Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

th-9th-4th-3th-2There is only one preferable engineering solution. Period. A coffer dam around the break on each side and pump. In civil engineering class in my college there there was a saying on the wall: "mud plus mud makes more mud....and you can't do a (censored) thing with mud!". You cannot dump fill in water and create a stable base. Once the area is dry, pilings to rock. Then rip-rap. Then headwalls and one or more large corrugated sectional culverts. Then tamped fill with gravel. I would use earth cement. Portland cement and earth. When close to grade conventional ballast.  An alternative would be a pile-driven trestle. A third alternative would be coffer dams, pumps, two 28-day strength concrete wing-wall abutments and a bridge. A steel or pre-cast pre-tensioned concrete span. That should do based on 80,000 pound cars and modern locos. But Canada has an engineering standard. You could go with a truss. Then trackwork. Then remove the coffer dam. Concrete will harden under water but you can't dump it in. There is a caveat. The long approaches may not be stable. So-called Attenberg liquid-limit tests must be performed at frequent intervals in flooded areas. Supersaturated roadbed may survive several passes of a freight, seemingly without harm, and then catastrophically degrade, resulting in a wreck in the middle of nowhere. In any event construction traffic will likely be load-limited. Crews may have to wait till the water subsides and the ground freezes. Or raise and stabilize the approaches. A nightmare on Elm street. In New York this was done by piping in ice-cold saline. Argh!!! More importantly a massive drainage/watershed study is in order. Tree planting, canals and or dams may be in order. A wonderful book on fill is "Moving the Earth" by Nichols - the workbook of excavation. A must read for museum groups with limited budgets and washout issues.

www.garymgreen.com , a modeler, has examples of some actual typical canadian roadbed requirements in appendix six of his site though somewhat dated and blurry.

Attachments

Images (4)
  • th-4
  • th-3
  • th-2
  • th-9
Last edited by Tommy

Thanks tommy. not exactly what  I had in mind for a quick fix.. but you may be right. do it right the first time. .. How would you marshal your train  heading to the wash out to start the project.... American hoist.....  material to construct copper dam.. There's no place to unload much of the material....

The water is slowly receding with no current flow from one side of the right of way to the other.

How would you start the project??   Anyone else.?

Well...I am very concerned about the roadbed in front of and behind the break, despite the nice aerial view. The properties of sand, silt, and clay affect the permeability of soil. The biggest problem are extreme freeze-thaw cycles, especially over 70 odd years. These create fissures, cracks and channels beneath the ballast, moreso with high water levels. As the freezing weather comes on, the water will turn to ice, which expands. While clay structures have low permeability, goodness knows what fill was used in 1929 when money way scarce and mandatory construction standards non-existant. The news media are focusing on the 19 or so breaks. Not the load-bearing capacity of the rest of the water-soaked trackbed. This factor is a wild-card. 

The decision by the previous operators to limit loads on freights may not have been so irrational. I would like to see their confidential engineering studies. Ignoring load limits by the American owner may have contributed to progressive deterioration of the sub-base and the susceptibility of the roadbed to washouts.

 

Last edited by Tommy

So, looking at the satellite view of the area, it looks like it was the ocean bottom long ago.

I was thinking of turning to the Alaska RR for ideas, but this terrain is awful.

The ARR and the main highway from Anchorage to Fairbanks follow virtually the same route today, along the river to avoid massive excavations.

How does the Churchill Highway handle the weather and flooding? Why did the Canadian government abandon this line (and the folks that live there)when CNR deemed it financially unable to maintain and operate it?

Fixing washouts is a bandaid to provide a short term lifeline. I suppose we have all seen the photos railroads around the world that keep places alive. There are many small places in Alaska that survive by air or boat support only.

No longer having a major source of revenue, it seems that the Churchill residents are on their own.

Gregg posted:

Thanks tommy. not exactly what  I had in mind for a quick fix.. but you may be right. do it right the first time. .. How would you marshal your train  heading to the wash out to start the project.... American hoist.....  material to construct copper dam.. There's no place to unload much of the material....

The water is slowly receding with no current flow from one side of the right of way to the other.

How would you start the project??   Anyone else.?

There is no quick fix. 

I know you just can't dump in tons of gravel and hope that it will hold until a permanent fix could be done.  Particularly when it's way out in the boonies with limited access, any MOW crew would want to go in only once and once only.  You're talking about moving in a small army of men and equipment to repair this washout.  Plus, I'm sure an inspection for the surrounding land and remaining roadbed would have to be made before anything moves in.

I'm sure any Engineering Department would get a good laugh out loud for any solution us model railroaders or railfans could conjure up.

Rusty

Maybe...   Maybe not... ( according to google) .  Seems the last parts  of the railway were laid right  on  top  of  frozen tundra in the winter . In the spring , out came the ballast trains dumping ballast right on top of the track until the line was completely ballasted.

There's another article about  two  American's on dirt bike traveling the line and taking pictures. They seem to think it's not quite as bad as the company that owns and operates the railway think . I'll stick the link on the other thread. 

I guess what bothers me is.... We give millions away to other countries but neglect our own... (same as you guys)

Back to the wash out... how are you going to fill it in or fix it?

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, of whom I worked for has developed free software to assist in planning rail construction and rehabilitation. These programs have only been available with the last five years. Called AREMA track design criterion. They have a downloadable PDF discussing vertical load pressure, load limits, and progressive high-load roadbed deterioration. And more importantly, estimating man hours and equipment hours required for various repairs, much as in the old fm 5-35.

http://pavement.wes.army.mil/pcase.html

The URL only seems to work when you type it in and not use the hypertext transfer link.

There are several other Corps of Engineer rail repair PDF's available for download.

www.AREMA.org

AREMA publishes "The Practical Guide to Railroad Construction" which should be a must-have for any museum with proprietary trackage. And those considering rebuilding the Churchil line. A tremendous amount of information is available these days regarding rail repairs, estimates of man and equipment hours to repair, and forecasting lifetimes of track that were unavailable in 1929. We no longer need to rediscover the wheel or make repairs by the seat of our pants.

Incidentally AREMA publishes a "portfolio of track plans" which should be of great interest to any P:48 modeler.

 

Last edited by Tommy

There is a magazine called "Railway Track and Structures" that has been around since 1904. I threw out my old issues but they have had detailed articles on replacing track and restoring washed out areas. You see old issues on e-bay once in a while. Lots of neat interesting stuff about turn-of-the-century structures, track, and structures. And rail construction practices in 1929.

There is a company called:

www.lusas.com

They provide modeling software for rail soil-structure problems and construction sequence modeling.

They have a number of free videos on their site with relevance to planning rehabilitation of the Churchil line.

Last edited by Tommy
Tommy posted:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, of whom I worked .

 

Tommy,

As soon as I heard those words coffer dam,  rip rap,  Portland cement,  etc,   I knew that somewhere in your background The Corps of Engineers was lurking!   Anything short of what you have suggested is just a temporary band aid that is another failure waiting to happen.

Nick 

Gregg posted:

Thanks tommy. not exactly what  I had in mind for a quick fix.. but you may be right. do it right the first time. .. How would you marshal your train  heading to the wash out to start the project.... American hoist.....  material to construct copper dam.. There's no place to unload much of the material....

The water is slowly receding with no current flow from one side of the right of way to the other.

How would you start the project??   Anyone else.?

Difficult indeed - which end has material and equipment?

I wasn't kidding about the Alaska RR. They can provide excellent examples as they encounter problems like this and have to regularly repair such damage.

Acquiring the equipment to make such a task will be a hurdle.

The ARR (and all railroads for that matter) have to get clever at times as snow melt can cause washouts when areas regularly vulnerable that have culverts get clogged. From John's Alaska railroad website, the MOW section, they show a work train attacking a washout that needed repair to permit the proper MOW equipment to get to the section.

The first car was a large flat  with an excavator on it and then short hopper cars or ballast dumpers full of the needed size rock pushed by an engine

Washout at the loop

ARR MOW

The ARR has their own quarry and rock crushers and have modified and acquired cars for hauling equipment and material. rail lifters, spreaders, tie machines and on.

Getting the line sturdy enough for travel could be accomplished by some experienced MOW personnel.  

I would say that would be the most important resource to locate - then, let them say what they need. Engineers, surveyors, politicians, press, investors and such all like to talk and plan. Find some folks that know how to keep a line open. The long term rebuilds could come later.

Of course, a pile of cash would be needed to fuel all efforts.

Contacting the Canadian rail companies (CNR that maintained this line) or the railroad union may get some contacts of retired personnel. They won't give up or loan the current personnel as they are much needed. They are busy keeping the lines open. A project like this could be of interest to retirees for some extra cash.

Moonman posted:
Gregg posted:

Thanks tommy. not exactly what  I had in mind for a quick fix.. but you may be right. do it right the first time. .. How would you marshal your train  heading to the wash out to start the project.... American hoist.....  material to construct copper dam.. There's no place to unload much of the material....

The water is slowly receding with no current flow from one side of the right of way to the other.

How would you start the project??   Anyone else.?

Difficult indeed - which end has material and equipment?

I wasn't kidding about the Alaska RR. They can provide excellent examples as they encounter problems like this and have to regularly repair such damage.

Acquiring the equipment to make such a task will be a hurdle.

The ARR (and all railroads for that matter) have to get clever at times as snow melt can cause washouts when areas regularly vulnerable that have culverts get clogged. From John's Alaska railroad website, the MOW section, they show a work train attacking a washout that needed repair to permit the proper MOW equipment to get to the section.

The first car was a large flat  with an excavator on it and then short hopper cars or ballast dumpers full of the needed size rock pushed by an engine

Washout at the loop

ARR MOW

The ARR has their own quarry and rock crushers and have modified and acquired cars for hauling equipment and material. rail lifters, spreaders, tie machines and on.

Getting the line sturdy enough for travel could be accomplished by some experienced MOW personnel.  

I would say that would be the most important resource to locate - then, let them say what they need. Engineers, surveyors, politicians, press, investors and such all like to talk and plan. Find some folks that know how to keep a line open. The long term rebuilds could come later.

Of course, a pile of cash would be needed to fuel all efforts.

Contacting the Canadian rail companies (CNR that maintained this line) or the railroad union may get some contacts of retired personnel. They won't give up or loan the current personnel as they are much needed. They are busy keeping the lines open. A project like this could be of interest to retirees for some extra cash.

I'm going with the" lets patch it for now...."

Consist.... From the south to north....  3 units for power,( One might just pump air. Jordan spreader,assortment of  bunk cars . 50 loaded  air dumps.....Flat car with ties . spikes . jacks ,tie plates and whatever else  the section crew may need. Last car and the one that will end up right next to the wash out.... A flat  containing a front end loader , back hoe and a portable ramp.

 Lets get started..... unload the front end loader and back hoe.... put the ramp back on the flat.

Dump 20 air dumps for starters....

Pull the train back 30 cars or so

Let the loader and back hoe fill the cut the best they until the section crews can  replace any missing ties.

Keep filling in  until the track will support a loaded car..

Now things can go a little faster... Dump whatever remaining  cars are needed... Maybe even bring in the spreader,  Track is jacked up above normal.    It's going to settle.  Track is now passable with a ten per slow order placed on it.

 

 

 

 

Last edited by Gregg

The rehabilitation of the Churchill branch is an interesting and complex engineering problem.

Nature Magazine (27 sept 2007) pp 398-402 had an excellent article on construction of the Quing-Hai railroad, a 416 mile line over 40% permafrost. They used extra-high embankments with frequent transverse ventilation ducts. Thousands of remote temperature sensors were emplaced on both sides of the railbed. It was concluded this was the only method of insuring safety on single track in the middle of nowhere. There was preventative removal of icy masses from the frozen base which was filled with high consistancy soil. Finally active cooling (refrigeration with pumped cold saline) was used on several critical sections.

The Chinese experience is the most recent and well-documented.

Google scholar has a scientific search engine, including material on cold weather permafrost rail construction from the 11th annual cold weather engineering conference.

Last edited by Tommy

The most significant issue is so-called mud-pumping - not filling in gaps in washout areas with gravel. This is even a problem on the Northeast Corridor. ACELA trains do the most damage. With every passing of a train there is roadbed deflection. The water and soil go squish-squish. This situation does not exist in freezing weather. The decision of the previous operator to limit freight car weights was reasonable and prudent. The American operators ignored the problem of mud-pumping by making believe they magically discovered you could run heavyweight cars over the roadbed without consequence. This decision alone may have been responsible for much of the damage. One problem with the sale of the spur to Churchill was the requirement to provide 365 day service. There are two potential engineering standards:

If it can be decided only to operate the spur in freezing weather the operational problems are significantly reduced.

If you mandate 365 day operation you have a more expensive engineering standard.

MIT has developed a low-cost system using five vertical settlement probes, a piezometer, a laptop computer and an internet connection that has been installed on the NEC corridor to monitor the condition of areas of flooded roadbed. You can't evaluate the condition of the subgrade by taking a motorcycle trip over the right-of-way. Cutting to the chase, if an agreement is reached to cease traffic during certain vulnerable periods, the line may be maintained at far less cost.

On a long-term basis we have to look at the hydrology of a drainage basin across a watershed. How long will it take for the water to drain? Will it drain? When will it drain? What can be done (if anything) to speed drainage? The answers to these questions are unclear. In 1975 Canada developed a federal-provincial flood damage reduction program. This was defunded in 1999, presumeably so the Canadian government could spend more money on the parasites at the United Nations.

Ok, since this is "for fun" and yet a serious issue, I would like a little more engineer perspective on the following ideas.  I never had the opportunity to complete my engineering degree but still thirst for knowledge, so please answer with a bend toward educating, not admonishing.

1. Build bases on either side and put a short girder bridge between them.  I am assuming the ground underneath the remaining track is susceptible to the same forces that create the existing wash out.

2. Drive pilings down to the bedrock and put the tracks on a "pier"

3. Ok, so this might sound a little crazy...and it is probably too costly, but float the track.  For reference, there are 3 freeway bridges that float on lake Washington in Seattle.  These are not small, they are 4 and 6 lanes and do float on the water.  The soil density in this area must be somewhat denser, would it be possible to make it work?

Again, just want to know more.

Add Reply

Post

OGR Publishing, Inc., 1310 Eastside Centre Ct, Suite 6, Mountain Home, AR 72653
800-980-OGRR (6477)
www.ogaugerr.com

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×