Carry distance of top-of-rail friction modifiers

Abstract

Rail issues such as corrugation, rolling contact fatigue, noise and wear have been increasing with the increase in railway traffic. The application of top-of-rail friction modifiers (TOR-FMs) is claimed by their manufacturers in the railway industry to be a well-established technique for resolving the above-mentioned issues. There are various methods for applying friction modifiers at the wheel–rail interface, among which stationary wayside systems are recommended by TOR-FM manufacturers when a distance of a few kilometres is to be covered. TOR-FM manufacturers also claim that by using wayside equipment, the TOR-FM can be spread over a minimum distance of 3 km, over which it maintains a coefficient of friction of µ = 0.35 ± 0.05. To determine the carry distance of TOR-FMs, some researchers use tribometers to measure the coefficients of friction. However, moisture and deposits from the environment and trains can alter the top-of-rail friction and give a misleading indication of the presence of a friction modifier. Therefore, the coefficient of friction itself is not a clear indicator of the presence of TOR-FMs. In the present study, cotton swabs dipped in a mixture of alcohol and ester were used to collect surface deposits (a third body) from both the wheel and rail at various distances from the point of application. Subsequently, the third body collected on the cotton swab was analysed using an energy dispersive X-ray analysis. The results have shown that the maximum carry distance of TOR-FMs on the top of the rail is limited to 70 m when using a TOR-FM from one manufacturer and to 450 m when using a TOR-FM from another manufacturer. The carry distance on the contact band of the wheel is limited to 100 m and 340 m. The friction modifier on the edges of the contact band was detected over a distance of up to 3 km; however, this will not minimise the damage or friction at the wheel–rail interface.

Keywords

Friction modifier carry distance top-of-rail wayside equipment top-of-rail friction modifier

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Dirks

Enblom

. Prediction model for wheel profile wear and rolling contact fatigue. Wear 2011; 271: 210–217.

Asplund

Famurewa

Schoech

. A Nordic heavy haul experience and best practices. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2017; 0: 1–11.

Waara

. Lubricant influence on flange wear in sharp railroad curves. Ind Lubr Tribol 2001; 53: 161–168.

Eadie

Oldknow

Santoro

et al.

Wayside gauge face lubrication: how much do we really understand?

Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2012; 227: 245–253.

Stock

Stanlake

Hardwick

et al.

Material concepts for top of rail friction management: classification, characterization and application. Wear 2016; 366–367: 225–232.

Eadie DT, Vidler B, Hooper NE, et al. Top of rail friction control: lateral force and rail wear reduction in a freight application. In: Proceedings of the IHHA, Dallas, TX, USA, 2003, pp.7–35.

Eadie

Santoro

. Top-of-rail friction control for curve noise mitigation and corrugation rate reduction. J Sound Vib 2006; 293: 747–757.

VanderMarel

Eadie

Oldknow

et al.

A predictive model of energy savings from top of rail friction control. Wear 2013; 314: 155–161.

Makowsky

Eadie

et al.

Friction management on a Chinese heavy haul coal line. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2012; 226: 630–640.

10.

Eadie

Elvidge

Oldknow

et al.

The effects of top of rail friction modifier on wear and rolling contact fatigue: full-scale rail-wheel test rig evaluation, analysis and modelling. Wear 2008; 265: 1222–1230.

11.

Stock

Eadie

Elvidge

et al.

Influencing rolling contact fatigue through top of rail friction modifier application – a full scale wheel-rail test rig study. Wear 2011; 271: 134–142.

12.

Eadie

Santoro

Oldknow

et al.

Field studies of the effect of friction modifiers on short pitch corrugation generation in curves. Wear 2008; 265: 1212–1221.

13.

Lundberg

Rantatalo

Wanhainen

et al.

Measurements of friction coefficients between rails lubricated with a friction modifier and the wheels of an IORE locomotive during real working conditions. Wear 2014; 324–325: 109–117.

14.

Lemma Y, Asplund M, Rantatalo M, et al. Top-of-rail friction measurements of the Swedish iron ore line. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop and Congress on eMaintenance, Luleå, Sweden, 2014.

15.

Nordmark T. Increased axle load to 32.5 tonnes: what operational and maintenance effects will it have for the rolling stock? Report, Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, 2016.

16.

Nordmark T. Vagnsrapport - Provtåg 32,5 Tons Axellast: November 2016. Report, LKAB, Kiruna, 2016.

17.

Khan

Persson

Lundberg

et al.

Prediction of the effects of friction control on top-of-rail cracks. Proc IMechE, Part F: J Rail and Rapid Transit 2016; 0: 1–11.

18.

Khan

Persson

Lundberg

et al.

Prediction of top-of-rail friction control effects on rail RCF suppressed by wear. Wear 2017; 380–381: 106–114.

19.

Asplund M, Khan SA and Nordmark T. Improved wheel-rail system of Sweden’s iron ore line. In: Proceedings of the IHHA, Cape Town, South Africa, 2017.

20.

Sunqing

Junxiu

Guoxu

. A review of ultrafine particles as antiwear additives and friction modifiers in lubricating oils. Lubr Sci 1999; 11: 217–226.

21.

Hardwick

Lewis

et al.

The effect of friction modifiers on wheel/rail isolation at low axle load. Wear 2011; 271: 71–77.

22.

Spikes

. Mixed lubrication – an overview. Lubr Sci 1997; 9: 221–253.

23.

Goldstein

Newbury

Echlin

et al.

Scanning electron microscopy and X-ray microanalysis, Boston: Springer, 2011.