The CRS pilot project evaluated the use of composite railway sleepers in underground mines, trestlework, and bridges. Key outcomes included updated feasibility results, a marketing plan, and metrics to measure implementation benefits. Field tests at five sites found the composite sleepers met or exceeded acceptable ranges for static load, derailment, aging, retention, and moisture tests, with one exception due to extreme temperature fluctuations. Comparisons showed composite sleepers have advantages over timber and concrete in being lightweight, impervious to pests, easy to work with, and absorbing sound, though they have higher upfront costs.
The CRS pilot project evaluated the use of composite railway sleepers in underground mines, trestlework, and bridges. Key outcomes included updated feasibility results, a marketing plan, and metrics to measure implementation benefits. Field tests at five sites found the composite sleepers met or exceeded acceptable ranges for static load, derailment, aging, retention, and moisture tests, with one exception due to extreme temperature fluctuations. Comparisons showed composite sleepers have advantages over timber and concrete in being lightweight, impervious to pests, easy to work with, and absorbing sound, though they have higher upfront costs.
The CRS pilot project evaluated the use of composite railway sleepers in underground mines, trestlework, and bridges. Key outcomes included updated feasibility results, a marketing plan, and metrics to measure implementation benefits. Field tests at five sites found the composite sleepers met or exceeded acceptable ranges for static load, derailment, aging, retention, and moisture tests, with one exception due to extreme temperature fluctuations. Comparisons showed composite sleepers have advantages over timber and concrete in being lightweight, impervious to pests, easy to work with, and absorbing sound, though they have higher upfront costs.
The CRS pilot project evaluated the use of composite railway sleepers in underground mines, trestlework, and bridges. Key outcomes included updated feasibility results, a marketing plan, and metrics to measure implementation benefits. Field tests at five sites found the composite sleepers met or exceeded acceptable ranges for static load, derailment, aging, retention, and moisture tests, with one exception due to extreme temperature fluctuations. Comparisons showed composite sleepers have advantages over timber and concrete in being lightweight, impervious to pests, easy to work with, and absorbing sound, though they have higher upfront costs.
The CRS pilot project was conducted to Key outcomes of Pilot
evaluate the use of Fabrikam composite railway sleepers in non-traditional market segments Updated feasibility results such as underground mines, trestlework and Marketing plan bridges and areas with environmental sensitivity. Metrics for implementation benefits Updated resource requirements Field Test Results
Pilot Site Static Load Derailment Aging Test Retention Moisture
Test Test Test Test Site 1 1.62 mm 59 mm 94% 6 mm 0.50% Site 2 Feasibility 1.91 mm 42 mm 93% 7 mm 2.50% Site 3 1.74 mm 46 mm 99% 5 mm 1.75% Site 4 1.66 mm 57 mm 94% 6 mm 0.50% Performance of CRS sleepers in pilot Site 5 1.71 mm 53 mm 96% 6 mm 1.25% field tests met or exceeded acceptable ranges in all but one instance. The Site 2 static load test variance has been Test Note 50 tonnes at Groove size Retention of Initial gauge at Degradation of attributed to extreme temperature rail seat strength -3 mm material ranges (below -2° C to above 38 ° C) Acceptable 1.58 - 1.88 mm 42 - 60 mm 92 - 98% Up to 7 mm 0.25 - 3.00% and adjustments have been made. Range Other sites with similar conditions (3 Generic 1.75 mm 52 mm 91% 6 mm 1.50% and 5) demonstrate successful Composite performance. Timber 2.31 mm 40 mm 74% 9 mm 3.50% Concrete 1.59 mm 58 mm 83% 4 mm 2.75% Materials Comparison Composite Timber ◦ Lightweight construction reduces transportation ◦ Ubiquitous use and handling costs ◦ Minimal upfront costs ◦ Will not rust, rot, splinter or crumble ◦ Concerns with toxicity ◦ Impervious to insects and other pests ◦ Easy to cut and drill Concrete ◦ Superior service life if properly installed and ◦ Excellent sound absorption maintained ◦ High upfront costs ◦ Difficult to remove and cannot be recycled