Talk:Railroad tie

1

Added link for ballast - it was an unlinked term previously.
Kether83 07:33, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Can somebody mention (and reference of course) the fact that the railroad ties are really toxic and leach toxins into the soil. It is common to find these ties in peoples yards and sometimes vegetable gardens after their railroad use. Discusting.

Common

Which is the more common name?

• Railroad tie
• Sleeper

Simply south 00:47, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd go for sleeper, as it is used throughout the Commonwealth I think, whereas Railroad tie would be largely limited to America (the U.S. of). Philip J. Rayment 01:45, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Naturally, you're British. There are more railroads in North America than in the UK, Australia, and wherever put together. Besides, the term crosstie is far more descriptive and less confusing. A "sleeper" is a Pullman sleeping car.Scott Adler 08:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Are you really certain that there are more railroads (in terms of track length, I suspect) in the U.S. than in the Commonwealth? Besides, I would rather try to determine which term more people use, not which country has longer rail tracks. But no matter if tie or sleeper, it would improve the article a great length if one term was consistently used through all of it (except the synonyms portion of course). --Funkysapien 01:19, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of what continent/country has more miles of track, more trains running on them, or more sleepers, ties, what have you, the article should at least be consistent with itself, for the benefit of the reader. It should also be consistent with its title, which at present is "Railroad tie". Unless anyone has real objections, I'll change the article to use "tie" consistently - if folks want a different term to be used then the article's title should be changed. --Badger151 (talk) 22:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Steel Sleepers

To complete this article we should perhaps have a description of steel sleepers and their use

Done. Biscuittin 20:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Ties per mile

There are 5,280 feet in a mile.

This article states that railroad ties are laid at "intervals of about two feet".

This works out to roughly 2600 ties/mile.

The article states that "a typical mile of rail contains approximately 3,000 ties."

That's a big difference. Which fact is wrong?

~~ clintp

Strictly speaking, neither. 2600 ~= 3000, when rounded to the nearest thousand. Its a matter of significant digits.

Now, as for the answer that isn't from the science teacher side of me, I'd say the rounder number's acceptable, because the variation can be pretty great. Factors like the type of tie used, the level of use of the line, and the presence of curves or bridges can easily increase the number. So using the less specific number is probably a good idea. oknazevad 02:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Heres foot note from Trains.com

A footnote: Why are ties spaced as they are? W.M. Camp's 1903 book, "Notes on Track," says there should be enough space between the ties to allow a shovel to be used to advantage - at least 11 inches. This works out to about 20 inches on centers, about 10 inches less than the average person's step.

So as 20" centers it would be 3168 ties/mile(Larek 18:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

Size?

What are their dimensions? Scott Adler 08:48, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

That depends on the Gage in use, and changes around cirtan structures such as switches and bridges. (Larek 18:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

Spannbetonschwellen Typ B 70

I don't know about the US, but to give you an aproximate value (I don't think they will differ too much around the world), here in Germany wood sleepers are 6"x10", and concrete sleepers are 12" x 8" on their outer edges. Both types are 8,5 feet long. --Funkysapien 01:28, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Concrete Sleeper being "more common"

The article refers or infers twice to the use of Concrete sleepers as the replacement for wood and most common type. Instead of 'an alternative mostly seen in Europe'

"but concrete is now widely used" "Concrete sleepers have become more common"

Firs I contend that this is not properly sourced, as the 1 and only source listed is for Wooden ties.

I believe this idea Concrete tie prevalence to be untrue, at least in my geographical area [Michigan USA]. I assume that the original creator is from Europe where concrete has seen more use. The 150 foot section of test track at Pandrol_Jackson/Jackson_Jordan's Ludington MI faculty being the largest installation of concrete sleepers I have yet seen.

Wood sleeper are shown only in a Historical/negative light with none of the positive benefits. Also none of the negative aspects of concrete sleepers have been shown. (Larek 18:22, 10 July 2007 (UTC))

Their prevalence obviously does differ heavily with location. I live in Germany and have been around german railways for 25 years now, and I can't remember seeing a single portion of newly laid track (and that includes track replacenment) here during the last 15 or 20 years where wood sleepers were used. Of course this is only my personal observation, and I have no reference for it. But, what ARE the 'positive benefits' (is there such a thing as 'negative benefits'?) of wood sleepers as opposed to concrete sleepers? And what are the negative aspects of concrete sleepers? Seriously, because I don't know any. (More expensive maybe? but thats as far as my imagination goes.) Cheers --Funkysapien 01:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

The disadvantage is, that a concrete tie weights 300 kg compared to about 70 kg weight of a wooden tie, so it's very difficult to get one into your car ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.139.236.246 (talk) 14:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

The only advantage that I can think of for wooden sleepers is possibly quieter track, as they'll absorb better. These days they're probably not even cheaper. The only time I ever see wooden sleepers in the UK is on older track that hasn't yet been relaid (oddly enough, some of the relaying on the Settle-Carlisle line in recent years has used steel sleepers), or occasionally former worn main-line track going into sidings. An exception I've noticed sometimes are wooden sleepers around points - am I imagining I've seen that, or is it real and is there a reason for it? : Riedquat (talk) 22:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

I believe wooden sleepers are still used in sets of points because they can be cut easily to any length. If you are using concrete sleepers you need a few dozen moulds to cast the few dozen different length sleepers to fit. Wongm (talk) 23:51, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Concrete ties provide less kinetic energy absorption ("dampening") of the vibrations of the train's rolling stock than do wood or plastic composite ties. This may result in higher rail wear and higher wear on a train's rolling stock. Also, concrete ties are susceptible to electrical corrosion whereas plastic composite ties and wood ties are not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.101.0.34 (talk) 05:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Would there be a difference in brittleness (and would it matter)? --Badger151 (talk) 22:03, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Errors in section "Fastening rails to ties"

(I'm not correcting these error myself, because I'm not a native English speaker, so I'll just point out the errors in the section, and hope that someone with better writing skills will include them)
Orignally no tie plates were used, but its hard to find examples nowadays. I've seen directly spiked rails on a siding of the Cumbres & Toltec and also (but a special spike type) on some siding in Bavaria, Germany (don't remember the exact location)
Virtually all rail uses tie plates nowadays and for a very long time.
European-style railroads DO NOT use screws which are driven through the tie plates to hold the rails, unlike American-style railroads:
Wood ties, America: some nails only attach the tie plate to the tie, other nails clamp the rail and extend through the tie plate into the wood
Wood ties, Europe: 4 screws attach the tie plate to the tie, a clamp with a screw hold the rail, but this later screws don't extend into the tie, it's quite sophisticated compared to American style, a picture can be found here
http://www.oberbauhandbuch.de/oberbauhandbuch/oberbauarten/standardbauarten/k-s-49-s-54-holzschwelle.html
Steel ties, Europe: tie plate is integrated
Conrcete Ties, Europe: tie plate is similiar to that on wood ties, sometime attached with 2, sometimes with 4 screws, on newer rails the more modern clamps are used which I think are also used for American style concrete ties —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.139.236.246 (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)