+- (https://bigbluetrains.com)
+-- Forum: Branchline (https://bigbluetrains.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=45)
+--- Forum: Strictly Rail Operations (https://bigbluetrains.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=54)
+--- Thread: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting (/showthread.php?tid=2757)
Pages:
1
2
Re: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting - BR60103 - 06-06-2010
I read, a long time ago, that a train moving from ballasted track to a solid structure would feel a bump. This was confirmed by observation (in fact, the seat of the pants method) over years of commuting.
Re: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting - Fluesheet - 06-07-2010
BR60103 Wrote:I read, a long time ago, that a train moving from ballasted track to a solid structure would feel a bump. This was confirmed by observation (in fact, the seat of the pants method) over years of commuting.
I was thinking about that myself the other day. My father was one of the founding members of a scenic railway in SE Ohio, and as a result, I did a lot of train riding when young. We had one through-girder bridge on line, and when passing over it, the quality of the ride was harsher (I assume vibration of the bridge) and noisier!
Matt
Re: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting - Sumpter250 - 06-07-2010
In any case, the one common detail of a ballasted deck bridge, is some structure is needed on the sides, to contain the ballast.
Most commonly, it would be a "through girder" bridge, or a stone arch, with raised sides.
Re: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting - Herc Driver - 06-10-2010
This all builds a strong case for ballasting the portions between the ties for my trestle.
The engineering behind the reason is what I'm finding more and more interesting.
Thanks very much guys for all this info!
Re: Bridges, Trestles, and ballsting - Fluesheet - 06-10-2010
You know Herc, in spite of all the prototypical advantages of a closed deck, I think open decks just look more interesting!
(If I didn't already believe that, Doc Wayne's Maitland River crossing scenes may have sealed it!)