Page 1 of 34

LWR ON BRIDGES: WORLD SCENARIO

A PROJECT REPORT

BY

1. ANIL PRAKASH
-DyCE/Track, E C Rly

2. PAWAN GURAWA
-SrDEN/3/BSB, N E Rly

3. BALDEV RAM
-SrDEN/Kota, W C Rly

4. REWTI RAMAN ROY
-DEN/ADA, S E Rly




COURSE NO. 725
SR. PROFESSIONAL COURSE (ADVANCE P-WAY)



Page 2 of 34

INDEX


SN DESCRIPTION PAGE NO.
Acknowledgement 3
1.0 Introduction 4
2.0 Background 4
3.0 Practice on Indian Railways 6
4.0
Technical Requirements &
Constraints
12
5.0 Track Bridge Interaction 15
6.0 World Scenario 20
7.0 Concluding Remarks 32
8.0 References 34

Page 3 of 34

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The project preparation and presentation is an
integral part of Sr. Professional Courses (Adv. P-Way)
being run at IRICEN. These courses are mainly to update
and refresh the knowledge of the advancements in the
field of track technology. The issue of continuation of
CWR/LWR over the bridges has assumed a lot of
significance in recent times, particularly in the context
that provisions on IR are too conservative.
We are highly grateful to Shri Shiv Kumar, GM (W)/
NF Rly [The then Director, IRICEN] and Shri R K Yadav,
SP/T and Course Director for selecting such an important
and relevant topic for the project.
We also acknowledge gratefully the direction,
guidance and support extended by Shri V K Gupta, Dean,
and IRICEN during the project preparation.
We also acknowledge the valuable support given by
the Library staff and Computer Cell staff of IRICEN.
Last, but not the least, we would also like to extend
our gratitude to all the staff of IRICEN, Hostel and Sports
Complex who made our stay very memorable and
comfortable.

ANIL PRAKASH PAWAN GURAWA
BALDEV RAM REWTI RAMAN ROY
Page 4 of 34

1.0 INTRODUCTION:
Today the LWR is synonymous with modern track. The need for
modernization of railway track has made it inevitable to introduce LWR
as standard practice to achieve better riding quality and better
maintainability of track as well as to ensure SAFETY. On Indian
railways, the installation of LWR has been very encouraging due to the
in-house development of quality track components like rails, sleepers,
fastenings etc. Indian railways has gone in a very big way for putting
LWR/CWR on normal straight track, but has opted LWR/CWR in a very
limited & conservative manner as far as the bridges & curves are
concerned. Since the entire railway lines are dotted with bridges &
curves, where there is compulsion of breaking the continuity of
LWR/CWR; it can easily be appreciated that the full advantage of
LWR/CWR is not being availed by Indian Railways, as of now.

Thus in the above mentioned context, the issue of continuing
LWR/CWR over bridges, assumes a lot of significance. An attempt has
been made in this project report to study the various practices over the
world railways and make some rational recommendations/remarks.

2.0 BACKGROUND:
The dream of jointless track has fascinated track engineers ever
since the first railway was laid. The welding of rails had been started as
early as in 1905; however the commercial welding on any considerable
scale became common only after 1932.During the thirties, the weights
and lengths of standard rail sections varied from 22kg/m to 65kg/m and
lengths from 5.5 m to 27 m respectively. The length of welded rail
panels varied from 18 m to 380 m.

Page 5 of 34
In India in nineteen thirties, the then existing railways like GIP,
BN, NW, EI etc started conducting trials on welded rail joints. From
1947 to 1966, large number of 5 rail panels and 10 rail panels were put
into track.
During the year in 1967 Railway board took a policy decision of
making LWR as the standard track structure on trunk routes and main
lines as a part of modernization plan of IR. But as per para 5.6.2 of the
first LWR manual i.e. Manual of instructions on LWR (provisional)
Oct70, in regard to the girder bridges, with unballasted decks, LWR
shall not be continued over girder bridges of single spans
exceeding 13 m or multiple spans of overall length exceeding
18m. On girder bridges, where LWR is laid, the fastenings shall be
rail-free fastenings so that the rail and the girders expand and
contract independently. Nothing much has changed from that time
and as per latest LWR manual provisions the maximum permitted
overall length of girder on which the LWR with 60 kg track in zone
IV can be continued is a bare 11m with rail free fastenings and 23
m with partly box anchored sleepers on girders, that too with
certain additional stipulations.

However, at the corresponding period i.e. in year 1968 1969
the bridges as long as 800m were provided with LWR without an
expansion joint on German Railways. JNR succeeded in using LWR on
bridges continuously with some changes in bridge support
arrangement and adjustments in creep resistance. In the America also,
despite difficulties involved, many railways installed welded rails on
bridges in sixties and seventies. Also in Europe, most of the long
bridges were provided with ballasted decks and LWR was used
extensively on girder bridges.



Page 6 of 34

3.0 PRACTICE ON INDIAN RAILWAYS:
On Indian Railways, the provisions for LWR on bridges is given
in LWR manual para 4.5.6 & 4.5.7. These paras are discussed as
below

Para -4.5.6:- Bridges with ballasted deck (without
bearing):
There is no restriction for laying of LWR/CWR on ballasted deck
bridges without bearing like slabs, box culverts and arches.

Para4.5.7:- Bridges with/without ballasted deck (with
bearings):
i) LWR/CWR shall not be continued over bridges with overall
length as specified in para 4.5.7.1 for BG and not more than 20 metre
for MG.
ii) Bridges on which LWR/CWR is not permitted/provided shall
be isolated by a minimum length of 36 metre well anchored track on
either side.

Para-4.5.7.1:- (i) Bridges provided with rail-free
fastenings (single span not exceeding 30.5 metre and
having sliding bearings on both ends):
Overall length of the bridge should not exceed the maximum as
provided in Table-1 with following stipulations:-
a) Rail-free fastenings shall be provided throughout the length of the
bridge between abutments.
b) The approach track upto 50 m on both sides shall be well anchored
by providing any one of the following:-
i) ST sleepers with elastic fastening.
Page 7 of 34
ii) PRC sleepers with elastic rail clips with fair T or similar type creep
anchors.
c) The ballast section of approach track upto 50 metre shall be heaped
up to the foot of the rail on the shoulders and kept in well compacted
and consolidated condition during the months of extreme summer and
winter.
Table 1
Maximum overall length of bridges permitted on LWR/CWR on BG (In m)
Temperature
Zone
Rail section
used
Rail free fastenings on bridges
with PSC/ST approach sleeper
[Para 4.5.7.1(i)]
60Kg 30 I
52Kg/90R 45
60Kg 11 II
52Kg/90R 27
60Kg 11 III
52Kg/90R 27
60Kg 11 IV
52Kg/90R 27

Para-4.5.7.1:- (ii) Bridges provided with rail-free
fastenings and partly box-anchored (with single span
not exceeding 30.5 meter and having sliding bearings at
both ends):
Overall length of the bridge should not exceed the maximum as
provided in Table-2 with following stipulations:-
a) On each span, 4 central sleepers shall be box-anchored with fair V
or similar type creep anchors and the remaining sleepers shall be
provided with rail-free fastenings.
b) The bridge timbers laid on girders shall not be provided with through
notch but shall be notched to accommodate individual rivet heads.
Page 8 of 34
c) The track structure in the approaches shall be laid and maintained to
the standards as stated in item 4.5.7.1 (i) (b) and (c) above.
d) The girders shall be centralized with reference to the location strips
on the bearing, before laying LWR/CWR.
e) The sliding bearings shall be inspected during the months of March
and October each year and cleared of all foreign materials. Lubrication
of the bearings shall be done once in two years.

Table 2
Maximum overall length of bridges permitted on LWR/CWR on BG (In m)
Temperature
Zone
Rail section
used
Rail free fastenings on bridges and
partially box-anchored with PSC/ST
approach sleeper [Para 4.5.7.1(ii)]
60Kg 77 I
52Kg/90R 90
60Kg 42 II
52Kg/90R 58
60Kg 23 III
52Kg/90R 43
60Kg 23 IV
52Kg/90R 43

Para-4.5.7.1:- (iii):
Welded rails may be provided from pier to pier with rail-free
fastenings and with SEJ on each pier. The rail shall be box-anchored
on four sleepers at the fixed end of the girder if the girder is supported
on rollers on one side and rockers on other side. In case of girder
supported on sliding bearings on both sides, the central portion of the
welded rails over each span shall be box anchored on four sleepers.
See Fig.4.5.7.1 (iii).


Page 9 of 34
Para-4.5.7.1:- (IV)
LWR/CWR may also be continued over a bridge with the
provision of SEJ at the far end approach of the bridge using rail-free
fastenings over the girder bridge (Fig. 4.5.7.1 (iv)). The length of the
bridge in this case, however, will be restricted by the capacity of the
SEJ to absorb, contraction and creep, if any, of the rails. The length of
the bridges with the above arrangement that can be permitted in
various rail temperature zones for LWR/CWR with SEJs having
maximum movement of 120 mm and 190 mm are as follows:-

Table 3
Max. length of bridge
with SEJ
Initial gap to be
provided at td
Rail temp.
Zone
Max
Movement
of SEJ
used
(mm)
With
ST/PSC
approach
sleepers
With CST-9
approach
sleepers
With
ST/PSC
approach
sleepers
With CST-9
approach
sleepers
IV 190 55m 45m 7.0 cm 6.5 cm
III 190 70m 70m 7.0 cm 6.5 cm
II 190 110m 100m 6.5 cm 6.5 cm
I 190 160m 150m 6.5 cm 6.0 cm
II 120 20m 15m 4.0 cm 4.0 cm
I 120 50m 50m 4.0 cm 4.0 cm

Note : SEJ is to be installed 10m away from the abutment.

Para-4.5.7.1 (v):
Welded rails may be provided over a single span bridge with rail
free fastenings and SEJ at 30m away from both abutments. The rail
shall be box anchored on four sleepers at the fixed end of bridge if
bridge is supported on rollers on one side and rockers on other side. In
Page 10 of 34
case of bridge supported on sliding bearings on both sides, the central
portion of the welded rails shall be box anchored on four sleepers. On
both side of the approaches fully creep anchored fastening shall be
used. The single span bridge permitted temperature zone-wise shall be
as under
Table 4
Temperature
Zone
Maximum length of single span girder bridge with SEJ
(190mm gap) at 30m away from both abutments with
full creep resistant fastening at approaches (td = tm)
IV 75m
III 87m
II 110m
I 146m



Page 11 of 34








Page 12 of 34
4.0 TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS & CONSTRAINTS:

If rail free fastening have been provided with LWR on girder
bridges then no thermal interaction takes place between track and
bridge, thereby ensuring that no forces are transferred from girder to
rail or vice-versa due to temperature variation. With such fastenings,
gap at rail fracture becomes limiting factor for providing LWR on bridge.
Thus the limitations for laying of LWR on bridges in Indian
Railways are due to certain additional forces on bridges due to
LWR/CWR. These forces are

i) Consider bridge with bearing provided with LWR/CWR. Due to free
expansion or contraction of girder, expansion/contraction take place
at free end of bridge and rail on bridge also move with girder as
both are connected to one another either directly or through ballast,
but at approach the movement is restrained by ballast resistance.
Due to this additional forces exerted in rail on bridge, which
transmits to sub structure through girder & bearings.


ii) In addition to above substructure of bridge also over loaded due to
higher tractive & braking forces of modern locomotive & stocks.
Page 13 of 34
Existing bridges were not
designed by considering above
forces and corresponding rail
stresses. The safe option for
providing LWR/CWR on
bridges is to keep rail & girder
independent of each other, so that there is no interaction of forces
between girder & LWR. This can be achieved by providing rail free
fastenings. In India we have been using dog spike and rail screw as
RFF and now pandrol has come up with a zero longitudinal restraints
design. Under normal circumstances there is small gap between the
base plate and top side of rail foot. In case of large lateral forces, the
baseplate prevents the overturning of the rail. The pad under the rail is
made up of low friction material like Teflon, which provides an almost
zero friction movement between rail & sleeper.
When rail free fasting provided on bridge & fracture occurred on
or near bridge, the gap at fracture will be wider as compared to fracture
in LWR on ordinary formation. This gap is equals to gap due to two
breathing lengths & due to free movement of LWR

g = g1 + g2 + g3

= Gap due to two breathing lengths [g1 & g3] + gap due to free
movement of LWR [g2] over bridge
2
= 2AE ( t) + Lo t
2R
This can be understand by force diagram as shown below-



Force dig. in absence of bridge Force dig. With bridge

Page 14 of 34
F is the location of fracture. Hence in case of fracture, there will
be additional gap equal to Lo t. Maximum length of the bridge in LWR
will, therefore, be restricted so that gap due to fracture can be
traversed by wheel i.e. 50mm without derailment, hence
2
2AE ( t) + Lo t < 50
2R
Hence value Lo can be increased for a particular rail section is to
increase the value of R by compacting ballast at bridge approach,
increase sleeper density to 1660 at bridge approach, heaping of ballast
at bridge approach and box anchoring of sleepers. By doing all this, the
bridge with sliding bearing at both end, rail free fastening throughout
the length, the value of Lo restricted as given in para 4.5.7.1(i).
For further increasing the length of bridge with LWR is to
improve approaches as above and provide few sleepers on each span
with creep restraints fastenings at location where the girder movement
is minimum to prevent more gap at fracture. This can be achieved by
providing 4 central sleepers with creep resistant fastenings and
remaining with rail free fastening [with single span not exceeding
30.5m with sliding bearing at both end], bridge timber with notch for
individual sleeper, centralization of girder with reference to location
strip on bearing before laying LWR, inspection of bearing twice in a
year with greasing once in two years. The value of Lo restricted as
given in para 4.5.7.1(ii).
The even longer length of LWR can be provided on bridges by
providing creep resistant fastening at selected locations on bridge, if it
is ensured that:
(i) Gap at fracture is not excessive,
(ii) Rail stresses are within safe limit and
(iii) Structural safety of the bridge is not jeopardized.




Page 15 of 34
5.0 TRACK BRIDGE INTERACTION (UIC 774 3R)
The LWR induces additional thermal forces in the track, Stress
developed due to restraining free expansion/contraction of the Rail
When such type of track is laid on the bridges, two types of Situations
arises-
i) Bridges with ballasted decks without bearing:
LWR can be continued over bridges without bearings like slabs,
box culverts and Arch bridges, where there is no relative movement
between bridge and LWR Track.
ii) Bridges with/without ballasted deck with bearing:
When the bridge structure and the track exhibit relative movement
to each others, then there is interactive effect which is to be taken into
consideration. Further the interactive effect can be tackled in two
different ways namely-
a) The rails and bridges can be made independent to each other
by providing rail free fastenings, so that movement of rails and bridge
deck are independent and they do not exert force on each other.

b) The rails and bridges are not made Independent and thus both
will exert inter alias forces on each other and the forces thus generated
are calculated and assessed and taken care of, in assessing the
strength of existing bridges and in the case of new bridges, the same
are taken into account at design stage itself. Determination of
interaction effects quantitatively is quite complex.
No reliable method was available for this purpose till UIC
recommendations for calculations of these interaction effects
were issued. To analyze and assess these interactive forces, the
ERRI specialists Committee D 213 has conducted detailed studies and
the results of the same have been published in the form of a report
named UIC774-3R of the year 2001.
Interaction between track and bridge, i.e. the consequence of
the behavior of one on the other, occurs because they are interlinked,
Page 16 of 34
regardless of whether the track is directly fastened or has a ballasted
bed. The interaction takes the form of the forces in the rails and in the
deck and its bearings, as well as displacements of the various
elements of the bridge and track. If the interaction is within the control,
then the bridge will continue to fulfill its functions i.e. supporting the
track, without the track being subject to anomalies.
There are two types of anomaly: The rail fractures or
disruption of the link between track and bridge such that track stability
is no longer guaranteed. Therefore interaction must be taken into
account as a serviceability limit state as regards the bridge as well as
being an ultimate limit state as regards the rail. The acceptable limit
state for the track depends on its design and state of maintenance. The
permissible values used in UIC report are the values that are most
widely permitted for standard track components in a good state of
maintenance. If a railway for its own reasons operates outside the
scope of application, that railway will still be able to use the calculation
methods by replacing criteria given in UIC report with new criteria
based on its own experience and observations. Similarly, the track
strength taken into account and the temperature increase envisaged
were drawn from the knowledge of the various railways. It is perfectly
possible to use this method but with different Values, if the need arises.
It should also be noted that the displacement or rotations to be
checked only concern what has to be checked to guarantee that the
behavior of the bridge cannot damage the track and alter its behavior.
There are other checks to be made as regards displacements and
rotation of the structure, these being concerned with problems of
comfort, dynamic behavior or strength.

5.1 EFFECT OF THE PRESENCE OF BRIDGE IN THE TRACK
Introducing a bridge under a LWR means, effectively, that the
LWR Track is resting on a surface subject to deformation and
movements. Thus causing displacement of the track. Given that both
Page 17 of 34
track and bridge are able to move, any force or Displacement that acts
on one of them will induce forces in the other. Interaction therefore
takes place between the track and the bridge as follows:
i) Forces applied to a LWR track induce additional forces into the track
and/or into the bearings supporting the deck and movements of the
track and of the deck.
ii) Any movement of the deck induces a movement of the track and an
additional force in the track and, indirectly, in the bridge bearings.

PARAMETERS AFFECTING THE PHENOMENON:
A distinction can be made between bridge parameters and track
Parameters.

5.1.1 BRIDGE PARAMETERS
a) Expansion length
b) Span length
c) Support stiffness
d) Bending stiffness of the deck
e) Height of the deck

5.1.2 TRACK PARAMETERS
a) Track resistance
b) Cross sectional area of the rail

5.2 ACTIONS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT

The cases that could lead to interaction effects are those that
cause relative displacements between the track and deck. The cases
concerned are as follows:
i) The thermal expansion of the deck only, in the case of LWR or the
thermal expansion of the deck and the rail, wherever a rail expansion
device is present.
ii) Horizontal braking and acceleration forces
iii) Rotation of the deck on its supports as a result of the deck bending
under vertical traffic loads
iv) Deformation of the concrete structure due to creep and shrinkage
v) Longitudinal displacements of the supports under the influence of
the thermal gradient
vi) Deformation of the structure due to the vertical temperature
gradients.
In most of the cases, the first three effects are of major
importance for the bridge design.

Page 18 of 34
5.3 PERMISSIBLE ADDITIONAL STRESSES IN CWR ON THE
BRIDGE
Theoretical stability calculations, on UIC60 CWR, 90 UTS,
minimum curve radius 1500 m, laid on ballasted track with concrete
sleepers and consolidated >300 mm deep ballast, well consolidated
ballast, give a total possible value for the increase of rail stresses due
to the track/bridge interaction are;
i) The maximum permissible additional compressive rail stress is 72
N/mm2
ii) The maximum permissible additional tensile rail stress is 92 N/mm2.

5.4 ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE DISPLACEMENT
Limits have to be placed on the displacement of the deck and
track in order to prevent excessive deconsolidation of the ballast. The
displacement limits also play a role in limiting indirectly the additional
longitudinal stress in the rails. These limits are as follows:
i) The maximum permissible displacement between rail and deck or
embankment under braking and/or acceleration forces is 4 mm.
ii) In the case of CWR on ballasted track with expansion devices, the
maximum permissible absolute horizontal displacement of the deck
under the same loads is 30 mm.

5.5 END ROTATION OF THE DECK
The end rotation of a bridge deck due to traffic loads is an
important factor for determining satisfactory track/bridge interaction
behavior. In order to determine an appropriate limit to the end rotation
of a bridge deck it is necessary to consider also other criteria such as
dynamic effects (ballast maintenance) and passenger comfort. Under
vertical loads, the displacements of the upper edge of the deck end
must be limited in order to maintain ballast stability. Obviously, the
effects of this displacement must be added to temperature variation
and of braking/acceleration.
Page 19 of 34
i) In the case of CWR on ballasted deck, the permissible
displacement between the top of the deck end and the embankment or
between the tops of two consecutive deck ends due to vertical bending
is 8 mm.
ii) The maximum vertical diplacement of the upper surface of the
end of a deck relative to the adjacent construction has to be limited.

5.6 SUPPORT REACTION
The interaction results in horizontal support reactions at the
fixed elastic supports, and these must be taken into account along with
conventional support reactions when calculating the structure and
supports.

5.7 RAIL EXPANSION DEVICES
It is preferable to avoid expansion devices in the track, but one
should always be inserted at the free end of the deck if the total
additional rail stress or the displacements exceed the permissible
values. Using the possibility of locating the fixed support at the middle
of the deck, it is possible to increase the length of a single deck
carrying CWR. Generally speaking this will lead to the following
conclusion:
The maximum expansion length of a single deck carrying CWR
without expansion device will be:
i) 60m for steel structures carrying ballasted track
ii) 120m for steel structures deck with fixed bearing in the middle
iii) 90m for structures in concrete or steel with concrete slab
carrying ballasted deck track
iv) 180 m for structures in concrete with fixed bearing in the
middle In the case of unballasted deck, a specific evaluation should be
done. Even when the calculated stresses and displacements do not
exceed the permissible values, it may be necessary to fit an expansion
device in the track. This is the case when the daily variation of the deck
Page 20 of 34
exceeds the permissible values taking into account the track
maintenance conditions.
The calculations are made using the precise track arrangement
(CWR expansion devices, joints) when, for any reason e.g.
Maintenance works consisting of serving CWR, this track arrangement
is modified, the service conditions on the bridge should be reviewed.
The bearings could also be modified and prohibition of braking forces.
A new analysis of the interaction effects should be made, when the
functioning of the bearings and/or of the supports is changed.

5.8 CALCULATIONS USING UIC REPORT

For designing the structure from the point of view of Track /
bridge interaction, three different steps of calculation can be used-
I) Pre- dimensioning method
ii) Calculation without interaction and calculations with
interaction.
iii) Calculations with computer program.

6.0 WORLD SCENARIO:

A literature survey has been done by RDSO to know the
practices being followed on various Railways. The survey reveals that
maximum length of the bridge ( Ballasted and Unballasted) is varying
from Railway to Railway. A summary of the information collected in this
regard is as under :-

(i) Maximum lengths permitted on ballasted track
Type CSD DB JNR SBB SNCF BR NS OBB RENFE SNCB
Steel
structure
- 60 - 25 100 20 15
to
48
Study in
individual
case
Not used
with CWR
No.
limit
Page 21 of 34
Concrete
structure
No.
limit
120 No.
limit
25 100 20 16
to
53
Study in
individual
case
No. limit No.
limit
Composite
structure
- - - 25 100 20 - Study in
individual
case
This type of
structure
not used
with CWR
No.
limit

(ii) Maximum lengths permitted on unballasted track

Type CSD DB JNR SBB SNCF BR NS OBB RENFE SNCB
Steel
structure
20606020202015
to
48
Studyin
individual
case
20(forsingle
span),Study
inindividual
case(multiple
span)
No.
limit
Concrete
structure
201206020202016
to
53
Studyin
individual
case
Thistypeof
structurenot
usedwith
CWR
No.
limit
Composite
structure
20- 60202020-Studyin
individual
case
Thistypeof
structurenot
usedwith
CWR
No.
limit

CSD CzechoslovakianRailway
DB GermanRailway
JNR JapaneseNationalRailway
SBB SwissRailway
SNCFFrenchRailway
BR BritishRailway
NS NetherlandsRailway
OBB AustrianRailway
RENFESpanishRailway
SNCBBelgianRailway
Page 22 of 34
It is further revealed from literature that most of the Railways
were not having the theoretical basis regarding the provisions they are
observed. These provisions were adopted just based on their past
experiences.
Railways world over have been trying to lay LWR/CWR
continuously over ballasted as well as unballasted decks to fulfill their
long cherished dream of having smooth ride over bridges. To
implement this, they are experimenting with innovative fastening
systems viz. Zero Longitudinal Restraint (ZLR), low toe load elastic
fasteners and also different types of expansion devices to
accommodate expected expansion/contraction. New bridges are now
being designed duly taking into account the LWR forces with/without
expansion devices. For this, computer based models and simulation
techniques have been vastly adopted to simulate LWR forces on
bridges, track/bridge interaction and expansion patterns. Different
railways have adopted different approaches with a single objective in
their mind to lay LWR/CWR over bridges and almost all have achieved
a fairly encouraging degree of success. Some of these approaches are
discussed below:

6.1 GERMAN RAILWAYS (DB)

German Railways have evolved an unique system to avoid
interaction between unballasted steel girder deck and LWR/CWR track.
In this design a solid steel bar with a side groove is welded on top of
the stringers. Over this special bearing plates having jaw are placed
which slide in the groove. Sleepers rest over these bearing plates, the
connection being secured by bolts/sleeper screws. This arrangement
permits relative movement between sleeper and girder. In this design it
is usual to provide a SEJ after 400 m even though on some bridges a
length of 800m was provided without an expansion joint. The main
advantages of this system are:
Page 23 of 34

i) Track structure on top is unaffected
ii) Need for special fastening is obviated.
iii) The arrangement is much stronger than rail free type against
vertical buckling.
iv) The arrangement maintains very good alignment.
v) No maintenance of anchor bolts/ special fastening is involved.
vi) There is no problem of sleeper seat corrosion.

The main problem with this design is that resistance to creep
being very small; wider gap at rail fracture is to be expected. To
counteract this, USFD testing at increased frequency was employed.
This resulted in timely detection of flaws and also in case of rail
fractures, gaps were found not dangerous.

6.2 BRIDGE ON HIGH SPEED LINE BRUSSELS-LILLE
(JUNCTION FOR PARIS-LONDON)

This bridge is 438 m long consisting of 7 spans, the main span
being 120 m long. The bridge carries two parallel-ballasted tracks with
UIC 60 rails laid on concrete sleepers. Computer modelling with full
continuous CWR track over bridge was done using the computer
program PROLIS20. The complete track and bridge configuration was
modelled in a discrete system consisting of 263 nodes and 416
elements assuming construction symmetry over both the tracks and
interaction forces and displacements were studied. Studies concluded
that the application of expansion devices in high-speed tracks on
bridges, as a means to prevent excessive longitudinal displacements
and forces, is not the best solution due to comfort, safety and
maintenance aspects. Instead a very effective solution is possibly the
use of zero longitudinal restraint (ZLR) fastenings over some lengths of
the track. The calculations, carried out in this respect, show a
Page 24 of 34
considerable reduction of track displacements, track forces and the
relative sleeper/ballast displacements, the reduction being a function of
the length over which these fastenings are installed. Based on this
conclusion the CWR was designed on the bridge with partly ZLR
fastenings but without expansion joints, which even resulted in saving
in investment costs. They recommended that the use of ZLR
fastenings, though not widely accepted yet and the construction
perhaps requiring some further development, should be given more
attention considering the favourable theoretical results achieved.


6.3 DIRECT FIXATION OF TRACK ON THE MISSION
VALLEY WEST LRT EXTENSION
Usually bridges are free to expand and contract at the
abutments and hinges, but attaching the rails directly to the bridge deck
would prohibit normal movement. A new design was adopted based on
this concept that allows longitudinal movement of rails near the hinges
and abutments without forcing the bridge to move with it. However,
some control over the rail movement is required to limit the size of the
gap in the event of a rail fracture. For this, two types of direct fixation
fastener plates (DFFs) were used, i.e.
i) One that allows longitudinal movement of the rail, Zero
Longitudinal Restraint (ZLR) fasteners, and
ii) Another that restraints such longitudinal movement of the
rail Standard Restraint (SR) Fasteners.

Page 25 of 34
The primary difference between the two is that the ZLR direct
fixation fasteners (DFF) use a special Pandrol Clip and a steel toe plate
that prevents the clip from contacting the base of the rail. A small gap
between the clip and toe plate combination and the rail allows
longitudinal movement but still confines the rail within the rail seat. The
resulting design allows the bridges to expand and contract as designed
while limiting the effects of CWR forces on the structure.

6.4 THE PANDROL RAIL FREE OR ZERO LONGITUDINAL
RESTRAINT (ZLR) SYSTEM
This system has been developed by PANDROL Corporation
based on rail free concept. It maintains the rail to correct track gauge,
provides the desired restraint against sideways movement of rails, yet
permits longitudinal movement through the assembly. With the help of
these fasteners long welded rails can be installed over and beyond
bridges without any additional requirement to compensate for the
differential thermal expansion. The rail free feature was obtained by
incorporating pressed mild steel cover plates over the shoulder housing
and firmly held in place by a special pandrol clip which is inserted into
the base plate in the traditional manner. With the cover plate locked
over the shoulder housing, the rail free action is obtained by designing
into the assembly a nominal 4mm clearance between the underside of
the cover plate and the rail foot. The pandrol Rail Free or Zero
Longitudinal Restraint System provides necessary interface between
the differing thermal movements of rail and its supporting structure.

6.5 DESIGN OF CWR ON A SUSPENSION BRIDGE (PORTUGAL)

A CWR track was designed for a 2.3 km long suspension bridge
over the river Tagus in Lisbon, Portugal. It is one of the longest bridge
of world with CWR track. It also consists one of world largest rail
expansion joint with a capacity of 1500 mm movement combined with
Page 26 of 34
the ability to disperse the angular rotation caused by the stiffening
truss. The 2.3 km long continuous stiffening truss deflects 5.3 m (17
feet) at the center of the bridge. The CWR is designed for such a
flexible support and for the resulting change in grades. In addition, the
CWR also has to negotiate, at the bridge ends, significant angular bend
caused by the behaviour of the truss under railway loading. The track
structure was kept independent of the longitudinal forces in the
stringers but had sufficient fixity to maintain the vertical and transverse
constraints of the track against buckling. The expansion assembly
consists of moving telescopic girders mounted on vertical rollers and
restrained by horizontal rollers between the stationary girders.
Longitudinally split rails are mounted on these girders .The construction
work was started in 1992 and completed in 1999 with a maximum
permissible speed of 60 kmph.

6.5.1 BRIEF HISTORY:
The original suspension bridge was constructed in 1966. The
main span is 1012.88 m, the side spans are 483.42 m and the three
backstay spans are approximately 100 m each. One of the unique
features of this bridge is its 2300 m (7472 ft) long truss continuing over
the suspended main, side and backstay spans. This was purposely
done to prevent large break in grade under train loading. The bridge
was built to carry four lanes of highway traffic at the upper deck level
with design provisions for a second phase construction to allow future
railroad track installation at the bottom chord level. In 1992, it was
decided to add two railroad tracks at the lower level and to widen the
upper deck to accommodate six highway lanes with minimum
interruption to the existing traffic.

Various components such as rails, guard/check rails, low toe
load fasteners, slide plates, expansion assembly etc had to be chosen
in a manner to suit the assembly in working as a unit permitting the rail
Page 27 of 34
movement to the effect and separating the bridge structure from the
LWR/CWR track completely. The system provides for free expansion of
the rail and also isolation of bridge and track from each other.

6.5.2 SELECTION OF THE TRACK

The main considerations of track on a suspension bridge were:

i) Aerodynamically acceptable behaviour
ii) Low dead load
iii) Independence from stresses in truss
iv) Lower noise and maintenance levels
v) Safety during derailment
vi) Capacity to accommodate a large expansion joint at ends CWR with
elastic fasteners on wooden sleepers at 60 cm spacing was found most
suitable to these requirements. The track was designed to UIC
standards. The open deck with all these arrangements was found
suitable from aero dynamical requirements also.
Page 28 of 34


6.5.3 TRACK LAYOUT ON THE BRIDGE
The track layout on the bridge is divided into different zones on
the 2300 m length of the bridge as follows:
i) standard zone
ii) anchor zone
iii) end zone
iv) expansion zone
Page 29 of 34
v) creep free zone
The standard zone : It is basically a rail slip zone,
approximately 2150m long and consists of CWR. The track in this zone
can flex to follow the different deflected shapes of the suspended truss
with maximum deflection at center is 5.3 m. The continuous rail can slip
in its chairs longitudinally within the limits of the zone without picking up
the axial forces of the stringer that supports it.
Anchor zone: At either end of the bridge the CWR is terminated
over a short length wherein the rail is anchored to the stringer through
an anchor joint. The anchor joint is a specially designed insulated
connection where in the rail is rigidly connected in the longitudinal
direction but the rail is allowed the usual resilient support. This
connection will provide the uniformity of the track modulus and prevent
uneven wear of the rail.
End Zone This is a short stretch of track between anchor joint
and start of expansion joint complex. Bonded rails at one end and
insulated rail joint at the other end is provided for bypassing the track
circuit over the expansion joint.
Expansion Zone The expansion zone accommodates the
expansion complex. The expansion zone is kept free of CWR forces.
Bonded rail joints are provided at each end for easy replacement of the
expansion joint.
Creep Free Zone In order to protect the expansion zone and
to arrest any possible longitudinal movement, the creep free zone is
provided with extensive creep anchors and an anchor joint at the
approaches.
Tension Clip Mark 3 The rail needs to adjust to the deflection
of the long stiffening truss as the truss will deform under live load which
is effected by slipping of rails longitudinally. A new clip was developed
by modifying the standard SKL-12 clip, which induced a low toe load of
300 kg instead of the standard toe load of 1300 kg. This clip had
additional characteristic of a partial rail free type fastener, which allows
Page 30 of 34
the rail to slide longitudinally on its chair. As a result, the running rail
stresses remain independent of the rail stringer stresses. To facilitate
such sliding, a 3 mm smooth stainless steel plate is provided
underneath the rail.

6.5.4 EXPANSION ASSEMBLY COMPLEX.
The suspension bridge truss is a flexible structure. The railway
loading consisting of heavy concentrated loads, when moving on this
flexible bridge causes local and global deformation of the truss. The
railway track experiences steep grades and changes of grades at the
center and specifically at the ends of truss. If the running rail is rigidly
fixed to the end stringer, the transition girder will result in a kink in the
rail and high bending and fatigue stresses. Therefore, the rail is
mounted on resilient chairs capable of allowing the rail base to rise and
fall to adjust to the imposed curvature. This has a significant effect at
the end producing an angular bend in the rail. The thermal expansion
of the trusses is significant at the ends. In addition, the truss ends also
move in and out due to deflection of the truss under the live load
depending upon the location of the load. The maximum calculated
movement at the ends for the design was 1500 mm.
After detailed research and studies of various existing systems
the split rail type of expansion joint was developed. The other designs
like switch expansion joint, moving sleeper type etc were not adopted
due to large space requirements at the end of the bridge and more
maintenance requirements due to large number of moving parts.
Considering the limited space available at the end of the bridge, the
telescopic girder type expansion joint was selected as the most
suitable.
The expansion assembly complex so evolved comprised of the
following important components
i) Transition girder and telescopic girders
ii) Split rails for rail expansion
Page 31 of 34
iii) Check rail and its expansion arrangements
iv) Angular bend dispersion components
v) Telescopic girder mountings
Such expansion system is located at either end of the bridge
and was specially designed to address the requirements such as
a) restricted space, b) high expansion range and c) construction of the
unit under traffic conditions on an existing bridge etc.
The expansion assembly used on this bridge is one of the
largest and most complex expansion assemblies in the world providing
for constant cyclical longitudinal movements and the angular bends in
the running rail.
This expansion joint has been accommodated in a limited space
of 8.5 m thus making it the most compact, yet one of the largest
expansion joints in the world.
In this arrangement to cover the expansion gap of 1500 mm at
the ends and to flex for the angular bend, a short 6.0 m transition girder
was designed. This also acts as the inner moving telescopic girders for
expansion. The moving telescopic girder is inserted between the two
stationary telescopic girders and held laterally and rigidly by two
horizontal rollers with a preload force of 100 t in order to maintain
clearance of 6 mm between stationary and moving girders. These
girders are designed very stiff, structurally, to limit deflection to not
more than 1 mm. On these girders L shaped split rails having top
profile of UIC60 railhead have been used. These split rails are made of
high manganese steel, forged and surface hardened in fine laminated
perlite structure to a level of 1150 N/mm2 for a depth of 25 mm for
wear resistance. In order to control and guide the wheel to roll at the
gauge face, a U69 type high performance rolled steel check rail is
placed at 45 mm clearance. The check rail is kept continuous over the
expansion gap. It is extended continuously from the truss over the
telescopic girder and expansion joint up to the approaches to provide
lateral restraint to the wheel flange. The check rails have been
Page 32 of 34
provided with an expansion arrangement on the approaches. In order
to uniformly distribute the angular bend of maximum .06 rad and permit
rail to assume a curvature the rail is fixed on special type of chairs. A
dispersion length of 2052 mm was considered sufficient on the
transition girder and similarly on end stringer. The horizontal rollers are
mounted on the stationary girders. The vertical steel rollers on the
bronze bearings are mounted at the bottom of the telescopic girder at
the far end. The steel assemblies in which the rollers are housed are
designed with close tolerance to resist lateral forces and uplift forces
caused by the passage of wheel loads. These rollers are critical in
maintaining gauge and close clearances in the split rail.

7.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS:
From above discussion following conclusions can be made-
1. Maximum length of bridge (ballasted or un-ballasted) over which
LWR can be continued, is varying from railway to railway, probably on
account of the forces considered in the original design of the bridge.
2. On IR, there is no restriction for LWR on ballasted deck bridges
without bearings. Even all the bridges can be provided with LWR with
provision of rail free fastening, partial box anchoring and SEJ on each
pier.
3. There is no restriction on provision of LWR on ballasted deck
bridges as for as Czechoslovakian Railway (CSD), Japanese National
Railway (JNR) and Belgian Railway (SNCB) in case of concrete
structures.
4. Minimum length permitted on bridges with ballasted deck
bridges is NIL in case of Steel structures as in Spanish railway
(RENFE).
5. Maximum length permitted on bridges with un-ballasted deck
bridges is 120 m with concrete structures as in case of German
Railway (DB).
Page 33 of 34
6. Minimum length permitted on bridges with un-ballasted deck
bridges is NIL in case of Steel as well as concrete structures in
Spanish railway (RENFE) and Belgian railway (SNCB).
7. Most of the Railways are not having theoretical basis regarding
the provisions being observed. These provisions have been adopted
just based on their past experiences.
8. Out of 1,19,724 no of bridges on IR, 99547 no of bridges which
are Arch, slab, pipe or other, are covered under para 4.5.6 and 19,149
nos are covered under para 4.5.7.1 of LWR manual. Thus there are
only 928 nos of bridges that are not covered under provisions of LWR
manual.
9. On IR, 190 mm gap SEJs may be utilized so that LWR manual
can be implemented fully.
10. As existing manual provisions in case of ballasted deck bridges
are with rail free fastening suitable zero longitudinal resistance
fastening (ZLR) to be used on PSC sleeper should be introduced.
11. Case to case study & trials under Indian conditions for all the
existing bridges should be carried out as brought out by the UIC report
no 774-3R for continuing LWR/CWR over the bridges that are not
covered by the LWR manual.
12. Experiments/field trial should be conducted to under stand the
thermal interaction between bridge & track when LWR is provide with
elastic fastening.
13. It is desirable to analyze the forces due to track-bridge
interaction and take into account the same while designing new
bridges.






Page 34 of 34
8.0 REFERNCES:
(i) Long Welded Rails, 2005 (IRICEN publication).
(ii) UIC Code no 774-3 R, Oct-2001.
(iii) Long welded Rails on Girder bridges by L S Mittal.
(iv) LWR on bridges by H K Jaggi (Article in IPWE Journal).
(v) 7
th
Meeting of the extraordinary TSC, Oct-2002.
(vi) Improved Knowledge of CWR Track by Coenraad Esveld.
(vii) CWR for Seoul subway no. 2 Dangsan Bridge by ZLR by Lee
Duck Young, Kong Sun Yong, Kwon Soon Sub, Kim Eun.
(viii) Direct Fixation Track on the Mission Valley West LRT extension
by Dane Schiling, P. E. Associate Engineer, Boyle Engineering
Corporation.
(ix) Design of High Speed Track on Long Bridges by Prof .Dr.Ir. C.
Esveld , Professor of Railway Engineering TU Delft University,
Netherlands.
(x) Annual report of RDSO Track Directorate for 2003- 2004.
(xi) Design of Continuous Welded Rail on Suspension Bridge: A
Technical Paper for AREMA by Ranganatha r. Rao and Sudhir
Sanghvi- Parsons Transportation Group.
(xii) Pandrol Rail Free or Zero Longitudinal Restraint System by
Pandrol.com.
(xiii) Manual of Instructions on Long Welded Rails, 1996.
(xiv) RDSO Civil Engg. Report nos 148, 166, 169 & 170.
(xv) Long welded rails on girder bridges- R. Rajamani: P-Way
Bulletin, July-1987.
(xvi) SPC-12, Canadian Pacific railway; April-2000.