ONLINE
STORE
"ASK THE BACH MAN"
FORUM
PARTS, SERVICE,
& INFORMATION
CATALOGS AND
BROCHURES

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 26, 2021, 06:53:27 PM
Home Help Search Login Register
News: Check out the photo gallery link above or >click here< to see photos of recently announced products!
+  Bachmann Message Board
|-+  Discussion Boards
| |-+  General Discussion
| | |-+  rails on bridges
« previous next »
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: rails on bridges  (Read 4084 times)
SteamGene

View Profile
« on: July 26, 2007, 03:21:19 PM »

I'm building a steel viaduct.  The company that makes it calls for their bridge rail set - which does have guard rails and bridge barrels along with it, but the rail is code 83.  Is it prototypical to have lighter rail on a bridge than on ballast?  Or should I use the code 83 rail on a siding?
Gene
Logged

Chief Brass Hat
Virginia Tidewater and Piedmont Railroad
"Only coal fired steam locomotives"
Stephen Warrington

Engineers love a tender behind


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2007, 06:24:03 PM »

Hi Gene,

Maybe I can help you out this time. For the all the times you gave me adice.

On our shortline all our Bridges had 110 pound rail and  most of the main was 90 pound on ballast. So I would use the lighter rail on a siding and the heavy rail on the bridge. Don't forget the guardrails.

Stephen
Logged
SteamGene

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2007, 06:31:54 PM »

Thanks, Stephen.  It's nice to have some prototypical examples.  I'm surprised about the heavier rail on the bridge though. 
Tell you what, it's amazing how this bridge works.  I'm taking 0.20 plastic and making something that will hold a Rivarossi H-8!  I have to say it's not fun work, but progress is nice.
Gene
Logged

Chief Brass Hat
Virginia Tidewater and Piedmont Railroad
"Only coal fired steam locomotives"
Atlantic Central

View Profile
« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2007, 09:05:50 PM »

Gene,

In most cases the running rails on a bridge are exactly the same as the trackage leading to it. Guard rails are often the same size as the running rails, but may be slightly smaller.

Not all railroads use/used guard rails in every case. A recent article in RMC (May, 2007) goes into great detail about guard rails and other safety appliances commonly found on bridges. It discusses in detail differences from road to road and how guard rails and the like have evolved.

Sheldon
Logged
Stephen Warrington

Engineers love a tender behind


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2007, 09:16:39 PM »

Hi Gene,

Your welcome and Sheldon is right on some lines the rail on the bridges were the same as on ballast.But the IC liked heaver rail on most long bridges and used smaller guard rails. Our shortline is a former IC branch and when theylast reworked the bridges installed  heavier rail on them but most of the shorter ones they didn't.

Stephen
Logged
Guilford Guy


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2007, 09:47:11 PM »

For a steam era line use the same size guard rails but as rail is replaced over time present day railroads often have smaller sized rail as guard rails since guard rails are only really replaced when it is destroyed in a derailment. Therefor in your era you should be fine.
Logged

Alex

Atlantic Central

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2007, 10:17:49 PM »

Guilford guy is correct, most guard rails only ended up smaller because of upgrading of the running rails. So if your bridges are "new" both rails should be the same size.

Sheldon
Logged
RAM

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2007, 10:51:26 PM »

let so when the bridges were built the rails were the same.  When I was a kid and lived net to the hight bridge branch of the Jersy central.  There was a bridge right in back of our house.  the rail were not the same size and it was 64 years ago when we moved.
Logged
Guilford Guy


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2007, 11:01:09 PM »

well if its an older bridge then the guard rails were probably originally there and the main rail was replaced when needed...
Logged

Alex

SteamGene

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: July 27, 2007, 10:36:13 AM »

I'm not an expert on bridges so I appreciate the information.  Let's face it, no two railroads acted in the same fashion.  The replacement of running rails with heavier track while leaving the guard rails the same makes perfect sense to me. 
I guess the question is going to be - will the fact that the ties are designed for a bridge outweigh the fact that the bridge running rails are code 83 while the track on either end is code 100?  I'll probably have to take a look at that.
Gene
Logged

Chief Brass Hat
Virginia Tidewater and Piedmont Railroad
"Only coal fired steam locomotives"
Stephen Warrington

Engineers love a tender behind


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: July 27, 2007, 08:14:45 PM »

Hi Gene,

To be perfectly honest it shouldn't matter with some weathering the two rail sizes should blend in with each other. I seen some wonderful model bridges with code 83 bridge track  on them with older code 100 rail leading up to them and if you didn't really stare I couldn't tell the difference. 

Stephen
Logged
r.cprmier

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: July 28, 2007, 06:01:39 AM »

Gene;
Most bridges and trestles I have seen were a mixed bag.  When I lived in Braintree, Mass, there was a supr that led to the Fore River Shipyard, and it crossed a pond on a trestle.  This trestle was eventually filled in, but I do not recall seeing guard rails utilized; possibly because the engine weight was that of a 44-ton loco.
On the Ct. Viaduct, there are two bascule draws over the Housatonic, and they do employ guard rails, the same size as the traveling hardware.
Guardrails were essentially to minimize damage done by derailments, so structural integrity was not a factor.
As a matter of choice, I use guard rails, start a taper a short distance from the bridge end, and continue it onto the ballasted trackwork, ending in a point.  Simply put, I like the looks.

RIch
Logged

Rich

NEW YORK NEW HAVEN & HARTFORD RR. CO.
-GONE, BUT NOT FORGOTTEN!
SteamGene

View Profile
« Reply #12 on: July 28, 2007, 08:10:27 AM »

Stephen,
You make an excellent point about code 83 rail.  I've found it to be much more expensive than code 100 and yet almost everybody says you can't tell the difference once the rails are painted and ballasted.  Obviously on a bridge they will only be painted.
Gene
Logged

Chief Brass Hat
Virginia Tidewater and Piedmont Railroad
"Only coal fired steam locomotives"
Pages: [1] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!