Railway Track & Structures - February 2009 - (Page 17)

TTCI R&D Evaluation of the effects of car-based top-of-rail lubrication systems Figure 1, left, is a photo of TOR friction control applicator car and nozzle system. Figure 2 shows low rail curving forces, front to rear, for TOR friction control-equipped and non-equipped trains. Railroads see multiple benefits from using car-mounted TOR friction control applicators. op-of-rail (TOR) friction control is receiving increased attention by railroads. Traditionally, benefits have been seen in reduced rail wear, lower curving forces and improved rail surface conditions. However, due to recent increases in the cost of fuel, interest in TOR friction control has been raised because under certain conditions it can also reduce fuel consumption.1,2,3,4 The Association of American Railroads, Federal Railroad Administration, Union Pacific and Kelsan Technologies cooperated in a project to monitor TOR friction control implementation and deployment issues and documented T benefits achieved from a mobile-based TOR friction control application system. A hopper car was the platform for mounting a TOR friction control applicator. Two significant advantages of installing a mobile system on a revenue car instead of a locomotive are fewer systems are needed to cover a given route and no locomotives are taken out of service for application hardware installation or routine inspection/maintenance. TOR friction control systems can utilize a variety of wayside- and mobilebased application systems, all of which have been demonstrated in closed loop and field sites. Most recently, waysidebased (fixed location) application systems have been used in field demonstrations for several reasons: • Wayside-based applicators have undergone the most development in recent years. • Controlled rail wear tests and other monitoring activities can be conducted over manageable (short) distances. This allows effectiveness to be controlled and monitored using three to eight TOR application systems. These demonstrations followed similar methods of monitoring rail wear and curving forces over a period of time. By pro-rating results collected over a short (10- to 30-mile) test zone, data have been used to show benefits of implementing TOR friction control over a wider territory. Only a limited evaluation of energy savings has been conducted in an area with territory-wide wayside deployment.5 A known limitation of wayside application systems is the distance TOR friction control is effective. Data suggest a wayside-based TOR friction control by Richard Reiff, principal investigator, TTCI February 2009 17 www.rtands.com Railway Track & Structures http://www.rtands.com

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Railway Track & Structures - February 2009

Railway Track and Structures - February 2009 Contents On Track Industry Today Supplier News AREMA News NRC News TTCI R&D Railroads Stepping Up Use of Technology to Locate Rail Flaws Rail Lubrication Realizing Great Potential M/W Challenges: Track Settlement at Bridge Approaches Supplier Profiles Products and Literature People Calendar Advertisers Index Sales Representatives Website Directory Professional Directory Classified Advertising Chicago Perspective

Railway Track & Structures - February 2009

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.