM mech dept. files.
After the rail is clipped down, finish the rail channels flush with grout or lower strength concrete.
Since the track is intended for infrequent movement, resilient pads, Pandrol fasteners, and other technology can be bypassed. Oh, yeah, if you even have a faint thought of ever putting trolley wire in the building, bond the rail joints before enbedding them for all time!
I also recall there are some methods described in the Bethlehem Steel track handbook.
I wish I'd be coming down to help build this one--it sounds like fun.

Francis Wong

flwong@danceart.net

I consulted with a Metrolink Civil engineer that I know: His suggestion was:

For low speed track like a shop it is fairly easy to set the rail up to the finished grade and pour concrete around it. Usually a base pour is made to within 3-4 inches of the base of the rail, then the rail is set up on bolted plates and adjusted to final line and surface after which a final pour of small aggregate low-shrink cement is made.
For main lines of either transit or freight this "direct fixation" method requires quite elaborate vibration isolation from the slab, typically steel plates under the rail on rubber pads bonded to a base plate. These units are afixed to the rail and then the final pour is made as above.
On main lines the slab is not poured around the rail because it has to be accessible for maintenance.