INDEX

1. RAILS, SLEEPER & FASTENINGS

S.No.ItemProposed by

1.1Field trial for 25Ton Axle Load PSC Sleepers in SER Delay in approval of fittings by RDSO.

Railway Board vide letter under reference has expressed concern over the delay in field trial of 25T Axle load PSC sleeper in SER. In this connection, following are resulting into delay in field trial.

1. Manufacturing of PSC sleepers for 25 Ton Axle Load have already been done.

2. P.O. for ERC-MK-V as per Drg. No: T-5919 has already been issued to firm M/s. Surya Alloys Industry Pvt Ltd. Firms sample has been approved for regular production. RDSO has been requested for inspection of raw material for regular production vide this Railways letter No: CE/TP/SER/2011/012 dated 11-02-2013.

3. P.O. for GFN-66 liners (Drg. No: T-6938-6939) has been issued to M/s. Seth & Co/Mumbai. RDSO has been requested to conduct inspection of entire quantity offered vide this Railways letter No: CE/TP/2012/011 dated 18-01-2013.

4. P.O. for 10mm thick GRSP (Drg. No. T-7010) has been issued to M/s. D. K. Steels/Kolkata. The firm to whom the PO has been issued has informed this Railway that preparation of sample is not viable due to stringent specification. RDSO has been requested to apprise the latest position of approving the sample vide this Office letter No: CE/TP/2011/011 dated 30-01-13.

RDSO to expedite the inspection of fittings at Sl. No: 2 & 3 above and resolve the issue of specification for 10mm thick composite GRSP.

SER

1.2Limited field trial of composite sleepers

Railway Board vide letter No: 2003/Track-II/22/11/78/Technext dated 20-08-2010 had directed SER to take up limited field trial of composite sleepers of M/s. Integrico Composites Inc. Texas, USA supplied by M/s. Technext Track Pvt. Ltd on two bridges. Accordingly, two bridges were identified and M/s. Technext Track Pvt. Ltd was asked to submit budgetary quotation.

Meanwhile, Railway Board vide letter No: 2011/Track-II/22/19/1/CS dated 27-09-2011 had directed that this limited field trial of M/s. Integrico design be conducted by the Railway by inviting Open tenders from the firms having valid MOU/Agreement with M/s. Integrico Composites Inc., USA.

This Railway has accordingly invited open tender but none of the firm having valid MOU/Agreement with M/s. Integrico Composites Inc., USA had participated. However, a company (Patil Rail Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd) claiming to be having tie up with M/s. Tie-Tek, USA has found to be interested in participation of the tender. It may please be noted that instruction of Limited field trial by S. E. Railway exists for M/s. Integrico design composite sleepers.

Further, Railway Board vide letter No: 2010/TK-II/22/19/1/CS dated 24-08-12 has directed that extended field trial of design of M/s. Tie-Tek USA is to be done by all Zonal Railways and limited field trial of design of M/s. Integrico Composites Inc., USA is to be done by few Railways out of which SER is one of them. In this letter, Railway Board has stated that some of the firms expressed their willingness to supply composite sleepers free of cost to enable commencement of trials expeditiously.

In this connection, it is requested to supply:-

(a) A list of suppliers having valid MOU/Agreement with the Original Manufacturer i.e. M/s. Integrico Composites Inc., USA.

(b) The names of the firms willing to supply the composite sleepers free of cost to SER.

Railway Board may kindly advise this Railway for taking up trial of composite

SER

1.3Speed potential on shallow depth sleepers

Drawing of shallow depth sleepers have been circulated by RDSO vide no.T-4852. It is mentioned that these sleepers are used where problems of cushion is there i.e. below FOBs, ROBs & PF lines. Earlier these sleepers were designed & used in Mumbai sub- urban section where speed potential is 100 KMPH. It is not clear from the drawing that shallow depth sleepers can be used even upto full speed potential at other locations where speed is more than 100 KMPH.

WCR

1.4Special PRC sleeper with provision of cable duct.

In order to ensure thorough packing of all sleepers by TTM and to eliminate chances of breaking/damaging of S&T cables during tamping specially in automatic signaling territory it was felt from long time that an arrangement should be made by which the passing of cables though space between sleepers specially near rail seat ( i.e. tamping zone) can be avoided. As an effort in this direction a modified special sleeper has been cast on Western Railway having provision of duct for passage of cables, in such a way that cable will enter from ends of sleepers and will come out on top of sleeper near rail seat as shown in photo/figures enclosed.

The Test results for SBT after 15 days are as under:Sleeper No.

Date of casting

Centre top

(60 KN)

Rail seat

Result

Remark

R1

(230 KN)

R2

(230 KN)

40A

06.03.13

90

225

225

Fail at rail seat

50mm dia through PVC pipes with three outlets at top

40B

07.03.13

85

230

230

Pass

40C

11.03.13

80

230

230

Pass

The above strength test shows that out of 3 only one sleeper failed marginally at rail seat, which can be avoided if iron pipe is used instead of PVC pipe.

In this connection it is suggested that the design aspect should be examined for further improvements.

WR

1.5Utility of data storing system in digital USFD machines Data storing system in presently available digital USFD machines are to be modified since the process of storing data makes slowdown the work of USFD testing since it takes too much time to store.

No advantage found by storing data from digital machines over manual storing system since it is also to be feed manually by the operator in the machine and it could not help the operator or inspecting officer to cross check the defect for a particular location.

Freezing the defect is also a time taking process and it also fails to determine the defect whether it was available at the time of testing at particular location or not.

To eliminate above deficiencies and to make storing system and USFD testing more effective and useful, continuous recording system to be developed. It will help the operator and the inspecting officer not only to cross check the work of USFD testing but also catch the defect left by the operator due to any reason.

WCR

1.6Necessity of using 37 probe for bolt hole testing It has been observed that while doing normal USFD of rail some of the bolt holes cracks are being left uncovered by 0 and 70 (F/B) probes. Such possibility can be eliminated with use of 37 (F/B) probe.

But as per Para 7.1(iv) of USFD manual For detection of bolt hole cracks, 37 probes are ideal. This is because the cracks emanating from bolt holes are generally oblique and propagate in the zig-zag manner. However, the present SRT/DRT machines have not been provided with 37 probes due to limitation of number of channels and detection of bolt hole cracks is accomplished by normal probe. These cracks are detectable by 0 probe since they obstruct the path of sound waves and lead to drop/loss of back wall echo. If the cracks are so located that they are unable to be scanned by 0 probes due to smaller size or orientation, such cracks may not be detected in initial stages of their development.

Keeping in view the above, it is suggested that necessary modification in design and specification of digital machines should be made for accommodating 37 probe. In case if it is not feasible then at least one round of testing before winter (as and when due) should be arranged with 37 probe by replacing 70 NG face side probe ( which is not as vital as 37 probe) in digital DRT/SRT. This has already been started on WR.

WR

1.7 As per Manual for Ultrasonic Testing of Rails and Welds- 2006, Para-5.1.2(v), a USFD operator should look out for back echo corresponding to normal probe throughout testing. However, this is deleted from the revised manual issued in 2012. This needs to be discussed and decided.

ECoR

1.8Discrepancies in IRPWM & USFD Manual regarding criteria for metallurgical investigation in connection with rail/weld failures.

There is discrepancy in IRPWM & USFD Manual regarding criteria pertaining to length of rail & GMT as per which rail piece to be sent for metallurgical investigation in connection with rail/weld failures as indicated below.As per Para 13.1.1 of USFD manual-2012

As per Para 257(4) of IRPWM-2004 (Issued vide CS no-122)

(a) All the fractured rail/weld pieces of 150mm length on each side of fractured face shall be sent to Chemist and Metallurgist for detailed investigation

(a) A piece of rail approximately 1m long (500mm+500mm) has to be sent for detailed material investigation

(b) Rail failure within 5 years of primary renewal

(b) The rail failure is within test free period subject to maximum of 10 years of rolling of rail.

The anomalies, therefore, need to be reviewed and provisions of both the manuals to be made similar.

ECR

1.9Test free period for USFD testing of rails is misnomer.

Test free period: Para no 6.6.1 of the USFD manual, speaks about test free period of rails which is 15% of the service life in GMT of rails, rolled before April1999 & 25% for rails rolled in April1999 and later. The test free period is misnomer as it appears that rails need not to be tested during this period but in actual ,testing is required to be done as follows:-

(i) As per Para no.6.6.1 of the USFD manual, The rails having sectional weight and grade equal to or higher than 52kg/90UTS shall be ultrasonically tested covering gauge face corner of rail head on passage of every 40 GMT during test free period.

(ii) As per Railway Board`s letter no. Track/21/2007/0903/7,dtd- 12.11.07, the rails is to be tested at 40 GMT or once in two years, whichever is earlier, up to the test free period.Suggestion: The word test free period should be replaced and correction should be made as Rails to be ultrasonically tested at every 40GMT up to 15% of the service life in GMT of rails rolled before April1999 & up to 25% of the service life in GMT for rails rolled in April1999 and later.

ECR

1.10USFD testing frequency for loop lines, turnouts and also for non passenger running lines :

As per para 6.8.1.1 of USFD manual, USFD testing frequency for all the BG and MG routes is specified in accordance with GMT. But for loop lines and turnout, no frequency for USFD testing is specified as no GMT is given.

It is suggested to fix the USFD testing frequency for the above items as below :

a) All passenger loop lines one in two years

b) Turnouts on passenger running lines one in a year

c) USFD testing may be dispensed on non-passenger running routes/ loop lines/ turnouts.

SCR

1.11

Removal of DFW(R)s :-

As per Clause No 8.14 of Manual for Ultrasonic testing of Rails & Welds DFWRs welds has to be removed within 03 months of detection. In case non removal within 3 months a speed restriction of 100 Kmph needs to be imposed for passenger trains.

Over NWR there are about 6160 nos. DFW(R) and is being remove with AT Welds. This is resulting in increasing the population of AT Welds. Some of the sections where DFW exists, TWR has been sanctioned. It may not be advisable to remove the DFW(R) and increase the population of AT Welds in the sections where through weld renewal has already been sanctioned and existing AT welds are being replaced by flash butt welds in the near future. As such the time limit for removal of DFW (R) and need of imposition of speed restriction shall be dispensed with where CTR/TWR has been sanctioned.

In this connection it is advised that for the sections where TWR works has been sanctioned. The removal of DFW(R) should be one year instead of 3 months as existing earlier.

NWR

1.12Codal Life of Rail

As per para 302(2)(d) Page-111 of IRPWM prescribes the codal life of rails for 60kg 90UTS - 800GMT and 52kg -525GMT. This was laid on prior to introduction of heavier axle load (25T/CC+8+2T) concept. The experience on this Railway shows majority of rail fractures up to 550GMT (86 Nos. out of total 92) for 60kg 90UTS rail & 350GMT (37 Nos. out of total 39) for 52kg 90UTS rail in the last 05 years on WAT Division. This is much less than the codal life.

The knowledge of metallurgy and strength of material shows that the fatigue life is reduced exponentially as the magnitude of reversing stress increases. This is clear from the following graph extracted from Strength Of Material by Timoshenko & Young as reproduced below:

Thus it is suggested that the codal life of rail be reviewed and reduced in the life of increasing axle load (magnitude of reversing stress) aggravated due to further overloading.

ECoR

1.13 USFD testing of rail at level x-ing is not possible because flange of the wheel of the SRT/DRT infringes with the road top. Because of this gap arises between the probe and the rail top, and proper USFD testing is not possible. Because of this grey area, the GMT life of the rail over the level crossing should be reduced. On Eastern Railway we have instructed started for renewal of these rail after covering 50% GMT life.

ER

1.14Stipulared life for switch, crossing and SEJ etc.

GMT life of rail and glued joints has been stipulated, but there is no stipulated life of SEJ, awitches and crossings. There have been cases of breakage of switches, SEJ etc. There may be a case of breakage on account of fatigue even though there is no appreciable wear in switches and crossing, SESJ. There is a case for fixing up GMT life of SEJs, switches and X-ing also.

1.15Adoption of in situ glued jointWR & CR

1.15.1In-situ fabrication of Glued Joints:- At present practice Glued joints are being fabricated in workshops (Departmental/by Agency). The process of fabrication of Glued joints in workshop has some of its merits and demerits. Like the quality control can be achieved better in case of workshop fabrication, but on the same time it is a time consuming process and having certain other limitations such as necessity of introducing of 2 SKV welds, wastage of rails cost etc as brought out in subsequent Paras..

As an alternative to workshop fabrication, the in-situ fabrication of glued joints has been tried on Western Railway during 2001-02. A work of in-situ fabrication of Glued Joints was executed in CCG-VR section for 80 Nos. of 60 Kg and 20 Nos. of 52kg Glued joints amounting total Rs. 6,22,000/-. The performance of these in Situ G/joints was encouraging. Later on one more work was executed on quotation basis in 2011 for in situ fabrication of 6 Nos. of Glued joints and results are satisfactory. Similarly in Central Railway suburban section also in-situ G/joints are being executed.

The in-situ fabrication is having following advantages:-

2.1In case of situ fabrication execution of two Nos. of AT welds is avoided. As we know AT welds are major threat of rail failure and costly affair.

2.2At least two Nos. of rail cut (one at either end for creating space corresponding to G/Joint length) and 32 Nos. of holes drilling (8 Nos. for Fish plating, 8 nos. for copper bonds in two joints and 16 Nos. for making S&T cable connections) are avoided in this method.

2.3With this method the manpower required for Rail/Glued joint renewal, cutting of rails and drilling of holes is saved, approximately 10/5 Nos. of men are required to perform these activities per G/joint depending upon availability of scope for one/two glued joint renewal on same day in vicinity.

2.4Transportation of Glued joints from divisional material depot to insertion site is avoided.

2.5Since existing rail is converted in to Glued joint hence wastage of rail pieces approximately 3.25m + 3.25m on each side is avoided.

2.6In this method only one block is required, but in case of pre fabricated method two to three blocks are required (One for G/joint insertion and 1 to 2 for AT welding) hence saving of traffic blocks is there.

2.7Right from indenting to dispatch at site is a very long procedure in case of pre fabricated G/Joints, hence many times PWIs are not getting G/joints in time and forced to continue with ordinary fish plated IB joints which are prone to failure and need frequent maintenance.

2.8In case of P&C zone where 6.5 m long Glued joint cannot be inserted (like If SRJ to SRJ distance is less than 13m or both SRJ are butting, distance of SRJ from heel joint of another T/out is less, Diamonds & scissor crossovers) in situ fabricated G/Joints are only option to eliminate free ( IB) joint.

2.9Due to ease and ready availability of in situ fabrication of G/joints we can eliminate large population of free IB joints in SWR, P&C zone etc by this method, which will ensure reduction in failure of track circuit, less maintenance efforts hence less manpower, durability of rails/sleepers/fittings, elimination of frequent packing of free joints and riding quality

2.10 In addition to above reduction in deterioration of track parameters is ensured.

2.11 There is a financial saving in this method as its cost is less than cost of pre fabricated method, it can be seen from cost comparision as shown in table below:

Cost of Pre fabricated G/joints

Cost of In-situ fabricated G/joints

Sr. No.

items description

Cost in RS.

Sr. No.

items description

Cost

in RS.

1

Cost of pre fabricated 60 Kg Glued joint vide WR P.O. No.88059 dated 25.08.2010.(This include cost of transportation up to divisional P-way depot & CST 4%)

9288

1

In situ fabrication of G/joint by Agency including transportation taxes etc. (Rates are as on Aug. 2011.)

9000

2

Escalation for one year i.e. 6% to bring cost at the level of Aug.20011

557.

28

3

Transportation from Divisional depot to Site of insertion @ Rs. 4.00 per KM/MT for 100 km Average lead.

=(6.5X60/1000)X4X100

156

4

Cost of execution of Two Nos. of AT Welds = 2x 2912

5824

5

Cost of Two Nos. of rail cut= 2X115

230

6

Cost of 32 Nos. of holes in rail= 32x88

2816

7

Cost of 5 Nos. of gangmen (assuming that team of 10 men including staff on machines will get scope of two G/Joints in a day)= (25000/30)x5

4166.67

Total cost per G/joint

23038

Total cost per G/joint

9000

Since there is no separate specification/guidelines available for in-situ fabrication of G/joints , therefore the specifications of Glued joint manual were used for this fabrication, except some conditions which cannot be meet at site like fixing in Jig ( for alignment) at the time of fabrication, curing for 24 hrs at room temperature, pullout test and subsequent immersion in water (for 48 hrs) to check resistance in wet condition. in spite of above limitation results were satisfactory.

In view of above mentioned benefits, site specific suitability and satisfactory trials of in-situ fabricated G/joints, it is suggested to examine the adoptability of in-situ fabrication of G/joints and separate specification should be made to make this as an approved alternative.

WR

1.15.2In-situ Glued Joints

In-situ fabricated glued joints were tried in a limited way on Mumbai division of Central Railway in 2002-03. The performance of these glued joints over the years has been found satisfactory. Fabrication of glued joints in-situ avoids two AT weld per GJ. This also facilitates provision of a glued joint where IBs have been provided due to space constraints.

Northern Railway have issued a PCE Circular No.259 (P. Way) in this regard. During in-situ fabrication, certain conditions such as surface preparation of surface using sand blasting, curing for 24 hours, Pull-out test and checking of resistance in wet condition, laid down in RDSOs Manual for Glued Insulated Joints cannot be met at site. None the less, performance of in-situ glued joints was found satisfactory. Keeping in view the advantages, it is suggested that a separate specification for in-situ fabrication of glued joints may be made.

CR

1.16Adoption of Technology for detection of Rail weld failures: Patrolling of track in winter, summer and rainy season involves deployment of a large no. of trackmen because of which track maintenance suffers very heavily resulting in to depletion of gang strength. Apart from this, a large no. of key men and patrolmen are run over and seriously injured because of being hit by trains. Many times, the rail/weld failures go undetected leading to accidents because the key men /patrolmen are not able to detect them. In some of the advance Railways, foot patrolling is not being carried out as the discontinuity track is detected by using available technology. It is suggested that other technological aid shall be used to ensure accurate and instant detection of rail/weld failures which may otherwise lead to serious accidents.

NWR

1.17 Rubber pads are provided to avoid metal to metal contact between bottom of the rail foot and channel sleepers and again between channel sleeper bottom plate and the top flange of the bridge girder. However, there is metal to metal contact of the hook bolt lip with the plate girder top flange. This result in lack of tight fitting. Some kind of rubber washer (with a sleeve to pass through the hook bolt shank) need to be devised. This washer will interface between the lip of the hook bolt and plate girder and hook bolt nut can be tightly driven.

ER

1.18Liner contact area with rail foot to be re-designed:

It is observed that M.S.Liners are not having full contact with the rail foot and there is gap at the top of liner through which water may percolate in between Rail foot and Liner. This condition may create beginning of corrosion for both Rail foot and M.S. Liner. Hence, it is opinioned that the Liner should have full contact with Rail foot, so that development of corrosion may be prevented to some extent. (At Present Gap is filled with Grease Graphite which is showing good results, but it is an addl. Work)

SCR

1.19Microscopic analysis of fractured rail surface to establish the direction of force.

In general in an accident the rails fracture, may be as an after effect of accident due to reason other than rail fracture. Often the cause of accident is pinned on rail fracture particularly when appreciable defects in the rolling stock is not found. The most glaring example is derailment of 18426, Durg-Puri Express between Lakhna & Naupada stations in Sambalpur Division on 12.02.12. To emphasize the point, where the rail & sleepers were completely damaged was not considered as the location of first drop of wheel where as the OBS location where only a narrow dent mark on sleeper without any disturbance to ballast was seen has been blamed for the cause of derailment. In such situation the above analysis can be of tremendous help. There is a technology available by which the grains on the fractured surface of rail if analysed can reveal the nature of stresses causing its failure i.e. tension/compression, pure axial/bending/shear/torsion or combination of them. Inter-alia this will give the neutral axis and hence the direction of application of breaking force. Hence the position of wheel moment before the fracture can be ascertained. I had a discussion on this issue with Sri Sengupta, in M&C Directorate in RDSO who endorsed my view but the facility was not available with him. Probably, the National Metallurgical Laboratory, Jamshedpur has this facility.

I suggest that the Track Directorate in RDSO should take initiative and get the instrument installed in M&C Directorate in RDSO for this purpose.

ECoR

1.20System of 90% payment for Sleepers produced:

At present 90% debits for sleepers meant for other than ECoR system is also booked to track renewal estimates of ECoR. This adversely affects the exchequer availability for track renewal works and upsets the budget monitoring seriously. It is therefore, requested that the consignee Railways should be asked to indicate fund availability duly certified by their associated finance in advance so that the debit can be directly booked against those estimate.

Also, ECoR should have diversion order well on time so that the sleepers are dispatched as soon as it is ready.

Railway Board may devise a system in consultation with finance department so that the financial booking, even on ad-hoc basis, is done only to the head of account meant for final charging.

ECoR

1.21Fixing Price for PSC second hand/class-II Sleepers

Present Problem :

Railway Board has given Price list for Class I PSC sleepers, Rails etc. For second hand Rails, the rate has been given as 65% of new materials. However, the rate of second hand/class-II PSC sleepers is not specified by the Railway board. Unlike rails, released PSC sleeper do not have any scrap value and for arriving at the rate of second hand/class -II PSC sleepers, there are no guide lines. Moreover, the residual life of the second hand sleeper will also depend on the service rendered in the track and its suitability for further use. Many Cement factories/PSUs and Private siding firms are requesting for the released PSC sleepers. Decision could not be taken by Railways for want of any guide lines/directives from the Railway Board. Southern Railway has sought clarification from Railway Board for this vide Letter No. W.504/Sales dated 5.12.12. But, so far no reply has been received.Suggestion :

Railway board may give guidelines/directives to arrive at price of second hand PSC sleepers, so that best use of them can be obtained by selling to the needy PSUs or Private firms.SR

2. POINTS & CROSSINGSS.No.ItemProposed by

2.1Standardization of sleeper spacing of 3rd & 4th sleeper in PSC layout and S&T fitment (D/P-Bracket).

The spacing between 3rd & 4th sleepers in PSC T/out layout has been stipulated as 685 mm as per alternation No. 5&4 to drawing Nos. T-4219 & T-4966 on 1 in 12 and 1 in 8 PSC sleeper layouts respectively. Though the sleeper spacing for these two sleepers has been fixed as per S&T requirement, in the field this spacing is rarely maintained at 685 due to type of point machine used, adjustment for point roding and for connecting D/P-bracket. Due to this uncertainty, the stock rails are not coming with predrilled holes for the slide chairs of sleeper nos. 3 & 4. Also for the fitment of connecting bracket (D/P-bracket) the predrilled holes are not being provided in the tongue rails. This is causing following problems in the field:-

1. As the slide chairs holes are not predrilled, these are drilled in the field. At times the location of the stud bolt comes in front of the rivet of stiffener provided in the tongue rail. The stud bolts in this portion are already with reduced head thickness and therefore to accommodate rivet head, the field staff has to further grind the stud bolt head which makes it weak. Such stud bolts break during service and cause obstruction to the point movement.

2. The holes in the tongue rail for fixing D/P-bracket are also not predrilled. Therefore the field staff removes one of the rivets of the stiffener plate for fixing this D/P-bracket. The other hole is drilled in the field at the time of connecting the point ridings. Slight misalignment of this hole causes problem in housing of the tongue rail at the time of installation. The problem in drilling of the hole in-situ is further intensified due to space constraint. Due to improper housing, often more time is taken for clearing the block. Further workmanship at site is also poor as the Blacksmith cadre is diminishing day by day.

In order to avoid these problems, following suggestions are made:-

1. The sleeper spacing between sleepers No. 3 & 4 should be frozen irrespective of type of point motor or type of point operation i.e. machine or rod operated. The holes for slide chair for these two sleepers should also be factory drilled instead of file drilling.

2. The location of D/P-bracket should be standardized and specified in the switch assembly drawing so that there is no necessity for field drilling of holes in the switch. In fact the D/P-bracket can be made part of the fitting with the switch itself.

3. All the half headed stud bolts should be of high tensile steal for better strength.

It is requested that these issues may be jointly studied by Track & Signal directorate of RDSO and required corrections / alteration in the assembly drawing may be issued. A reference has been already made to EDTK-I & ED/Signal, RDSO jointly by CTE & CSE, NCR vide this office letter no. 219-W/1/NCR/TP/Pt-IX dated 12.12.12 with copy endorsed to EDCE/P & Advisor/Signal, Railway Board.

NCR

2.2Review of Joint Inspection of Points & Crossings and Track Circuits (Docket No. N/245/1/5 dated 21.04.1998)

Instructions already exist for periodical joint inspection of all the interlocked points at all the stations to be carried out by SSE/SE/JE (P.Way) along with their counterpart of the Signal department. However, the existing standard format of NCR does not adequately incorporate S & T items to be jointly inspected. Hence, following additional S&T items are proposed to be incorporated in the joint points & crossings inspection format for a balanced and purposeful joint inspection. Existing standard format of NCRSI/PWI Joint Check List of Point & Crossing

i. Condition of tongue rail (OK/or Required replacement

a) LH tongue rail

b) RH tongue rail

ii) Condition of Stock rail (OK/or Required replacement)

a) LH stock rail

b) RH stock rail

iii) Condition of packing of point lay out with or without MSP.

iv) Housing of switch rail with stock rail with no excessive spring (if

any JIM proving required).

v) Condition, adequacy and tightness of complete fittings.

vi) Whether tongue rail are out of square, more than 15mm out of

square to be corrected.

vii) Whether any VURR on stock/tongue rail obstructing the

movement of log bar or housing of switch etc.

viii) Whether creep anchor, switch anchor, rail pegs or level pillars are

provided.

ix) Opening of switch at TOW show in mm (115mm for BG. 100

mm for MG).

x) The clearance between leading stretcher and bottom of rail not to

exceed 1.5mm. Nut and Bolts provided of standard size and are

tight.

xi) Gauge at the TOE of switch.

xii) Check loose wheel block switch pate are provided sufficient

offset and first two bolts are only tight.

xiii) Whether stock joint fish plates is planed through for smooth

working of log bars.

xiv) Obstruction test with 5mm test piece (OK or Requirement

adjustment)

xv) Condition of wooden sleepers on which point equipment is

installed.

xvi) Gauge tie plate is of standard size chair Fixing Nuts & Bolts are

tight. No gap between MS scrap remitted on gauge tie plate and

chair plate.

xvii) Whether sleeper is lock Bar Driving Crank/Radial Guide is

secured by tie bar with stock rail.

GENERALa) Whether sleepers are properly positioned with Rodding Run and Wire Run crosses the track.

b) If point Zone is track circuited, its details of joint inspection are recorded at page No. of track circuit No.

c) Any other items.

SI/PWI Joint Check List of Track Circuits.

i) Ballast is clear of the foot of the rail not less than 50mm throughout track circuit.

ii) Whether track is having proper drainage and no possibilities of water stagnation due to ash / mud with ballast etc.

iii) Whether insulated joints are square and well packed?

iv) Key of two rails are not touching each other or dog spikes are not touching fish plate at insulated joint/whether head of dog spike has been cut by 5mm?

v) Metal overflow at points is snot shorting track circuit?

vi) Whether longer fish bolts are provided at block joint & holes are of standard size.

vii) Whether planed fish plates are used on the block joint.

vii) a) Whether the gap between the rail ends is sufficient to accommodate the end post and the rail ends are smooth square and clear of Burrs & Battered ends at the insulated joint

b) Whether Rails in either side of insulated joints are anchored or not.

General:

a) Whether sleepers are properly positioned where roding run and wire run crosses the track.

b) No leakage from the water column.

c) Washer of holding down bolt at bridges/concrete apron not touching gearing plate.

d) Bond wire clips are in position.

e) Rails surface is free from rust.

f) Nuts and Bolts of crossing and gauge type plate are complete and tight.

g) Proper insulation of rail of level crossing gates provided.

h) If this track circuit also includes points, its detail of joint inspection is recorded on page no. ---- of point no.

i) Condition of wooden sleepers.

j) Missing liner and pad in PRC sleepers.

k) Any other items.

Additional items for SI/PWI Joint Check list of Points & Crossings:

i. Minimum stalling thrust of DC Motor point.

ii. Detection of lock bar stroke (1-3/4 or 43 mm).

iii. Point machine locking arrangement is functional or not.

iv. Condition of point rods

(a) Pull rod (b) Locking rod (c) Detection rod

Additional items for SI/PWI Joint Check list of Track Circuits

i. Ballast resistance to be checked (should not be less than 2 ohms/Km in the station yards and 4 ohms/Km in the block section).

ii. Difference between operation current under obstruction and normal operating current.

iii. The resistance of rail and bonding per 1000 m of track should not exceed 0.5 ohm for track circuits longer than 700 m. A rail bond resistance up to 1.5 ohms per 1000 m of track may be allowed for length of track circuits less than 700 m.

iv. Bottom of junction box connecting to track circuit should be at rail level.

v. Weather Rail Insulation Joint has been checked and are in good condition.

vi. Jumper wire insulation in good condition or not.

vii. Bonding wires are not rusted, double bonding is provided and Bond lugs must be firmly fixed into the web of the rail.

viii. Drop shunt working satisfactory. The track circuit shall not be over energized to such an extent that the shunting value drops below 0.5 ohms, except for AC 50 cycles per seconds track circuits for which the shunt value should be 0.15 ohm.

NCR

2.3Points & crossing inspection proforma:

In Points & Crossing Registers, the Gauge & Level are measured at 0 station and from 4th station onwards. But at stations 1 to 3 Gauge & level could not be measured as switches are in floating condition. Hence, the station 1 to 3 may be deleted from the proforma. Similarly in Thick web switches, the Guage & Level to be measured at every station upto SSD (Spring Setting Device). In this location, tolerance from -5mm to +10mm may be incorporated.

In GTL division, 23 nos of Thick web switches have been provided in two stations (MOO & KMH) by RVNL. The SSD of these switches giving frequent troubles at least once in fortnight, which increasing the workload of P.Way staff. Necessary guidelines may be issued that the organizations providing any such assets should maintain the assets for period of not less than a year.

SCR

2.4Procurement of half set of over-riding switches for need based replacement of damaged/worn-out tongue rail with corresponding stock rail instead of complete switch renewal:

It has been observed that population of LH turnouts on double line section is normally more than the RH turnouts. Hence, RH half switches of such LH turnouts get damaged/worn-out at faster rate and require frequent replacement within 09 to 15 months, whereas LH half switches of such LH turnouts have higher life of 32 to 36 months and remain in track for long.

It is therefore more prudent to replace only right hand half switches during 1st and 2nd need based replacement and during 3rd replacement the complete set of switch may be replaced.

This will not only economical by optimally utilizing the other half set switch to its full service life, but also reduce extra efforts and block requirement for complete set switch replacement. Inspection methodology for procurement of half set switch may also need a review by RDSO so that M/s RITES may be accordingly advised to inspect half set switches during procurement.

This item had been already discussed in the previous CTE Seminar and the Railway Board was required to take early decision on the issue. This may please be expedited.

NCR

2.5Clarification of applicability of Gauge tolerance limits of IRPWM Para 224(2)(e) (v) in case of P &C As per IRPWM Para 237 (1) (g) gauge just ahead of toe of switch is defined as under:-

(g) The gauge and cross level measurements shall be done at the nominated stations as indicated in the proforma. The track geometry at the turnout should not be inferior to that applicable to the route. However, gauge just ahead of actual toe of switch shall be as follows:

(i) All BG turnouts of 1:12 BG 60 kg with 10125 mm O.R. curved switches (on wooden, steel or PSC sleepers), 1:12 BG 52 Kg with 10125 mm O.R. curved switches on PSC sleepers and all thick web switches (52 kg/ 60 kg) on wooden/PSC sleepers i.e. all turnouts with switches having switch entry angle < 02000" = Nominal gauge. [Type a quote from the document or the summary of an interesting point. You can position the text box anywhere in the document. Use the Text Box Tools tab to change the formatting of the pull quote text box.]

(ii) All other turnouts excluding those (i) above i.e. turnouts with switches having switch entry angle > 02000"=Nominal gauge + 6mm. But the provision of IRPWM para 224(2)(e)(i) & (v) specifies the tolerance limits for gauge as under:-

(i) Preservation of gauge is an important part of track maintenance especially through points and crossings. For good riding, the basic requirement is uniform gauge over a continuous stretch of track and such gauge should be allowed to continue so long as it is within the permissible limits of tightness or slackness.

(v) While it is desirable to maintain correct gauge, where due to age and condition of the sleepers, it is not possible to maintain correct gauge, it is good practice to work within the following tolerances of gauge, provided generally uniform gauge can be maintained over long lengths:

Broad Gauge

a) On straight -6mm to +6mm

b) On curves with radius 350 m or more -6mm to +15mm

c) On curves with radius less than 350 m upto +20mm

Note : These tolerances are with respect to nominal gauge of 1676 mm. With the above mentioned two different provisions of IRPWM Paras (i.e. Para 237 (1) (g) & Para 224(2)(e)(i) & (v) ), it is not clear that provision of gauge tolerances of later para 224(2)(e)(i) & (v) is applicable for gauge in case of P&C particularly at toe of switch or not, If not then it needs to be modified as it is practically not possible to maintain nominal gauge without any tolerance. Secondly it is also needed to be clarified that what is the nominal gauge in case of turnouts on PRC sleeper, i.e. 1676 mm or 1673mm.

WR

2.6Standard Gauge to measure wear in Tongue Rails

Present Problem :

As per Para 237/2 of IRPWM, The wear on tongue rails is to be measured and recorded in Points and Crossing Inspection register as per Proforma for points and crossings inspection in Annexure 2/6. But for want of proper/approved measuring equipments, the wear of tongue rail is not being measured and the entries are left unfilled attracting criticism from higher-ups during inspections.

Though some gadgets are developed locally by some Railways, these are deficient and cannot be used if the tongue rail does not house flushfit with the stock rail.Suggestion :

RDSO may be advised to design standard wear measuring gauge to measure the wear of lounge rails in Points and crossing or else the Proforma for measurement of P&C may be modified similar to the earlier, where the wear of tongue rail was not measured.

SR

2.7Running out gauge at points and crossings at the rate of 1 mm in 3 M to the requisite extent.

Present Problem :

Running out gauge at the rate of 1 mm in 3 meters would amount to 1 mm in 5 sleepers. The least count of the Gauge is only 1 mm and easing out the gauge at that rate is practically not possible, considering the rigidity of PSC sleeper and the elastic fastenings used. It is observed that during yard accidents, this point is raised by Other departments and taking advantage of this provision, Engineering department is being made contributory to the derailment and it is difficult to defend. Even for P.Way renewals, the permissible tolerance for gauge variation from sleeper to sleeper is 2mm,i.e., a deviation of 2mm in 0.60 m. Such being the case, easing 1mm in 3 m during maintenance is not practicable.Suggestion: This provision in the Para 237 8(b) may be deleted and correction slip issued to IRPWM.

SR

2.8Permissible speed in case of multiple cross-overs

Para 410 (4) Up-gradation of speeds on Turnouts and loops to 30 Kmph of IRPWM specifies permissible speed on different types of Turnouts. Accordingly, 30 Kmph speed is permitted on 1 in 12 curved switch turnouts laid on PSC sleepers. However, manual is silent whether speed of 30 Kmph can be permitted on multiple crossovers i.e. when one has to go from one line to the non adjacent line. There are different situations i.e. i) when distance between two SRJs is more than one coach length; ii) when distance is less than one coach length; and iii) when SRJs are butting each other.

Para 407(9)(b) stipulates that a minimum length of 50 m should be kept between two reverse curves. It further stipulates that whenever straight length between two reverse curves can neither be eliminated nor extended to 50 m, speed in excess of 130 Kmph should not be permitted, of course if degree of curvature, super-elevation and transition permits the speed. In case of 1 in 12 turnouts, there is reverse curve of 4o without transition and super-elevation with straight mostly less than 50 m. Can the speed above 15 Kmph be permitted on such multiple crossovers? There are no guidelines available on the subject. RDSO may look into the matter and issue necessary guidelines. CR

3. L W R & WELDING

S.N.ItemProposed by

3.1Provision of the improved SEJs in lieu of 120 mm/190 mm conventional SEJs at the far end approach of the bridge, as given in para 4.5.7.1 (IV) of LWR manual.

LWR manual Para 4.5.7.1 (IV): LWR may also be continued over a bridge with provision of SEJ at the far end approach of the bridge using rail free fastenings over the girder bridge. The length of the bridge in this case, however, will be restricted by the capacity of the SEJ to absorb expansion, contraction and creep, if any, of the rails. The length of the bridge with the above arrangement that can be permitted in various rail temperature zones for LWR/CWR with SEJs having maximum movement of 120mm and 190mm.

The improved SEJs have two gaps each of 40mm. Thus, the total gap available is 80mm. Thus, these improved SEJs are having better capacity to absorb expansion, contraction and creep of the rail then the conventional SEJs, provision of improved SEJs as an alternative to 120/190 mm conventional SEJs at the far end approach of the bridge, as given in para 4.5.7.1 (IV) of LWR manual, may be permitted. This will held in continuing LWR on many of the bridges.

NCR

3.2Summer patrolling

As per LWR manual LWR track to be patrolled in summer when rail temperature is raised beyond specified limit and patrolling to be done by 1 patrolman in 2 km length on single line and 1 km on double line. For this patrolling about 8-10 men in each gang are being deployed and no gangman are available in gangs for doing other track maintenance work including preparation for mansoon. Presently all most all tracks is LWR on PSC sleeper with sufficient ballast profile even in most of locations ballast available is more than prescribed profile as per LWR manual. Even in summer we are restricting to do any work in LWR territory. Tamping is being done in night and consolidation is ensured by following DGS running or imposition of speed restriction as per LWR manual.

With above stipulation petrolling of LWR should be relaxed further and sectional Sr.DEN/DEN should be given power to introduce summer petrolling in those patches where he feel necessary on account of various reason like less ballast, disturbed track and weak formation etc.

3.3 Clause of Annexure X-A (Para 9.1.2(i) Hot weather patrolling gives the list of tools to be carried. Conne-a-boule is no longer relevant for concrete sleeper track, and needs to be removed from the list.

IRICEN

3.4Review of TWR criteria.

As per Para. 8.16 of USFD manual Through Weld Renewal (TWR) is to be carried out for removal of welds which have served more than 50 % of the life of rails. A study of the weld failure data of 3 previous years and the current year does not support this criterion of TWR. Because there has been a tremendous improvement in the quality of SKV welding as well as in the quality of USFD testing. A sample study of most vulnerable sections of Western Railway indicate that there is no need of TWR of welds after having served 50 % rail life as stipulated. The vulnerability of failures may not reduce even after TWR as the vulnerability of welds to failure is almost same after 50 % of the life of rails as well as of new welds. Therefore, there is a strong case of discontinuation of TWR especially by SKV welding.

Western Railway had very large population of DFW welds. WR concentrated on improving its quality standards of welding & USFD in addition to removal of DFWR category of defective welds as per recent guideline and achieved drastic reduction in weld failures. The study of weld failures before and after these measures indicate that we do not need to do TWR as stipulated

Study of Weld failures :

The data of 757 weld failures over Western Railway during previous 3 years and the year 2012-13 up to Feb. 2013 was studied in terms of %age GMT carried i.e. less than 50 % life of rail and more than 50 % life of rail. Further, data was also segregated between non-detected in USFD and the detected in USFD i.e. already declared defective welds (DFW). The data is presented in the following table:

Year

Nos. of AT weld failure

Nos. of weld failure

before passage of 50% GMT

Nos. of weld failure

After passage of 50% GMT

Non- detected

DFW

Total

Non- detected

DFW

Total

Non- detected

DFW

Total

2009-10

121

132

253

62

86

148

59

46

105

2010-11

81

175

256

41

67

108

40

108

148

2011-12

37

144

181

26

54

80

11

90

101

2012-13

(Upto Feb)

49

49

98

37

28

65

12

21

26

Total

288

500

788

166

235

401

(50.88%)122

265

391

(49.62%)

The above table indicates the following:

i)The number of weld failures are almost equal to the %age before 50 % GMT of rail life and after 50 % GMT of rail life i.e. 50.88 % and 49.62 % respectively.

ii) The data has been further divided into different %age bands of cumulative GMT carried and %age failures. The table as given below indicates that the failures are almost uniform over life of rails.Failure pattern of 60+52 kg AT welds

Percentage GMT in terms of stipulated rail life

Nos. of

failure

% of failure

Cumm. % of failure

10

138

17.51

17.51

20

62

7.87

25.38

30

59

7.49

32.87

40

63

7.99

40.86

50

79

10.03

50.89

60

94

11.93

62.82

70

148

18.78

81.60

80

80

10.15

91.75

90

43

5.46

97.21

100

22

2.79

100.00

788

100

The above failure data thus does not provide a rational any more for doing TWR after 50 % GMT of rail life.

Sample study of vulnerable sections :

Western Railway was having very high concentration of weld failures in UDN-JL (Udhna-Jalgaon) section and NAD-BPL (Nagda-Bhopal) section because of very high population of defective welds i.e. DFWs especially in NAD-BPL. It was not possible to do required large scale TWR. However, even much before the issue of Correction Slip No. 8 to USFD manual which categorized the vulnerable DFWs (having higher flaw size) into DFWRs, WR started the removal of DFWRs much in advance and as a result all the DFWRs have been removed from both the sections by 31st Oct.2012. With this measure, it has possible to have zero weld failures in both these vulnerable sections as against very high incidence in the previous years, as may be seen from the following table.

Section

&

DFW population

Year

Nos. of Fractures of DFW from April to Feb.

Nos. of Fractures of DFW for whole year

Remarks

Udhna-Jalgaon

( Km 0 to 306)

( DFW - 2852 Nos.) & Nagda-Bhopal

( km 0 to 238)

( DFW 10552 Nos.)

2010-11

29

76

Before identification of DFWR

2011-12

35

57

2012-13

(up to Dec.)

0

0

After identification of DFWR

The above sample study indicates that after removal of DFWRs, the failures can be almost arrested totally. Therefore, if we can continue to remove DFWRs like IMR in a reasonable time as specified and there is no need to do TWR

USFD Frequency of DFWs :

As per recent guide lines issued vide Correction Slip No. 8 USFD manual, the frequency of defective welds has been doubled which will also minimize the probability of undetected weld failures as all the welds vulnerable to failures shall get categorized into DFWRs which are to be removed.

Practice Abroad :

It is also understood that in any Foreign Railway , SKV welds, as adopted on Indian Railways ,are not renewed in the midlife of rails or any time before the weld serves full life of the rails (which is also much more than our standard of life because of the various rail maintenance techniques such as rail grinding etc.) This indicates that SKV welds presently being used on Indian Railways from last several years can certainly serve up to full GMT prescribed by Indian Railways for various rail sections as the metallurgy of welds is elastic enough to fully serve till life of the rail is over.

Sample study of TWR sanctioned works: In the recent past, a decision was taken by Indian Railways to execute TWR works by Mobile Flash Butt Weld plant. As these works are required to be done during traffic blocks which are hardly available in the sections, due for such renewals, there has been no response from the prospective tenderers. As a result, works of TWR continued to be in arrears. A sample study of these sections sanctioned for TWRs indicates that there has been hardly any weld failures especially after removal of DFWRs as may be seen from the following table.

Pattern of weld failure in section where TWR is due

Section

Line

Length in KM

Rail section

GMT carried

GMT in percent of stipulated life of rail

Nos. of weld failure in

2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

(up to Feb.)

NAD-BPL

UP

38

(km 97 to 135)

52 Kg

368

70

8

6

0

DN

58

( Km 97 to 155)

52 Kg

290

55

4

6

0

BRC-ADI

UP

29

(Km 400 to 429)

60 Kg

539

67

0

0

0

20

( km 463 to 483)

60 Kg

800

100

3

4

0

DN

20

(km 463 to 483)

60 Kg

665

83

3

3

0

Through Rail Renewal V/S. TWR:

Further, as per recent Correction Slip no. 129 to IRPWM, it has been stipulated that Through Rail Renewal may be done in case there are more than 30 defective welds per Track Km. which is indicative of the fact that it will be better to do Through Rail Renewal than to go for TWR as the cost of TWR is very high and in case , we have to do through SKV welding, the vulnerability to weld failures does not reduce as vulnerability of new SKV welds as well as 50 % old SKV welds is almost same.

DISCUSSION

In view of above analysis, it is considered that in future, instead of doing TWR, there is a need to concentrate on the initial quality of welds for by improved technology and also on the quality of USFD by digitalization etc. to take care of baggage of the older welds which were executed with lesser standards of quality. In any case, if there is high concentration of defective welds either on account of quality of welds / older welds or due to any other reasons, it would always be better to do Through Rail Renewal as this will bring in lesser no. of SKV welds.

CONCLUSION & SUGGESTION

To improve the reliability of the welds, it is suggested that the existing instructions of TWR at 50 % GMT of rail life may be withdrawn to save massive effort and in future we may focus on the quality of welding of new welds and on quality of USFD testing for the older welds by replacing the older equipments of welding as well as USFD and take other measures to improve technology. In no case TWR by SKV welding should be done.

WR

3.5Relaxation for carrying out of AT welding in place of FBW &

Scheme for taking up MFBW in Railway.

Most of the sections involved in this Railway where TWR works are sanctioned have GMT 40. Keeping in view huge GMT, it is apprehended that traffic block of not more than 2 hrs to 2 hrs would be available for on track FBW. Thus, the progress expected would be hardly 12-15 TKM/annum. With this rate of progress, TRR would become justified by the time TWR gets completed.

Under the circumstances, it is proposed that Indian Railway should procure MFBW plants like other track machines and these be allotted as departmental MFBWP which can take up work of TWR as per need & urgency of Railway.

Further, Railway suggests few items in the policy of track welding, may consider permit TWR by improved AT Welding in special cases such as:-

(i) Locations where tenderers are not quoting their rates even after second re-invitation.

(ii) At locations where topography of the section doesn't permit working of MFBWP such as High banks, Ghats section, sharp curves etc. And

(iii) No TWR on Routes where residual life of Rails is not more than 3 years as per GMT criteria. However Protection of AT welds to be done by Joggle Fish Plates.

SER

3.6Revision in Para 4.10.4 of Manual for fusion welding of rail by AT

process, (Revised 2012) This Para stipulates that By the time the reaction is complete, the burner should be removed quickly and gap closed with dried sand core. In practice burner is removed first and then only reaction is started, so this sequence need to be corrected.

IRICEN

3.7Authorisation of Sr. Supervisor/P.way (PWM) for carrying out welding of rail joints at site and permanent repairs including partial destressing :

Item No.2(g) and 8(c) of Annexure VI of LWR manual, specifies that the Lowest level of staff/ supervisor in-charge of work for the above works is PWI.

Due to shortage of hands and also due to increased work load,sufficient PWIs are not available in field for attending the above works and as a result of safety of track is getting affected.

All the PWMs are also under going field training of PWay on par with PWIs (including AT Welding training).

In view of the above, it is suggested to authorize Sr.Supervisor/PWay as the lowest level staff/ supervisor in-charge of the above works.

SCR

4. LEVEL CROSSINGS

S.No.ItemProposed by

4.1Modified check rail at level crossings New Modified LC check rail is fixed on ordinary PRC sleepers which costs Rs.1600/ sleeper.

There is no need of extra fabrication except small rectangular grooves of 110 to 130 mm in length & 25 mm in depth on head of the check rail at every 60 cm to accommodate the insert of the sleeper.

U-type distance blocks are used in new modified check rail which resists the heavy thrust of road vehicle & prevent the tilting of check rail.

There is no need of spl. type of PRCs.

It takes aprox. 20 minutes to fix the new modified check rail.

New modified check rail rests on the top of sleeper hence there is no possibility of play.

Fitting required

60 Kg slide chairs 8 nos (for one LC).

8 nos SEJ collars (60 kg) of two holes.

8 nos outer slide chair blocks of stock rail of w/layout 60 kg 1:12, used as distance

blocks.

Bolts 16 nos of 25x90 mm & 8 nos of 25x110 mm, for fixing SEJ collar with slide

chairs & distance block, check rail with SEJ collar respectively

Preparation of check rail Cutting of rail length 7.5 m. or as required.

Cutting & fabrication of flair ends & small rectangular grooves of 110 to 130 mm in length & 25 mm in depth on head of the check rail at every 60 cm to accommodate the insert of the sleeper.

WCR

4.2Inclusion of items pertaining to Gateman contained in G &SR in IRPWM.

(a) Competency certificate for gateman.

Provision of issue of competency certificate as contained vide para SR-16.01 of G & SR of ECR and indicated below is required to be incorporated in IRPWM.

SR-16.01 Certificate of competency- After prescribed training, every Gateman shall be tested by Section Engineer (P.Way) and issue a certificate of competency in the form given below before he is put to work independently. The competency certificate shall be valid for a period of three years. Certificate of competency

Certified that I (Name) Designation .. have examined Sri. S/o .. designation Station. in the duties of Gateman. He is conversant with the use of hand signals, detonators and other equipments provided at the gate. He is also conversant with the procedure to be adopted during abnormal conditions. He is hereby declared fit to perform the duty of gateman at gate No ..

Place

Signature

Date

Designation SE (P. Way)

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ECR

4.3Regarding duty of gateman at LCs during passing of trains. Para no.913 of IRPWM - 2004 speaks about the duties of Gateman, wherein in the sub para (2) the position of Gateman during passage of train has been prescribed. According to this, The Gateman should stand facing the track on the Gate lodge side of the approaching train. He should observe all passing trains and be prepared to take such action as may be necessary to ensure safety of trains. This provision contained in this para is not elaborative in nature and is rather vague. Whereas, as Para 16.04(A) of SR of ECR, is very elaborate and clearly described which is as follows-.

SR-16.04(A) The Gateman at all Level crossing gates should stand attentively at the gate lodge side, facing the track with furled red and green flags during day in right and left hands respectively and at night hold the hand signal lamp with the white light. He shall watch all passing trains to see any unusual condition like hot axles, chain hanging, any vehicle/wagons on fire, load shifted etc. and take prompt action to warn the Driver and Guard of the train by showing a danger signal. The Drivers and the Guards should be on the lookout for such danger signals. Therefore, correction slip needs to be issued in IRPWM to incorporate the entire detailed provisions as contained in para SR-16.01 and para SR-16.04 (A) of G & SR for better understanding among field officials of engineering deptt.

ECR

4.4Duty Roster of Gateman as Continuous Category :

The duty of the gatemen is almost similar to duties of ASMs. ASM do the duties of exchanging of private number, watching the train passing, taking safety measures in case of any accident/infringements on the track resulting in safety of the train etc . The similar duties are being performed by gate men. But the incentive given to the gatemen are much less than the ASMs.

Presently, great difficulty is being faced in finding gang men willing to work as gatekeepers because as per HOER gatekeeper of C class level crossing is categorized as Essentially Intermittent (EI) and has to perform duty for 72 hrs per week if residence is provided within 0.5 km otherwise 60 hrs per week, whereas gang man performs duty for only 48 hrs per week.

According to sub-para 4 (a) of para 8 of section 3(i) of Part-II of Gazette of India published on 5th March 2005 gatemen of C class LC is categorized in the same EI category as for caretaker of rest house and saloon attendant. With present working conditions at level crossings due to increased road traffic, behaviour pattern of road users and remote locations of level crossings, judging duty conditions of gateman and caretaker /saloon attendant at par is not justified.

In view of the above, it is suggested that working of gateman of C class LC should be classified as Continuous to provide justice to job being performed by him.

NWR

4.5Creation of Posts for Gateman for manning of LCs No matching surrender is available with Engg. Department.

Indian Railway has thurst on elimination of unmanned level crossings. One of the major activities is manning of level crossings. To man the level crossings, large number of posts of Gateman is required to be created on equivalent money value matching surrender but this is difficult as matching surrender is no longer available with engineering department. Therefore, it is essential to create new posts of Gatekeepers for manning of Un-manned level crossings.

This Railway is of the view that posts of Gateman should be created on the lines of justification followed for creation of Running staff such as Crew, SM/ASM, etc. as Gateman are also part of Running Staff.

It is to put on record that these LCs cannot be eliminated by any other means except by manning.

In view of the above, clear guidelines are required to be issued to the Railway to allow creation of posts for Gateman.

SER

4.6Annexure 9/2 Para 905 Thickness of stop board to be provided along with safety chain at manned level crossing is shown as 15mm thick, which is too thick & heavy. In practice people use 3-4mm thick plate. So the drawing may be changed accordingly.

IRICEN

4.7Wherever detonators are mebtioned in manuals, a box of 12, whereas detonators come in box of 10 (e.g. Para 910 & 11507 of IRPWM. So everywhere in manual 12 detonators may be replaced by 10 detonators.

IRICEN

5. MISCELLANEOUSS.No.ItemProposed by

5.1Allotment of fund under DRF for Track renewal works:

At present the allotment of funds is made work wise by Railway Board for the works appearing in the pink book. This does not relate to either progress of work or actual requirements. This is leading to frequent re-appropriation. Also as the powers for re-appropriation of funds within Zone are limited to 3 crores with GMs approval it becomes necessary to send the proposals for re-appropriation to Railway Board.

In this connection it is suggested that Board may allot total funds for track renewal under DRF & works wise distribution may be delegated to Zonal Railway, so that Zonal Railways can distribute the funds for the works which are targeted for execution.

SWR

5.2Increase in track centre at the time of construction of multiple lines

ECoR & SER

5.2.1Track centres in case of multiple lines: -

For electrified territory, the mast distance is to be kept as 2.3 m from track centre (EDTM/RDSOs letter No.2002/RE/161/11 dt.14.11.2006). Accordingly, if the mast is coming in between two tracks, the minimum track centre for the new track should be 5.9m (2.8 +0.3+2.8m). However, this is far inadequate to accommodate a push trolley kept off track to allow movement of train. The push trolley cannot be kept infringing the adjoining track from safety consideration as the train may approach on this track also. As such, to facilitate safe push trolley inspection, the track centre should be increased to 7.72m (2.36m+3m+2.36m). However, to avoid difficulties in yard arrangements, the track centre may be reduced to 5.3m by introduction of curves. On the approaches of yard, some element of safety is available through the signals.

In case if this is not possible to increase the track centre, the schedule of inspection of Engg. Dept. officials should be reviewed and revised as push trolley inspection in such situation is extremely dangerous.Railway Board may take a view on this.

ECoR

5.2.2Track centre for the multiple line (New construction) say 3rd line, 4th line etc.

Now a number of works for construction of 3rd & 4th Lines are being sanctioned. As per the present instructions the track centre of 3rd / 4th Line is being kept nearly equal to 5.3 m. This distance is found to be inadequate in field in view of the following:-

a) There is difficulty in inspection of track by one and all due to vicinity with nearby track.

b) P. way material unloading for the middle line/s becomes difficult. Rail/sleeper renewal is also very difficult.

c) Deep screening by BCMs and working of other track machines is very difficult.

d) It is very unsafe for P. Way staff to work on middle line with track centre of the order of 5.3m. It is proposed that the 3rd Line should be constructed at least at 7.5 M track center.

SER

5.3Increasing of Sectional Speed of existing sectional speed upto 110 kmph:

SWR, WCR and SR

5.3.1Increasing of Sectional Speed of existing sectional speed upto 110 kmph:

Policy circular no. 7 for Opening of Sections and sanction of Sectional Speed on Indian Railways has been issued by Railway Board vide letter No. 2011/CEDO/SR/15/O dated 08.10.2012. As per Para No.9 & 10 of circular, PCE is authorized to permit raising of speeds up to 110 kmph after initial authorization by CRS.

Commissioner of Railway Safety, Southern Circle, Banglore vide letter No. Q.190176/6/2012-SWR dated 18.02.2013 has objected to this in view of guide lines under Para No. 4.08 of General Rules which is as under.

GR 4.08 : Limit of speed generally:

(1)(a) Every train shall be run on each section of the railway within the limits of speed sanctioned for that section by approved special instruction.

In the light of GR 4.08, it becomes imperative that increase of speed has to be necessarily approved by CRS under approved special instructions.

As per GR approved special instructions means special instructions approved of or prescribed by the commissioner of Railway safety.

Clarification is required in this regard.

SWR

5.3.2Provision of G.R. & policy circular no.7

As per policy circular no.7, PCE of Railways are authorized to increase the maximum permissible speed of section from existing speed to 110 KMPH vide Para 10.1. In this regard CRS of Western circle & Central circle are raising objections as per there GR item no.1.02 (4) of chapter I- stipulates Approved special instruction means instruction approved or prescribed by CRS while as per Para 4.08 (1) (a) chapter IV every train shall run within the limit of speed restriction for that section approved by special instruction.

The provision of GR is in contradiction with policy circular no.7 as per CRS for increasing the sectional speed up to 110 KMPH. CRS sanction to be obtained or modification is needed in Para of GR.

WCR

5.3.3Provisions of Para 9&10 of Policy circular No. 7 and contradiction with provision 4.08 of GR, clarification sought by CRS/Southern circle

Present Problem :

The Zonal Railways are increasing the speed up to 110 kmph on New/GC/Doubling lines invoking the provisions of Paras 9 &10 of Policy circular No. 7 issued by Railway Board letter No. 2011/CEDO/SR/15/O dated 08.10.12. But as per G.R.4.08, every train shall be run on section of a Railway within the limits of speed sanctioned for that section by Approved Special Instructions.

As per CRS/SBC, it becomes imperative that increase of speed has to be necessarily approved by CRS under approved special instructions. CRS has sought clarification whether RB letter supersedes GRS. This Railway has sought clarification from RB, vide lr.No.W.368/1/Gen. dt.13.3.13

Suggestion :

Railway Board may look into this and clarify as to how to process further regarding increasing of section speeds up to 110 Kmph.

SR

5.4Jurisdiction of CRS to Instruct Open Line Officers to increase speed on new section:

As per the guidelines of Railway Board vide their letter No.2003/W-2/DL/O/1 dt.10.04.2003, the constructing agency is to commission any section (NL, DL, GC, Multiple Line) at the sectional speed and not less than 80 kmph. This policy essentially enforces a commitment of very good quality of construction by the concerned department.

Contrary to the above guidelines, the CRS authorizes opening of section at much lower speeds (in some cases on ECoR even at 45 kmph, 60 kmph, etc.) and directs Open Line organization to take over the section and then further raising of speed to be done by CTE/PCE after his inspection and personally satisfying about the suitability of track for higher speed. This has following impacts:-

a) The construction quality deteriorates as they never tried for a speed more than 65 kmph. Thereby they produce sub-standard quality work and often get away with it.

b) The Open Line does not have resources to make good the deficiencies on the new section. Quantifying all deficiencies jointly with construction agencies and then signing MoU along with financial liabilities is an uphill task.

c) Non-availability of maintenance resource with Open Line further compounds the problem.

In my opinion the CRS dilutes his statutory inspection in allowing section to be opened at lower speeds thereby proving that the quality is not up to the mark. Further, it is not proper for CRS to direct Open Line organization to take over the section immediately and then further raising of speed by Open Line.

Suggestion: To enforce a high quality of work, even if opening of a section at lower speed than 100 kmph is in the interest of traffic, the section should remain with constructing agency for maintenance until the constructing agency makes the section fit for the sectional speed or 100 kmph whichever is higher. In no case a new line be handed over to Open Line for maintenance at lower speed than 100 kmph. However, OL may extend help on cost-basis to construction in respect of Track maintenance/ballast etc.

ECoR

5.5Inclusion of safety tolerances in IRPWM 2013:

Safety tolerances in connection with normal maintenance of track are to be established and incorporated in IRPWM 2013 new edition so as to fight with sister department. All other departments are having their own safety tolerances. However, in the New P.Way manual these are being considered. Status of the same be advised to the committee.

SCR

5.6Maximum Permissible Speed for different Track Structure for running of different BG Wagons/Locos/Rolling stock.Present Problem :

RDSO gives Final maximum Permissible speed certificate for different wagons/Locos/Rolling stock for different track structures, specifying the rails, sleeper density and ballast cushion, with a condition that speed restriction can be imposed by the Railway for track structure inferior to the specified. However, there are no clear cut guidelines, as to what speed can be permitted for different wagons with different suspension system and different axle loads, if the track structures differs from the specified. Also,. There is no software or methodology available with the railways to decide the speeds, for approaching CRS. If some speed is specified arbitrarily, it may not satisfy the stress requirements and can not be justified with calculations, when questioned by CRS. With this, it is becoming difficult for the Railways to decide what speed to be certified , if the any component of the track structure ( rail section/sleeper density/ballast cushion either full or caked cushion) differs from the one specified by RDSO for the particular rolling stock and leads to confusion/un certainty. Further, speed varies for empty and loaded conditions.

In Southern Railway, different Track Structure exists on main line such as 52kg (72 UTS), M+4 sleeper density with 200 mm total cushion (LWR), 52kg (72 UTS), M+7 sleeper density with 200 mm total cushion (LWR), 52kg (72 UTS), M+4 sleeper density with 250 mm total cushion (LWR), 90 R (72 UTS), M+7 sleeper density with 250 mm total cushion (LWR). For all these combination of track structure, there is no specific speed recommended by RDSO. This aspect has been brought to the notice of RDSO by SR vide letter No.W.368/1/Wagons/VolII. Date: 01.02.13.

For want of specific permitted speed for above Track Structure, it is difficult to process Joint Safety Certificate for running different wagons/locos/rolling stock.

Suggestion: Hence RDSO should advise the permissible speed for different Track Structures of various combinations in the RDSO speed certificates. Otherwise, RDSO may provide the Software on line or share the existing technology, for calculating the Permissible Speed for different combination of track structure for different wagons/locomotives/rolling stock so that permissible speeds can be recommended at zonal level for the track structure other than the specified by RDSO in the Final Speed Certificate.

SR

5.7RDSO to state permissible Cd for all coaching stocks in the safety certificates:

As per IRPWM Para-405(2)(a) printed in 2004, Cant Deficiency (Cd) of 100mm can be permitted for determining speed on curves for nominated Rolling Stocks on A & B routes with the approval of PCE. However, details/types of nominated Rolling Stocks suitable for Cd =100mm is not elaborated in the said Manual.

ECoR has asked the information from RDSO which is awaited. RDSO should compile and circulate the list of coaching stocks with permissible cant deficiency. RDSO should mention permissible cant deficiencies in all speed certificates of rolling stock in future.

ECoR

5.8Speed restriction

The track cushion get reduced during service before it is due for deep screening. There may be various reasons for it like weak formation, heavy traffic, ineffective drainage, poor quality of ballast etc. in case of new line also during opening there can be less cushion at some locations. There is no provision in IRPWM regarding speed reduction if ballast cushion get reduced from required 350 mm.

The suitable instruction needs to be issued for imposing the speed restriction when ballast cushion is ranging between 350-300, 300-200, 200-150, 150-100 mm & less than 100 mm.

WCR

5.9Minimum sleeper density for SWP trackPresent Problem :

As per the correction slip No.130 to IRPWM, The minimum sleeper density of SWP track is specified as 1340 nos per km and the sleeper density for main line is 1660 nos per km. The variation in sleeper density is posing problems during machine tamping due to adjustment to suite sleeper spacing and resulting in ineffective utility of the precious block. Further, as CC+6+2 is universalized, the stretches with M+4 density require speed restriction, thus affecting the line capacity.

Suggestion :

Since the SWP track with 1340 Nos per Km is very minimum, it is better to have uniform sleeper density of 1660 nos per Km, so as to overcome the problems explained. Accordingly, the correction may be issued to IRPWM making the sleeper density uniform.

SR

5.10Surrender of posts & creation of posts for new assets

WCR & SCR

5.10.1Surrender of posts & creation of posts for new assets

In terms of Para 4.3 (7) of policy circular No. 7 a certificate is to be submitted to CRS that sanction of staff as per Railway Boards approved formula and yard stick/ norms for all category of staff (i.e. currently approved MCNTM formula to Trackmen etc.) is available before applying for opening of the section for regular operation of goods/ passenger trains.

At present, for creation of new lines / new assets matching surrender is being asked in zonal Railways and zonal Railways are facing great difficulties for providing matching surrender for creation of staff for new lines / new assets as there is no surplus safety / non safety posts which can be surrendered. WCR is having sanction strength of 11731 while as per MCNTM formula, the required gang strength worked out to be 13508. Thus there is a shortage in sanctioned gang strength as compared to strength required as per MCNTM formula.

A draft letter has been issued by Railway Board vide no. 2012/CE-I/GNS/2 dated .02.2012, it is suggested to outsource activities including for new lines. Exercise has been carried out in WCR and even if all the possible activities are outsourced, still there will be shortage of manpower as per present position. Therefore additional manpower will be needed for new lines.

Hence for creation of posts of new lines / new assets, no matching surrender should be asked.

WCR

5.10.2Manpower issues:

(i) P.Way maintenance has come under tremendous strain as many new sections, doublings etc., have been added over last several years and are being added continuously, but trackmen strength has not been sanctioned. The age profile of the available trackmen has also become very adverse to the extent that almost 50% of the available trackmen are going to retire in another 5 to 6 years. Many references from CRS to advise him the system to ensuring P.Way maintenance are yet to be adequately replied.

For ready reference, the figures as on 01.04.2011 are as under:

Requirement of trackmen with machine maintenance as of present status

19,594 Nos.

Book of Sanctions

15,029 Nos

Men on Roll

10,682 Nos.

(ii) The present system of creation of new post requires sufficient money bank or equivalent number of safety post shall be surrendered. Under the shelter, Personal Department (CPO) not created even single post for the 10 years during which several new lines/doubling are added to this system.

(iii) As per ME D.O No:2004/CE-I/GNS/1 dt: 18.04.2007 land Additional Member Civil Engineering letter no: 2003/CE-1/Safety/Posts/I dt:29.03.2007 envisages that surrender of trackmen shall not be done, if surrender is made, the same has to be revoked and taken back into book of Sanctions.

(iv) As per Railway Board Policy circular No:07, opening of sections and sanction of sectional speed on Indian Railways issued vide letter no: 2011/CEDO/SR/15/0 dt:08.10.2012 (F/748) under para 4.3(7) specifies that sanction of staff as per Railway Board approved formula (MCNTM) should be available before applying for opening of sections for regular operation of passenger/goods trains, a certificate to this effect to be submitted to CRS/competent authority along with Prescribed Documents.

(v) Under the above circumstances it is to mention that the policy of surrender of equal no., of posts for creation of trackmen/JEs/PWS/Welders shall be dispensed with and suitable instructions shall be formulated so as to positioning the required staff immediately to enable the Railways to takeover the new assets created and effectively utilized thereon.SCR

5.11Review of duties of Permanent Way Supervisors (PWS)

WR & SR

5.11.1Review of duties of Permanent Way Supervisors (PWS)

At present the nature of duties assigned to Permanent way supervisors (PWS) in IRPWM and LWRM are almost similar to the duties of Mate. In GR Chapter XV only PWI is considered qualified for taking block. However PWS are drawing pay same as to JE-II/P-Way ( Scale 9300-3400 +4200) and qualification wise also they are generally at par to JE-II/P-way as they are eligible for AENs selection after completing 5 years service as PWS similar to JE-II.

Keeping in view the increasing workload of sectional JEs it is desired that some of the duties of Sectional JEs must be delegated to PWS especially from portion other than inspections. So that sectional JEs can concentrate mainly on inspections and other important activities.

The following additional duties are suggested to be performed by PWS.

1) He shall ensure that track in his beat is kept safe for the passage of trains. Locations needing urgent attention shall be picked up without waiting for orders from PWI.

2) He shall ensure that entire gang length is kept neat and tidy. All loose materials are collected and brought to station, gang quarters / tool box or gate lodges. To ensure material lying in his beat is properly stacked and clear of any obstruction.

3) He should maintain a proper record of the P.WAY material location wise and all track features such as SEJs, P & Cs, culverts, bridge, LCs, DFW /DFWR welds, location wise DFW/ OBSR/ OBSW etc. in his beat.

4) He shall see that the equipments supplied to the gang are kept in good order and ready to use and every staff in his gang has a correct knowledge of all the equipments and is well conversant with safety rules. He shall check proper up keep of equipments of gang and their safe custody. He shall ensure that all safety equipments as well as other equipments are in sufficient number as per rules and are brought to the site of work as per need.

5) He shall ensure that prescribed system of track maintenance is adhered to and the task allotted, according to verbal instructions or entries made in his gang chart / diary, are efficiently carried out .He must fill the work done in the gang chart and task book daily .

6) PWS shall inspect the whole gang length, foot to foot once in a fortnight. During his foot to foot inspection he shall give special attention to loose/ missing fittings, special features /vulnerable location of his section like P & C, LC approach, SEJ, GJ, girder bridges, Defective Rails/welds, free joints curve, cuttings etc. . He shall maintain a proper record of his inspection, deficiencies noted and the action taken to rectify the deficiencies, if compliance not within his capacity he should inform sectional PWI. He should plan such inspections when attention of gang is done in that zone /location.

7) Pre & post parameters of spots given for attention/attended should be taken and proper record should be maintained in the DTM register with remarks if any if not rectified.

8) He will ensure that all free joints and Joggled fish plated joints of M/ L are opened out and checked once in 3 months.

9) He has to check all passengers loops once in 3 months and other loops once in 6 months and deficiencies' noticed to be got attended by gang .

10) He will carry out renewals of Rails, sleepers, P&C components in blocks and also carryout other block activities after taking block as per instruction of sectional JE/SE/SSE.

11) He will ensure the compliances of following activities on priority

a. He will ensure the protection as well as renewals warranted due to defect detection in USFD testing within time frame prescribed.

b. He will ensure the prompt action for prevention of corrosion in corrosion prone stretches of his beat.

c. He will supervise/execute the AT welding in blocks and will ensure that all the necessary precautions are taken and proper procedure is followed to achieve good quality. He will also check that no portion of riser should touch Joggled fish plate and fish plates are properly housed.

d. He will ensure that all the bolt holes are chamfered in his beat.

e. He will ensure that all the joints of CMS crossings are gapless and fish plates used are 1m long.

f. He will remain watchful regarding wheel burns, scabbed rails and cupped joints in his beat and will take remedial measures with consultation of Sectional JE/SE.

g. He will ensure that no any bolt holes are made for protection of new weld but protected with four clamps till these are tested by USFD,

It is suggested that the duty list of PWS in IRPWM and LWRM must be revised for inclusion of above mentioned duties, so that PWS can share the increased workload of sectional JEs with defined responsibility according to their pay/post/qualification. Necessary corrections in other relevant manuals/rules such as GR should also be made accordingly.

WR

5.11.2Amendment to Part C-Chapter 1 of IRPWM.

Present Problem :

IRPWM Chapter 1 Part C, deals with duties of Permanent Way Mistries. However, the designation of P.Way Mistry has been abolished in 6th Pay Commission. Sr.P.Way Supervisors have been delegated the duties as indicated in Part C, Chapter 1 of IRPWM for P.Way Mistries. It is pertinent to note that the pay of Sr.P.Way Supervisors is on par with Junior Engineer/P.Way. There is serious shortage of Junior Engineers and Section Engineers in Southern Railway (26 vacancies of Senior section Engineer out of 254 sanctions and 58 vacancies of Junior Engineer out of sanctions of 230. This situation is leading to not having Junior Engineers as per requirement. However, there are as many as 209 Nos. of Sr. P. Way Supervisors against the sanctions of 328 Nos. available in Southern Railway. As these Sr. P. Way Supervisors are drawing the salary on par with Junior Engineers on one hand and on the other hand, due to non-availability of proper duty list for these staff, Railway are n