Re-engineering Rail Stressing in Aurizon

D.W. Buntine
Aurizon, Australia
daniel.buntine@aurizon.com.au
Who am I?

• Track Engineer at Aurizon

Network
• Chartered Professional
Engineer
• Worked in Asset
Management,
Construction and Design
teams across Australia
3
What is Aurizon Network?
• Business unit of Aurizon
• 2700km, 1067mm gauge coal export network
• Monopoly network with third-party access
• 225MGT of coal transported in FY2016
Four linked rail systems

4
Fifty mines Five export ports
Where is the Aurizon Network? Darwin

Port of Townsville
Port Walcott Port Hedland Port of Abbot Point
Dampier Port Mt Isa
Port of Hay Point

Port of Gladstone

Brisbane

Perth
Port of Newcastle
Sydney
Adelaide

Melbourne

Hobart
5
CWR History in Aurizon
• First introduced with major upgrades
in 1980’s
– Track upgraded to 53-60kg/m on
concrete e-clip sleepers
• Rolling upgrades were completed
over multiple years
– Processes were refined and optimised
by trained crews
– Practice was largely taught from
generation to generation
• Many of the wise experts retired in
the last decade
• Shortcuts began to be taken
6
7
The catalyst for change

• December 2014 derailment

caused by track buckle
• Thought to be caused by
sleeper replacement using
track renewal train
• Existing process and
documentation not robust
- an overhaul was required
8
Documentation overhaul
• Existing documents were monolithic and confusing
– The language wasn’t targeted at the audience
– The mandatory requirements were not clear
– Ballast profile and consolidation requirements existed but were hidden in
other documents
• So we split the documents
– ‘Rail Adjustment’ is now ‘Track Stability’
– Safety standards to define minimum regulated requirements
– Engineering manual to state what is required for each type of work
– Define risk mitigation strategies for temporary works
– Split the instructions into a simple, straight-forward work instruction 9
 Mandatory requirements
Activity Category Activity Category
Ballast replacement – 10 sleeper bays or over General Track Minor
Relining to m onument (minor) – includes defect repair (corrective)
Resurfacing
No action
Ballast replacement – under 10 sleeper bays Mechanised
required Relining to m onument (major2) – includes defect repair (corrective)
w orks
Mechanised
Ballast replacement – mechanised ballast cleaning (e.g. RM900) Relining to new alignment General Track
w orks
Buckle repair General Track
Sleeper Replacement General Track
Cant adjustment – curve alignment unchanged Ballast Disturbing
Sleeper Replacement – side insertion – over 3 sleepers, no lift Ballast Disturbing
Cant adjustment – new curve alignment General Track
Sleeper Replacement – side insertion – 3 or less consecutive sleepers, No action
No action no lift required
Fastening replacement
required
Track construction/relay – includes bridge rollouts General Track
Form ation repair General Track
Minor
Track m aintenance lift
Glued joint repair/replacement Short Rail Resurfacing

Level crossing upgrades General Track Track lifting to new design alignment General Track

Pull-apart repair Long Rail Turnout Installation General Track

Rail break repair Long Rail Turnout Rail/Component Replacement Short Rail
Rail crack repair Short Rail No action
Turnout Repairs – up to three bearers, no rail cut
required
Rail installation/repair – <15 metres Short Rail
Weld Replacement Short Rail
Rail installation/repair – ≥15 metres Long Rail
10
 Mandatory requirements
MANDATORY REQUIREMENTS Tem porary only
Rail Stress Control Rail Stress Risk
Category Ballast Control Method Definitions
Method Mitigation
Clip-up Temperature Covers most types of track w orks,
General Track Works Track Consolidation Rail Adjustment Control -or- unless categorised differently
Stress Testing below
Covers most rail replacement
Clip-up Temperature
Long Rail Works w orks. Consideration for track
Maintain ballast profile Rail Adjustment Control -or-
No disturbance to sleepers or ballast consolidation is not required, as
Stress Testing
ballast is untouched.
Short Rail Works Covers small rail defect
Treat as Hazard
No disturbance to sleepers or ballast, and rail stress affected for Maintain ballast profile Steel In/Out replacement, such as w eld
Location replacement, plug rail installations
<15 metres
Where rail (and therefore rail
Maintain existing stress) remains unaffected, but
Ballast Disturbing Works Track Consolidation ballast has been affected, e.g. by
alignment
tamping.
Designated Mechanised Works
 Mechanised ballast cleaning Stress Testing -or- Treat as Hazard
 Maintenance resurfacing not considered Minor Track Consolidation
Resurfacing
Rail Adjustment Location
Refer General Track Works if new alignment.
Minor Resurfacing Mostly covers corrective
Resurfacing of defects or small changes w here: resurfacing where rail stress is not
 lateral track realignment less than in Table 4-1, or Maintain existing
significantly changed, and w here
 lifts of less than 100mm, or
Maintain ballast profile
alignment the track geometry is likely to be
 w here both lift and lateral realignment is required, subject
improved.
to the discretion of District Civil Engineer 11
Key process improvements

• Rail adjustment is specified for most works

– Preferred method of stressing is using tensors and rollers
• Rail adjustment performance must be achieved by measuring
and recording rail extension
– e.g. heating trolley is allowable but discouraged, cannot simply use
surface temperature
• All major track work activities require approved stressing plan
• Authority to Stress process, additional training required for
supervisors
12
Ballast focus

• Reinforcing ballast profile

importance
Ballast
Consolidation
Rail Stress
– 300mm minimum shoulder, full cribs
• Ballast is weak following tamping
Ballast Profile
without consolidation
– New tampers have DTS built-in
– Speed restrictions in heat if not used
Track Stability

13
Measuring success
50
45

40
35

30

22
20 18 17
18

10 8
6 5 6

0
FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 Target
Track Misalignments/Kinks Buckle
14
Testing the limits

• We developed a baseline
of good CWR practice
• Many efficiencies to be
gained in production
• Key areas investigated:
– Roller usage
– Leg length limits

15
The challenge
• Works programme
dominated by rail
renewal
– Primary cause of rail
stressing
• Rail is wearing most on
tight 300m radius curves
• 300m radius curves
require many rollers, and
many pulls to complete
16
Roller usage reduction - analysis

• Aurizon use Vortok

Stressing Rollers
• Manufacturer confirmed
roller has designed for 6
lateral force of 10kN

Lateral force at roller(kN)

Manufacturers Recommendations
5 1 in 3

• Key assumption 4
3
1 in 5
1 in 10

– ΔT = 35°C 2
1
0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Radius (m) 17
Roller usage reduction - results
• Maintain the same factor of safety
– 5kN maximum working load
• Re-running the calculations for ΔT = 20°C
– Most rail stressing is undertaken at or above
rail temperature of 18°C Curve Vortok Roller spacing Roller spacing

• 300m radius – 40% fewer rollers Radius (m)

160-280
Recommendation ΔT ≤ 20°C
1 in 3
ΔT ≤ 35°C
1 in 2

• 600m radius – 50% fewer rollers

281-400 1 in 3 1 in 5 1 in 3
401-500 1 in 8 1 in 4
501-600 1 in 5
• For a typical pull, ~200 fewer rollers
1 in 5
601-800 1 in 6
801-1000 1 in 10 1 in 8
required 1000-
Tangent
1 in 10
1 in 10

– Less work = faster track possessions

18
Leg length extension
• The big fish is extending
leg lengths
• Most stressing caused by
works on curves
• Tighter the curve, more
stressing needed
• If we can reduce a 3-pull
curve to a 2-pull, or even
1-pull, we can save hours
off track possessions
19
Leg length extension – How can we justify it?

• Huge difference in friction coefficient

• Vortok Stressing Roller 0.012 vs steel on HDPE ~0.250
• Causes of SFT fade in long pulls:
– Friction from rail on sleeper: 4.7°C/600m
– Friction from rail on Vortok rollers: 0.6°C/600m
– Self-weight of rail on 1:50 grade: ±0.4°C/600m
– Incorrect linear coefficient: Up to 2°C (depends on ΔT)
– Poor rail measurement: <2.1°C during daytime

20
Leg length extension – trials

• Trials conducted on
300m radius curves
• Most trials in the 200m
range
• Most ambitious trial was
up to 317m leg length
(up from 120m)

21
Leg length extension - result

• First stage trials successful

• Second stage trials ongoing extrapolated to wider range of radii
Reduction of pulls
Radius (m) Existing (m) Proposed (m)
per rail km
280-400 120 225 1.9
400-500 150 250 1.3
500-600 150 300 1.7
600-800 225 360 0.8
800-1000 300 500 0.7
1000-1200 300 600 0.8
1200-1600 400 600 0.4
1600-2000 500 600 0.2
2000+ 600 600 0.0

• But, we had unexpected consequences during trials

22
That wasn’t supposed to happen

• A misalignment developed within

36 hours of the stressing being
completed at a trial site

• But when we cut the track, it was

exactly at design neutral temp

• What happened?
23
Black Mountain – what we know

• 1 in 50(ish) descent for 8km

• 12,000t loaded trains descending at
40km/h
• Wagon and locomotive brakes feathered
to regulate speed
• 40 trains per day during busy times,
headways as low as 20 minutes

24
Rails get hot, very hot
• Wheels rub against the brakes for 3,000 revolutions and reach
temperatures as high as 160°C
• This heat is transferred through 500 wheels to the rail
• Rail observed to heat up ~7°C under loaded train

32°C 47°C 44°C 41°C

32°C Train UV31 37°C 40°C 36°C

Wheel rim recorded at 132°C

32°C 32°C 33°C 33°C

Ambient Air Temperature: 20°C
12:20 12:58 13:02 13:11
30 minutes before train 3 minutes after train 9 minutes after train 18 minutes after train 25
Rail average: 32°C Rail average: 39°C Rail average: 39°C Rail average: 37°C
Compounding heat

• What if we have many trains in a

Black Mountain_Sig
Hatfield_UP Rd 23 UP Rd Yukan_UP Rd
00:00

row? 01:00
02:00
• 26 minutes not enough time for 03:00
04:00
rail to cool 05:00

• Rail temperatures ratchet upwards 06:00

07:00
08:00 7 trains in a row,
09:00 avg. headway 26
10:00
minutes
11:00
12:00
13:00
14:00 26
A day in the life of a rail

+16°C

27
Black Mountain solutions

• Many options under

consideration
• Short term control
measure – headway
increase during hot
days
• Watch this space…

28
Conclusions/Recommendations
• Got CWR Practice under
control
• Reduced stressing roller
usage rate
• Improved stressing leg
length
• Discovered train brakes
are governing rail
temperature down the hill
29