Advertisement

Application of geoinclusions for sustainable rail infrastructure under increased axle loads and higher speeds

  • Buddhima Indraratna
  • Fernanda Bessa Ferreira
  • Yujie Qi
  • Trung Ngoc Ngo
State-of-the-Art Paper
  • 93 Downloads

Abstract

Given the ongoing demand for faster trains for carrying heavier loads, conventional ballasted railroads require considerable upgrading in order to cope with the increasing traffic-induced stresses. During train operations, ballast deteriorates due to progressive breakage and fouling caused by the infiltration of fine particles from the surface or mud-pumping from the underneath layers (e.g. sub-ballast, sub-grade), which decreases the load bearing capacity, impedes drainage and increases the deformation of ballasted tracks. Suitable ground improvement techniques involving geosynthetics and resilient rubber sheets are commonly employed to enhance the stability and longevity of rail tracks. This keynote paper focuses mainly on research projects undertaken at the University of Wollongong to improve track performance by emphasising the main research outcomes and their practical implications. Results from laboratory tests, computational modelling and field trials have shown that track behaviour can be significantly improved by the use of geosynthetics, energy-absorbing rubber mats, rubber crumbs and infilled-recycled tyres. Full-scale monitoring of instrumented track sections supported by rail industry (ARTC) has been performed, and the obtained field data for in situ stresses and deformations could verify the track performance, apart from validating the numerical simulations. The research outcomes provide promising approaches that can be incorporated into current track design practices to cater for high-speed freight trains carrying heavier loads.

Keywords

Ballast Geogrid Rubber crumb Scrap tyre Rail infrastructure Discrete element modelling 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the Australian Research Council (ARC) and Industry partners for providing support through the ARC Industrial Transformation Training Centre for Advanced Technologies in Rail Track Infrastructure (ITTC-Rail). The efforts of past doctoral students, Dr. Syed K. Hussaini, Dr. Nayoma Tennakoon, Dr. Mehdi Biabani and Dr. Joanne Lackenby among others, and postdoctoral research fellows, Dr. Sanjay Nimbalkar and Dr. Qideng Sun that have contributed to the contents of this keynote paper are also gratefully appreciated, as well as the support of colleagues A/Prof. Jayan Vinod, A/Prof. Cholachat Rujikiatkamjorn and Dr. Ana Heitor over the past years. The authors sincerely acknowledge Rail Manufacturing Cooperative Research Centre (funded jointly by participating rail organisations and the Australian Federal Government’s Business Cooperative Research Centres Program) through two Projects, R2.5.1 and R2.5.2. The authors also thank the Australasian Centre for Rail Innovation (ACRI), Tyre Stewardship Australia (TSA), Global Synthetics Pty Ltd, Naue GmbH & Co. KG, Foundation Specialists Group, Sydney Trains (formerly RailCorp), Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC), Bridgestone Corporation, among others. The cooperation of David Christie (formerly Senior Geotechnical Consultant, RailCorp), Tim Neville (ARTC) and Michael Martin (Aurizon/QLD Rail) during these industry linkages is gratefully appreciated. Salient contents from these previous studies are reproduced herein with kind permission from the original sources, including ASCE-JGGE, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Computers and Geotechnics, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, among others. The authors are also grateful to UOW technical staff, namely Alan Grant, Cameron Neilson, Duncan Best and Ritchie McLean, for their assistance during laboratory and field studies.

References

  1. 1.
    AS 2758.7 (1996) Aggregates and rock for engineering purposes. Part 7: Railway Ballast. Standard Australia, Sydney, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    ASTM D6270 (2008) Standard practice for use of scrap tyres in civil engineering applications. ASTM D International, West ConshohockenGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aursudkij B, McDowell GR, Collop AC (2009) Cyclic loading of railway ballast under triaxial conditions and in a railway test facility. Granul Matter 11:391–401Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bathurst RJ, Raymond GP (1987) Geogrid reinforcement of ballasted track. Transp Res Rec 1153:8–14Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Biabani MM, Ngo NT, Indraratna B (2016) Performance evaluation of railway subballast stabilised with geocell based on pull-out testing. Geotext Geomembr 44(4):579–591Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brown SF, Kwan J, Thom NH (2007) Identifying the key parameters that influence geogrid reinforcement of railway ballast. Geotext Geomembr 25(6):326–335Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cundall PA, Strack ODL (1979) A discrete numerical model for granular assemblies. Geotechnique 29(1):47–65Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fernandes G, Palmeira EM, Gomes RC (2008) Performance of geosynthetic-reinforced alternative sub-ballast material in a railway track. Geosynth Int 15(5):311–321Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ferreira FB, Indraratna B (2017) Deformation and degradation response of railway ballast under impact loading—effect of artificial inclusions. In: First international conference on rail transportation, Chengdu, China, July 2017, Paper ID: 362Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ferreira TM, Teixeira PF, Cardoso R (2012) Impact of bituminous subballast on railroad track deformation considering atmospheric actions. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137(3):288–292Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frederick CO, Round DJ (1985) Vertical track loading. Track Technology. Thomas Telford, London, pp 135–149Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hussaini SKK, Indraratna B, Vinod JS (2016) A laboratory investigation to assess the functioning of railway ballast with and without geogrids. Transp Geotech 6:45–54Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Indraratna B (2016) Railroad performance with special reference to ballast and substructure characteristics. 1st Proctor Lecture of ISSMGE. Transp Geotech 7:74–114Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Indraratna B, Hussaini SKK, Vinod JS (2012) On the shear behaviour of ballast-geosynthetic interfaces. Geotech Test J 35(2):1–8Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Indraratna B, Lackenby J, Christie D (2005) Effect of confining pressure on the degradation of ballast under cyclic loading. Geotechnique 55(4):325–328Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Indraratna B, Navaratnarajah SK, Nimbalkar S, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2014) Use of shock mats for enhanced stability of railroad track foundations. Aust Geomech J 49(4):101–110Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Indraratna B, Ngo N, Nimbalkar S, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2018a) Two decades of advancement in process simulation testing of ballast strength, deformation, and degradation. Railroad Ballast Testing and Properties, ASTM STP1605. Stark RSTD, Swan Jr RF (Eds). ASTM International, West Conshohocken, pp 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1520/STP160520170029 Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Indraratna B, Ngo NT, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2011) Behavior of geogrid-reinforced ballast under various levels of fouling. Geotext Geomembr 29(3):313–322Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Indraratna B, Ngo NT, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2013) Deformation of coal fouled ballast stabilized with geogrid under cyclic load. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 139(8):1275–1289Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Indraratna B, Ngo NT, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Vinod J (2014) Behaviour of fresh and fouled railway ballast subjected to direct shear testing—a discrete element simulation. Int J Geomech ASCE 14(1):34–44Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Indraratna B, Ngo T (2018) Ballast railroad design: smart-uow approach. CRC Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Indraratna B, Nimbalkar S, Anantanasakul P, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Neville T (2013b) Performance monitoring of rail tracks stabilized by geosynthetics and shock mats: case studies at Bulli and Singleton in Australia. Geotechnical Special Publication, pp 19–33Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Indraratna B, Nimbalkar S, Christie D, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Vinod J (2010) Field assessment of the performance of a ballasted rail track with and without geosynthetics. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 136(7):907–917Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Indraratna B, Nimbalkar SS, Ngo NT, Neville T (2016) Performance improvement of rail track substructure using artificial inclusions—experimental and numerical studies. Transp Geotech 8:69–85Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Indraratna B, Nimbalkar S, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2014) Enhancement of rail track performance through utilisation of geosynthetic inclusions. Geotech Eng J 45(1):17–27Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Indraratna B, Qi YJ, Heitor A (2018) Evaluating the properties of mixtures of steel furnace slag, coal wash, and rubber crumbs used as subballast. J Mater Civil Eng 30(1):04017251Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Indraratna B, Salim W, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2011) Advanced rail geotechnology—ballasted track. CRC Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Indraratna B, Sun Q, Heitor A, Grant J (2018) Performance of rubber tire-confined capping layer under cyclic loading for railroad conditions. J Mater Civ Eng 30(3):06017021Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Indraratna B, Sun Q, Ngo NT, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2017) Current research into ballasted rail tracks: model tests and their practical implications. Aust J Struct Eng 18(3):204–220Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Itasca (2016) Particle flow code in three dimensions (PFC3D). Itasca Consulting Group Inc, MinnesotaGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Jeffs T, Tew GP (1991) A review of track design procedures: sleepers and ballast. Railways of Australia, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Jenkins HM, Stephenson JE, Clayton GA, Moorland JW, Lyon D (1974) The effect of track and vehicle parameters on wheel/rail vertical dynamic forces. Railw Eng J 3(1):2–16Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kaewunruen S, Remennikov AM (2010) Dynamic crack propagations in prestressed concrete sleepers in railway track systems subjected to severe impact loads. ASCE J Struct Eng 136(6):749–754Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Li B, Huang MS, Zeng XW (2016) Dynamic behavior and liquefaction analysis of recycled-rubber sand mixtures. J Mater Civ Eng 28(11):04016122Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Li D, Hyslip JP, Sussmann TR, Chrismer SM (2016) Railway geotechnics. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lobo-Guerrero S, Vallejo LE (2006) Discrete element method analysis of rail track ballast degradation during cyclic loading. Granul Matter 8(3–4):195–204Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Marsal RJ (1967) Large scale testing of rockfill materials. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 93(2):27–43Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    McDowell GR, Bolton MD (1998) On the micromechanics of crushable aggregates. Geotechnique 48(5):667–679Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    McDowell GR, Harireche O, Konietzky H, Brown SF, Thom NH (2006) Discrete element modelling of geogrid-reinforced aggregates. Proc ICE Geotech Eng 159(1):35–48Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    McDowell GR, Lim WL, Collop AC, Armitage R, Thom NH (2008) Comparison of ballast index tests for railway trackbeds. Geotech Eng 157(3):151–161Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Navaratnarajah SK, Indraratna B (2017) Use of rubber mats to improve the deformation and degradation behavior of rail ballast under cyclic loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 143:04017015.  https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)gt.1943-5606.0001669 Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Navaratnarajah SK, Indraratna B, Ngo NT (2018) Influence of under sleeper pads on ballast behavior under cyclic loading—experimental and numerical Studies. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 144:04018068Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Ferreira FB, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2018) Improved performance of geosynthetics enhanced ballast: laboratory and numerical studies. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground Improvement, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2014) DEM simulation of the behaviour of geogrid stabilised ballast fouled with coal. Comput Geotech 55:224–231Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2016) Modelling geogrid-reinforced railway ballast using the discrete element method. Transp Geotech 8:86–102Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2017) Micromechanics-based investigation of fouled ballast using large-scale triaxial tests and discrete element modeling. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 134(2):04016089Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2017) Stabilisation of track substructure with geo-inclusions—experimental evidence and DEM simulation. Int J Rail Transp 5(2):63–86Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C (2017) A study of the geogrid–subballast interface via experimental evaluation and discrete element modelling. Granul Matter 19(3):54Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ngo NT, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Biabani MM (2016) Experimental and discrete element modeling of geocell-stabilised subballast subjected to cyclic loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(4):04015100Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Nguyen TT, Indraratna B (2016) Hydraulic behaviour of parallel fibres under longitudinal flow: a numerical treatment. Can Geotech J 53(7):1081–1092Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nimbalkar S, Indraratna B (2016) Improved performance of ballasted rail track using geosynthetics and rubber shockmat. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(8):04016031Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Nimbalkar S, Indraratna B, Dash S, Christie D (2012) Improved performance of railway ballast under impact loads using shock mats. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 138(3):281–294Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    O’Sullivan C, Cui L, O’Neill C (2008) Discrete element analysis of the response of granular materials during cyclic loading. Soils Found 48(4):511–530Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Powrie W, Yang LA, Clayton CRI (2007) Stress changes in the ground below ballasted railway track during train passage. Proc Inst Mech Eng F J Rail Rapid Transit 221:247–261Google Scholar
  55. 55.
    Qi YJ, Indraratna B, Heitor A, Vinod JS (2018) Effect of rubber crumbs on the cyclic behaviour of steel furnace slag and coal wash mixtures. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 144(2):04017107Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Qi Y, Indraratna B, Heitor A, Vinod JS (2018b) The influence of rubber crumbs on the energy absorbing property of waste mixtures. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on geotechnics of transportation infrastructure (ISGTI 2018). New Delhi, India, pp 455–460Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Rochard BP, Schmidt F (2004) Benefits of lower-mass trains for high speed rail operations. Proc Inst Civil Eng Transp 157(1):51–64Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Rujikiatkamjorn C, Indraratna B, Ngo NT, Coop M (2012) A laboratory study of railway ballast behaviour under various fouling degree. In: The 5th Asian regional conference on geosynthetics, pp 507–514Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Selig ET, Waters JM (1994) Track geotechnology and substructure management. Thomas Telford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Sol-Sanchez M, Thom NH, Moreno-Navarro F, Rubio-Gamez MC, Airey GD (2015) A study into the use of crumb rubber in railway ballast. Constr Build Mater 75:19–24Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Suiker ASJ, Selig ET, Frenkel R (2005) Static and cyclic triaxial testing of ballast and subballast. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 131(6):771–782Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Sun QD, Indraratna B, Nimbalkar S (2015) Deformation and degradation mechanisms of railway ballast under high frequency cyclic loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 142(1):04015056Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Sussmann TR, Ruel M, Chrismer SM (2012) Source of ballast fouling and influence considerations for condition assessment criteria. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, No. 2289. Washington, D.C., 2012, pp 87–94Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Tennakoon N, Indraratna B, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Nimbalkar S, Neville T (2012) The role of ballast-fouling characteristics on the drainage capacity of rail substructure. Geotech Test J 35(4):1–11Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    T.S. 3402 (2001) Specification for supply of aggregates for Ballast. Rail Infrastructure Corporation of NSW, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Tutumluer E, Dombrow W, Huang H (2008) Laboratory characterization of coal dust fouled ballast behaviour. In: AREMA 2008 annual conference & exposition, Salt Lake City, UT, USAGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Tutumluer E, Huang H, Bian X (2012) Geogrid-aggregate interlock mechanism investigated through aggregate imaging-based discrete element modeling approach. Int J Geomech 12(4):391–398Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Zheng YF, Kevin SG (2000) Dynamic properties of granulated rubber/sand mixtures. Geotech Test J 23(3):338–344Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for Geomechanics and Railway Engineering (CGRE) and ARC Training Centre for Advanced Technologies in Rail Track Infrastructure (ITTC-Rail)University of Wollongong AustraliaWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations