60E2 Steel Rail of EN 13674-1 Standard

60E2 Steel Rail of EN 13674-1 Standard

According to various sources, the 60E2 steel rail is part of the EN 13674-1 standard, which outlines the specific requirements for steel rails used in railway applications. These specifications encompass dimensions, mechanical properties, and quality assurance standards aimed at ensuring safe and reliable rail infrastructure.

I am Zhang Shijin, your expert for pyrolysis processes here at AGICO. If you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to get in touch.

Yongyang Product Page

I look forward to your message!

By Anders Frick and Dr. Wolfgang Schoech ' July,

Rail maintenance is crucial for the longevity and efficiency of railway infrastructure. Traditionally, rail grinding was intended to eliminate surface defects, necessitating significant metal removal. However, modern practices have shifted towards a preventive maintenance strategy, where minimal metal is removed at regular intervals to maintain optimal wheel-to-rail contact.

The fundamental question remains: what is the best profile for rail grinding?

As rail is utilized in various locations with diverse traffic characteristics, a singular profile cannot universally fit all scenarios. Historical experience indicates that even newly installed rails often fail to provide ideal wheel contact conditions. Thus, diverse rail profiles have been created to enhance wheel/rail interactions, prolonging rail lifespan in the process.

Rails must not only bear loads but also guide vehicles effectively. Appropriate contact geometry between the wheels and rails is essential to adequately align wheelsets on flat tracks and facilitate turning through effective rolling radius differences on curves. Nonetheless, despite good contact geometry, conical wheel treads inevitably generate creep and wear in the contact region, often leading to irregular shapes.

Standardization across Europe has streamlined wheel and rail profiles, with the S wheel profile and UIC standardized rail profiles becoming the norm. These geometries strive to balance average operational conditions over both straight and curved tracks.

Profiling in Grinding Practice

Initially, rail grinding focused on corrugation removal without significant regard for the transverse profile. The evolution of production standards for profiles allowed railway operators to aim for restorations to various original design profiles.

As research indicated the feasibility of achieving custom railhead shapes with precision, new target profiles distinct from rolled profiles emerged. Utilizing current grinding technology enables the production of numerous profile shapes. Systems that monitor transverse profiles continuously ensure compliance with specified tolerances and optimal profile outcomes.

In the late s, German railways (DB AG) pioneered the reduction of target grinding profiles, introducing a modified UIC 60 profile with a 1:40 incline. This modification enables consistent profile geometry across various rail types, allowing for a cost-efficient grinding process.

Moreover, rail life is influenced not only by wear but also by surface fatigue, especially under heavy loads and frequent cycles. Gauge corner fatigue, often termed headchecks, manifests primarily on high rails in curves with substantial radii, and occasionally in straight track as well.

Headcheck formation tends to occur under high axle loads, elevated speeds, and substantial traction forces. To alleviate rolling contact fatigue (RCF), it is crucial to systematically undercut the gauge corner and remove fatigued rail steel.

Other railways have sought innovative profiles to combat these issues, with Dutch Railways’ ProRail introducing an Anti-Headcheck Profile featuring gauge-corner relief compared to standard profiles. Similarly, French Railways (SNCF) have established preventive and corrective profiles based on headcheck visibility.

After extensive testing, German railways formalized a standardized target profile, ensuring negative production tolerances that promote moderate gauge-corner undercutting.

Optimal target profiles must maintain low equivalent conicity to sustain vehicle stability at elevated speeds. For example, Austrian railways (ÖBB) have developed convex rail head profiles to harmonize low conicity and reduced surface fatigue.

Moreover, innovations continue within the field, with specialists crafting specific target profiles to reduce wear, mitigate fatigue, and improve running behavior.

For more information, please visit 60E2 Rail.

Profiles for Heavy Haul

One prominent example of heavy haul rail is Sweden’s 473-km Malmbanan line, facilitating 30 million gross tonnes of mixed passenger and freight traffic annually. This electrified line endures extreme temperature cycles, resulting in fluctuating tensile and compressive stresses during seasonal changes.

Traditionally, head checking, spalling, and shelling defects were commonplace; however, contemporary maintenance strategies involve regular grinding and lubrication, reducing the occurrence of these issues.

As rail profiling technology improved, asymmetric profiles were employed strategically to assess their impacts on wear reduction, particularly for ore train wheels.

Subsequent projects yielded the MB1 profile, tailored specifically for the unique wear patterns of hollow wheels, allowing for enhanced wear reduction and delayed RCF defect emergence.

A five-year grinding program commencing in demonstrated consecutive improvements in profiles and significantly decreased RCF defect rates, though earlier defects could not be entirely eradicated.

The MB3 profile, refined from the MB1 model, optimized gauge corner relief further, permitting rails to remain viable longer in service.

Moreover, prior to 2005, grinding programs yielded considerable economic benefits, as rail maintenance costs decreased drastically following the introduction of proactive measures.

Turnout Grinding

Turnout rails undergo similar grinding processes to enhance performance in switches. Initially utilizing the BV50 profile, subsequent evaluations highlighted wear issues, prompting adaptation to profiles like MB4, which offers refined gauge corner relief.

Training and strategic planning play vital roles in optimizing rail grinding practices, culminating in consistent annual grinding for all critical track sections.

Future Work

Future efforts along the ore line will prioritize the handling of increased axle loads and annual tonnage. The optimized MB1 and MB3 profiles will continue in open tracks, while MB1 and MB4 profiles will address turnout needs.

Ongoing collaborations among Banverket, MTAB, and grinding contractors foster continuous innovation aimed at enhancing wheel-rail contact and overall operational efficiency.

Through researching advanced rail steel compositions and improved lubrication techniques, the railway industry aims to improve life cycle costs and prolong the viability of their infrastructure.

Anders Frick is Senior Metallurgist, Banverket, Swedish Rail Administration, Track Engineering. Dr. Wolfgang Schoech is Manager of External Affairs, Speno International SA

References
(1) Nilsson P., Wheel/Rail Interaction ' From theory to practice, 6th International Conference on contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems ' CM, Gothenburg

Are you interested in learning more about 60e1 Rail? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!