National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
----- ----------------------------- FRA/ORD-80/63 TRACK RENEWAL SYSTEM AND WOOD TIE REUSE ANALYSIS Unified Industries Incorporated 6600 Loisdale Court, Suite 400 Springfield, Virginia 22150 OCTOBER 1980 FINAL REPORT Document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 Prepared for U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION Office of Research and Development Washington, D.C. 20590 R£PRODUCED BY NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE U.S. DEPARTMENJ Of COMMERCE SI'RINGFIELQ,. V~ 2216J NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Depart· ment of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Gove~rnment assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manu· facturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. ---------------- Technical ~eport Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FRA/ORD-80/63 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date OCTOBER 1980 Track Renewal System and Wood Tie Reuse Analysis 6. Performing Organization Code r-::---~~-:-:----------------------------1 8. Performing Organization Report No. 7. Author/ s) G. Richard Cataldi, David N. Elkaim 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Unified Industries Incorporated 6600 Loisdale Court, Suite 400 11. Contract or Grant No. Springfield, Virginia 22150 DOT-FR-9044 13. Type of Report and Period Covered ~~--------------------~--------------------------------~12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Final Federal Railroad Administration August 1979-July 1980 Office of Research and Development 400 Seventh Street, SW. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D.C. 20590 15. Supplementary Nates 16. Abstract This report presents the results of an analytical study of the technical and economic feasibility of applying the track renewal method of railroad track maintenance in the United States. Track renewal, or out-of-face renewal, has long been the prevailing form of track maintenance used in Europe and has recently spread to Asia, Australia, and North America. Current North American activity is very limited, but the carriers and other elements of the railroad community are becoming increasingly interested in the potential advantages of track renewal as an alternative to selective maintenance. The core of the report consists of a detailed framework for conducting a comparative economic analysis of the track renewal method versus the traditional selective maintenance method .. The framework includes detailed descriptions of both methods, unit costs for each major operation under each method, and the comparative present worth long-term costs associated with each method. The framework methodology is presented in detail so that the reader can examine and if necessary modify the built-in assumptions and thereby tailor the framework for application to a specific situation. A sample economic analysis is presented wherein the framework is used to compare the estimated long-term and first-year costs when they are applied to fourteen specific track maintenance scenarios,. each of which represents a particular set of assump tions and conditions. The results of the sample analysis include the followin!r ( 1) track renewal offers the prospect of large long term cost savings over selective maintenance, although only under certain circumstances; (2) wood tie reuse is a critical factor in optimizing the long-term savings; (3) with wood tie reuse, track renewal is likely to be $15,000 to $27,000 cheaper per track mile than selective maintenance over time; (4) the internal rate of return for track renewal is likely to be 25-35 percent; (5) the break even point for first-year costs is about 32 percent tie replacement for installing wood ties and 75 percent for replacing wood with concrete ties; (6) ballast Cleaning costs are reduced by about 28 percent with track renewal; and (7) track occupancy time for maintenance is reduced 60-79 percent with track renewcil. The report also presents a worldwide survey of present and future track renewal machine technology to enable the reader to consider alternatives to the type of machine assumed in the framework and analysis. Also included is a discussion of the use of track renewal machines for abandoning existing track, building new track, and for other nonmaintenance applications. In addi tion, there is a brief section on two alternatives to track renewal machine ownership and operation by the railroads: ( 1) railroad leasing and operation, and (2) railroad purchase of services from contractor owner-operator. The report concludes with the identification of several areas for additional study, principally with respect to the further development and refinement of the framework as a research tool. It also states that the framework should be tested by one or more railroads; the results should be used to strengthen the framework and should also be shared with the railroad community. 17. KeyWords 18. Oi stributioh Statement Track renewal systems, track renewal machines, track Document is available to the public through the National maintenance, economics of track maintenance, wood Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 tie reuse 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized i METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS Approximate Conversions to Metric Measures M .. Approximate Conversions from Metric Meuurn .. .. Symbol When You Know Multiply lty To Fin4 Sy•bol _Symbol When You Know Multiply by ------ h Find Symbol ~ .. LENGTH ... - ~ ' LENGTH ------ mm nultimut6rs 0.04 1nches in ~ em centimuhtrs 0.4 inches in in mchos "2.6 centimeters em m muters 3.3 feet II It m meters teet 30 cenlimeters em ... ~ 1.1 varda yd yd yards 0.9 meters m km kilometers 0.6 miles mi mi miles 1.6 kilometers km -----!:; AREA ~ AREA = cm2 2 ... squwe centimeters 0.16 square inches in2 tn square inches 6.5 square centimeters 2 cm :!l m2 aquare meters 112 square feet ml 1.2 square yarda y~ 0.09 square meters km2 2 yd2 square ki lometera 0.4 square mi los mi square yard:s 0.8 square meters ~ 2 2 he hectares 110.000 m ) 2.5 acres mi square miles 2.6 square kilometers km2 ~ acres 0.4 hectares ha :l MASS (weight) "' MASS !wveightl =-- ~ oz ounces 28 gramtt g E.____ 9 gr11111S 0.035 ounces oz lb pounds 0.45 kllt>QHIITI$ kg kg kilograms 2.2 pounds lb short tons 0.9 tonnes ~-::: tonnes 11000 kg) 1.1 short tooa (2000 lbl • :::: VOLUME VOLUME tsp teaspoons 5 milliliter$ ml ml milliliters 0.03 tlu1d ouncea ft oz Tbsp tablespoons 15 milliliter~ ml I liters 2.1 pml& pi fl oz fluid ounces 30 millililers ml I liters 1.06 quo-.rts ql cups 0.24 lilcrs I I liters 0.26 ga!loos gal pi pints 0.47 liters mJ cubic meters 35 cubic feet qt "3 quarts 0.95 liters ml cubic meters 1.3 cubic yards ydJ yal gallons 3.8 liters ftJ cubiC feet 0.03 cubic meters 1113 ydJ cubic yards 0.76 cubic meters m3 TEMPERATURE (exact) TEMPERATURE (exact) "c Celsius 9/6 (then Fahrenheit "f temperature add 321 \omperature "f Fahrenheit 5,9 (after Celsius "c temperdture subtracting htmperature "' Of 32) ~ H K6 m I I I I lelo It -4~ I~ ~14~011 .~~o. I I • I ul ; :! .S4 (t! ><.<ll t! y]. .~~o~ 12C:O~/ I '" "the1 t~.><d< 1 ,;unvt:l ~""I'> <1nd 1illll e tlt:ldilt;d I<~Uit:~. NtiS M•~•·· h,t;L ;~til>. 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 llnll~ uf Vvc·~.llll~ dlld f'riLC r.'le<..!!"HII•~::.. ::.:! . .1.5. so Cnial<;~ Nu. CIJ.10:28ti. g. -40 -2 o o zo ~o 60 ·' ao 100 :X •u °C 37 °C ---- .. ------------------- PREFACE This report presents the results of an analytical study of the technical and economic feasibility of the track renewal method of track maintenance for U.S. railroads. It was prepared by Unified Industries Incorporated (UII), under contract to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). The authors wish to thank Ms. Claire L. Orth, the FRA technical monitor, for her continued guidance and cooperation throughout this project. The comments and suggestions offered by Messrs. Philip Olekszyk, Arnold Gross, and Robert E. Kleist of the FRA, Mr. Louis T. Cerny of the American Railway Engineering Association, and Mr. Richard D. Johnson of the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), especially during the preparation of this final report, are also gratefully acknowledged. In addition, the assistance provided by Messrs. Robert Corsetti and Michael E. Dunn of Amtrak, Messrs. R. D. Miles and J. H. Gasper of Canadian National Railways, and the members of the Association of American Railroads' Committee on Track Maintenance Research was particularly helpful for obtaining background data and develop ing objectives for this project. This study continued and expanded upon the pioneering research in track renewal done by railroad consult-ant David R. Burns, and he provided valuable assistance throughout the project. In addition, the authors wish to thank their UII colleagues. Messrs. Paul Elliott and Kenneth W. Larsen furnished assistance in project direction and in the preparation of the intermediate reports and this final report. Mrs. Virginia 0. Clem painstakingly typed the more than 80 tables, as well as all of the text, in this report, contended with seemingly constant revisions, and then transmuted this vast assemblage of paper into a final report. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. 1 I. INTRODUCTION ... 4 II. FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATING THE ECONOMICS OF TRACK RENEWAL. 5 1. Description of Maintenance Systems ..... 6 A. Conventional Selective Track Maintenance 6 B. Track Renewal System Based Maintenance . 11 2. Cost Factors Associated with Track Maintenance and Wood Tie Reuse.