2006•Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - TransportOpen access

Rail ballast: conclusions from a historical perspective

Peter A. Claisse, C. Calla

Open full text 24 citations

Abstract

Although it is now universally accepted that good-quality hard angular stone of nominal size 40–50 mm is the best material for ballast, historically track has been for longer on non-stone ballast than on stone ballast. Even the stone ballast specified up until the 1980s was of a smaller average size than present ballast. Research into the two-layered ballast system and a study of development of ballast specification from the early 1900s suggests that current ballast specifications should be changed to ballast of smaller size. This would: cause substantial reduction in maintenance requirements for ballasted railway track; reduce track noise levels; provide better ride quality; and increase ballast life.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Although it is now universally accepted that good-quality hard angular stone of nominal size 40–50 mm is the best material for ballast, historically track has been for longer on non-stone ballast than on stone ballast. Even the stone ballast specified up until the 1980s was of a smaller average size than present ballast. Research into the two-layered ballast system and a study of development of ballast specification from the early 1900s suggests that current ballast specifications should be changed to ballast of smaller size. This would: cause substantial reduction in maintenance requirements for ballasted railway track; reduce track noise levels; provide better ride quality; and increase ballast life.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 24 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Although it is now universally accepted that good-quality hard angular stone of nominal size 40–50 mm is the best material for ballast, historically track has been for longer on non-stone ballast than on stone ballast. Even the stone ballast specified up until the 1980s was of a smaller average size than present ballast. Research into the two-layered ballast system and a study of development of ballast specification from the early 1900s suggests that current ballast specifications should be changed to ballast of smaller size. This would: cause substantial reduction in maintenance requirements for ballasted railway track; reduce track noise levels; provide better ride quality; and increase ballast life.

Key concepts: Ballast, Track (disk drive), Quality (philosophy), Engineering, Marine engineering, Electrical engineering, Mechanical engineering, Philosophy

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Rail ballast: conclusions from a historical perspective — Research Paper | ScholarLens