The British Cementitious Paving Association

The Whole Life (and other) Benefits of

CONCRETE SLAB TRACK

 East London line
The Whole Life (and other) benefits of concrete slab track
The UK is demanding more from its rail infrastructure than
ever before. It is estimated that 2.5 billion rail journeys are
made every year. This is forecasted to rise to over 3 billion
by 2020.
Against this background of increased use, long-term assured
performance and minimum disruptive maintenance are
essential requisites for rail tracks. This is where the whole life
cost benefits of concrete slab track play a pivotal role in the
efficient and economic long-term performance of railways.
Slab track categories
Modern concrete slab track systems fall into three broad
categories:
■■ In situ cast-in systems
Typically top-down construction where the track is set to line
and level, then concrete is poured and finished manually
around the sleeper or baseplate.
The need for Whole Life costing
Whole life costing (WLC) is increasingly being recognised as
being a prerequisite for infrastructure investment. No-one
wants to invest in an asset that could potentially lose revenue
due to unplanned, frequent maintenance and renewal.
Essentially, WLC is the systematic comparison of various
options and their associated costs and income streams over
a period of time. Costs include initial capital or procurement
costs, and operating costs which includes maintenance and
inspection and associated possession costs. Those track
options with lower costs over the specified period should be
preferred.
The need to consider WLC is underlined by Network Rail’s
Technical Strategy, 2013, which stated: “With 2012/13 annual
maintenance costs at £0.9 billion, an early focus is to increase
cost efficiency. We will improve the cost-effectiveness of our asset
management by developing and applying our understanding of
whole-life, whole-system issues and trade-offs,” and that: “better
Slab track whole life benefits: the proof
There is a growing number of studies that forward the long-
term whole life cost benefits of concrete slab track and
conclude that the initial 10 – 30 percent higher in construction
costs of concrete slab are more than recovered by the
minimal maintenance requirement and long-term reliability
and performance when compared to ballast tracks. These
studies and evaluations have found that over the long-term,
slab track offers more economically efficient solution (ref 2)
with maintenance costs being reduced by 30 to 80% (ref 3).
These findings are further confirmed by the Korea Institute
for Structural Maintenance Inspection (ref 4) which found that
the proportion of renewal and operational costs is much higher
with the ballast track than in the concrete slab track.
Alstom slip-formed track (near Gisors)
■■ Pre-cast systems
Typically bottom-up construction. Pre-cast track units are
positioned and joined on site and then bedded on grout or
an asphalt layer to achieve final rail alignment
■■ Slip-formed systems
Track installation is bottom-up. Slip-forming lends itself to
embedded rail construction and can be used in conjunction
with both in-situ and pre-cast track construction.
Concrete slab track offers a wide range of significant
benefits over ballast track. These include high track stability,
minimum maintenance, reduced track weight and height and
a long life cycle of 60 – 100 years. The long life means that
the initial higher cost of slab track construction is quickly
recovered and on-going future costs, compared with ballast
track, are significantly less.
resilience and a reduced need for maintenance will be achieved
through new materials, further consideration of whole life cost
and improved, efficient design.”
Research carried out in 2010 by Booz & Co (ref 1),
commissioned by the Department for Transport, set out
the need to investigate WLC of slab track: “Both the Rail
Technical Strategy and the Rail Industry Research Strategy
promote innovative track design and this work is needed
to define the cost/benefits and evidence in support these
infrastructure improvements. There is now a need to examine
how competitive slab track designs will be in terms of reduced
maintenance costs.” The research concluded that; “application
of ballastless tracks is a viable option for heavily used lines,
but does not bring financial benefit to more lightly used lines.”
Given the inexorable increase in demand most rail lines are
increasingly ‘heavily used’.
Life–cycle cost research carried out by slab track supplier Alstom
has found that return-on-investment compares favourably with
ballasted track. Using construction costs based on Alstom data
and maintenance costs data from the French SNCF network and
Setra, the research found that the slab track system installation
costs were 15-20% higher than ballasted track. However, the
reduced maintenance and operation costs of the slab track mean
that the system would be cost neutral with ballasted track after
just 13-20 years against an assumed lifespan of 50 years (ref 5).
Indeed, the payback period can be just 8 years. In Japan, the
Shinkansen slab track system has a total construction cost of
1.3 times more than ballast tracks yet slab track long-term
 High Attenuation Sleeper for noise and vibration reduction
performance and minimum maintenance benefits means that
these costs are balanced in 8 – 12 years (ref 6).
The whole life benefits are demonstrated by the Rheda slab
track system used for the Bielefeld to Hamm route, Germany.
Although the system costs approximately 1.5 times more than
ballast tracks, the slab track has withstood speeds of up to
200km/h since 1972 and has operated almost maintenance free
for 44 years (ref 7). Overall, the German experience has found
slab track to be 20% to 40% more expensive than ballast track
but has almost zero future maintenance costs and almost 100%
availability (ref 8).
In the U.S. the cost for ballast track is calculated at $970,000
Further benefits of concrete slab track
In addition to whole life cost benefits, concrete slab track offers
a wide range of performance benefits over ballast track. These
include:
■■ Superior performance in reliability and track and ride
quality
Concrete slab track fixes the track alignment and so track
quality is consistent and stable unlike ballast track where
the reliability and quality deteriorate between maintenance
interventions.
■■ Very low maintenance requirements
Concrete slab tracks have a long performance life and very
low maintenance requirements especially under high speed
operations. Ballast track requires frequent intervention in
order to maintain track geometry and quality. The track
need to be regularly tamped for alignment and the ballast
needs to be cleaned and renewed.
■■ High levels of stability for high speed operation
In a slab track system, concrete provides mass, stability and
restraint to the track. Ballast tracks move under loading and
have to be regularly maintained to restore track position and
condition. With no ballast, slab track dues not suffer from
sucking out of materials due to the turbulence of passing
high speed trains.
■■ Increased sustainability
With concrete slab track there is no need for the ongoing
sourcing and supplying of the limited special aggregate
required for ballast high speed tracks. Apart from limited
supply in Scotland, it is expected that a ballasted High
Speed 2 track would have to locate and import its aggregate
supplies from Norway. The minimum maintenance
requirements of slab track means less resources being used
for ongoing operation.
Raising the signal for concrete slab track
Concrete slab track is a rail track technology that
offers significant whole life cost benefits and long-term
performance advantages. These benefits are proven by slab
track’s use throughout the world. Firstly, in Japan and the
U.S and now increasingly throughout Europe train operators
per mile and for slab track it is $1,240,000 per mile. Set against
the initial higher construction cost is a significant difference for
maintenance costs with the cost for ballast tracks being estimated
to be an annual $50,000 per mile yet only $10,000 per mile for
slab track. This also indicates a payback time of just eight years
for slab track (ref 9).
The costs to operate and maintain a railway over its lifetime are
considerable and are far greater than the initial construction
costs. The emphasis on initial project delivery should be replaced
by an examination of whole life costs. The installation of concrete
slab track could deliver reduced ongoing operational and
maintenance costs but also safeguard revenue streams from
unplanned rail possessions.
■■ Worker health and safety benefits
Network Rail has been running campaigns on reducing and
managing ballast dust – now seen as a significant Health &
Safety hazard. The removal of ongoing maintenance means
minimizing the need for rail workers to attend rail sites in
the early morning hours when fatigue can be contributing
factor to potential accidents.
■■ Reduced construction depth and structure gauge
Applicable for electrification projects where clearances need
to be increased through existing structures and tunnels.
Concrete slab track require less overall construction depth
than the equivalent ballast track system. This is significant
for tunnels, bridges, viaducts and piled sub-slabs where
ballast depth is increased and ballast mats are required to
counter grinding and attrition effects.
■■ Integral design for optimisation of design and
construction of trackside elements
The foundations for trackside or in track structures such
as noise barriers, derailment containment and overhead
electrification equipment can be integrated into the concrete
slab design. Slip formed drainage channels can also be
incorporated.
■■ Engineered noise and vibration performance
Slab track systems can be designed to provide high levels of
acoustic performance, reducing the transmission of ground-
borne noise and vibration.
■■ Greater resilience to climate change
Extreme weather events are becoming a regular occurrence.
Concrete slab track is more resilient than ballast track as it
provides a more stable structure that is not threatened with
ballast ‘washout’ due to flash or tidal flooding.
and their passengers are demanding a high quality, reliable,
low maintenance rail network. In the UK, slab track use has,
so far, been limited. However, with the increased focus on
whole life cost performance it is time that the signal is raised
for concrete slab track.
References
1. Booz & Co. Slab track research project for the
Department of Transport, Ref R01012, 2010.

2. Schilder, Rudolf, & Diederich, Dirk. Installation

of quality slab track – a decisive factor for
maintenance. RTR Special, pp79. July 2007.

3. Hyperlast Ltd. What is wrong with the way we build

track? Railway Strategies. January 2007.

4. Jang, Seung Ypu. Analysis of life cycle costs of

railway track: A case study for ballasted and
concrete track for high-speed railway. Journal of
the Korea Institute for Structural Maintenance and
Inspection, vol 20, issue 2, 2016.

5. Barrow, Keith. Next generation slab track heads for

Russia 2015. International Railway Journal. August
2015

6. Bilow, D. J. & Randich, G. M. Slab track for the next

100 years. AREMA Proceedings of the 2000 Annual
Conference. September 2000.

7. Nigel, O. & Franz, Q. Innovative track systems

criteria for their selection. Project funded by the
European Community, Directorate General Energy
and Transport. TUV Intertraffic. October 2001.

8. Giannakos, K. Requirements of tomorrow’s rail

transport infrastructure. Vossloh AG 2nd Traffic and
Transportation Conference. OSE. September 2004.

9. Kucera, William et al. Laboratory test results of

heavy axle loads on concrete slab track for shared
high-speed passenger and freight rail. AREMA
Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Conference.
September 2002.

The British Cementitious Paving Association

Indigo House Britpave, the British Insitu Cementitious Paving Association, promotes the better and greater use of
Unit 10 concrete and insitu cemtentitious infrastructure solutions. Its members include major contractors,
Mulberry Business Park specialist equipment and material suppliers, consulting engineers and interested trade associations.
Fishponds Road Together, they provide an important forum and voice for the infrastructure sector.
Wokingham
All publications are published in good faith. All advice and information is provided for those who will
Berkshire RG41 2GY
evaluate the significance and limitations and who will take responsibility for its use and application.
T: +44 (0) 118 402 8915 No liability (including that for negligence) for any loss resulting fron such advice or information is
E: info@britpave.org.uk accepted by Britpave or its authors.
BP59
www.britpave.org.uk First Published 2016