I have signed the Report of the A. S. C. E. Rail Committee,--"Approved
in connection with the attached report," as I feel that the report is
too condensed, and assumes that all are familiar with the Rail
situation, especially what has been done by the other Societies.
The work undertaken by this Committee has been delegated by The American
Railway Association to the Rail Committee of The American Railway
Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association, and it therefore seems
appropriate to give the results of their work, up to date, to our
members in convenient form for reference, especially as our rail
specifications have not been worked to, and they have offered a better
specification that will be worked to, and no doubt largely used by the
members of this Society. The specification is attached to this report.
In presenting this specification to the Annual Meeting at Chicago in
March last, the Committee said:[C]
"A new specification should not be proposed at this time without
careful consideration. So far as we know, no railroad company has
purchased rails under the specifications approved by the American
Railway Association and referred to us; nor do we know of any
railway company that has succeeded in buying rails during the past
two years according to a specification entirely satisfactory to the
railroad company. We believe that all of the specifications under
which rails have been rolled have been compromises on the part of
both parties, with the general result that neither party is
entirely satisfied. Our experience during the year has brought to
our attention some defects in all of the specifications now before
us, and acting under the impression that there is a distinct
feeling that we should revise our specifications, we offer the
attached specifications for your consideration. Our Association has
no specification for Open-Hearth Steel Rails, and in order to
comply with the instructions, a specification for Open-Hearth Steel
Rails is included.
"We believe it necessary to submit a sliding scale for the
percentages of carbon and phosphorus, which provides for increasing
the carbon as the phosphorus decreases. The fixing of this scale
properly is a matter requiring care, and we admit that our
knowledge on the subject is limited. The American Railway
Association specification calls attention to this matter in the
following words: 'When lower phosphorus can be secured, a proper
proportionate increase in carbon should be made.' The amount of
increase is not provided for in the specifications, and this
appears to us to be necessary in order to secure uniformity of
practice; otherwise, the fixing of these percentages becomes a
matter of special arrangement. Bessemer rails are being furnished
regularly with phosphorus under the maximum allowed, and where this
is done, the carbon should be raised above the higher limit now
fixed in our specifications, or a soft and poor wearing rail will
result; yet this condition has not been fully guarded against in
rails furnished under existing specifications. The lower and upper
limits for carbon have heretofore been fixed with the intention
that the mills furnish rails with a composition as near between the
two limits as possible. The mills, however, in order to meet the
prescribed drop tests with the least difficulty, keep both the
carbon and manganese as nearly as possible to the lower limits,
with the corresponding result that a generally poor-wearing rail is
furnished.
"Some roads have prescribed the limits of deflection to be allowed
under the drop test. With our present knowledge, we believe that we
should fix a minimum deflection to eliminate brittle rails and to
secure greater uniformity of product; also maximum deflection to
eliminate soft rails. We are not able at the present time to fix
these limits, but our ultimate object will be to determine and fix
such limits for the specifications.
"With reference to the amount of discard, time of holding in ladle,
size of nozzles, and other such details of manufacture or
machinery, we are of the opinion that the physical and chemical
tests required should be prescribed, and that we should see that
the material submitted for acceptance meets the prescribed tests.
We should not dictate to the manufacturers the amount of crop which
shall be removed from the top of the ingot, as this should vary
with the care and time consumed at the various mills. The railroads
should not be asked to take anything but sound material in their
rails. The mills can furnish such sound material if the proper care
and sufficient time are taken in the making of the ingots.
Information derived from the tests being made at the Watertown
Arsenal shows definitely that sound rails cannot be made from
unsound ingots, and that, therefore, the prime requisite in
securing a sound rail is to first secure the sound ingot.
"We recommend that the present Specifications for Steel Rails be
withdrawn from the Manual of Recommended Practice of the
Association, as no longer representing the current state of the
art.
"We submit herewith, as Appendix 'A,' a form for specifications. It
will have to be amended from time to time as we receive further
information on the subject."
The specifications referred to above were modified and presented at the
Meeting in _Supplement to Bulletin No. 121_, of March, 1910, and in this
final form are attached hereto.
These specifications do not represent the work of any one Society or the
work of any one Committee, but are the result of all the work of the
different Societies, as the members of all are so interwoven that
whatever work is done in any one Society, or by the Committee of a
Society, has very naturally and fortunately been carried into the
others.
At the Chicago Meeting these specifications were accepted without a
single change, and this is very unusual and shows how generally
acceptable they were, as the members of all Rail Committees were present
at the Meeting. The main points in this specification were discussed and
agreed upon by the members of the Committee and the Rail Committee of
the manufacturers who have co-operated with them in this work.
In the matter of Rail Sections, the Rail Committee of The American
Railway Engineering and Maintenance of Way Association has not arrived
at any definite conclusions. The new sections "A" and "B" of The
American Railway Association have not given as good results as was
expected of them, and the whole matter is yet under consideration. The
Committee reported as follows:[D]
"The instructions of the American Railway Association require us to
study the A. R. A. sections 'A' and 'B' in use and submit a single
type for standard. Owing to the conditions existing in 1908, very
little rail was laid, and practically none of the A. R. A.
sections, in such manner as to give the needed information. This
year, several roads have laid A. R. A. sections of rail, with a
view of determining the relative merits of the respective sections.
These rails have been in the track so short a time that we are not
justified in drawing any conclusions as to which of the A. R. A.
types, 'A' or 'B,' or if either, is better than the A. S. C. E.
sections.
"_Bulletin No. 116_, issued October, 1909, gives the statistics for
rail failures for six months from October 31, 1908, to April 30,
1909, as reported to the Committee. These statistics do show that
the difference in section can be entirely annihilated by difference
in chemical composition and by the treatment in furnace and mill.
"The results so far obtained from the heavy base A. R. A. sections
are disappointing, as we have received some rail from the mills of
the new section which was as bad as we did with the old
A. S. C. E. section, showing that the quality of the rail does not
depend entirely upon the section.
"The tests to be inaugurated by the Committee, combined with the
results of the tests at Watertown and the performance of the rail
in the track, will give us valuable data to aid us in coming to a
final conclusion."
A careful study of the results already obtained, on both Bessemer and
open-hearth steel rails, indicates that the next necessary step will be
the use of a much heavier rail, and I think the sooner this is admitted
and trial lots of say 1,000 tons each of 110-lb., 120-lb. and 130-lb.
rails rolled, of Bessemer and open-hearth steel, and put in service
under the most severe conditions, the sooner we will get rid of the
present difficulties with our rails.