# MISC | Tramways vs. Railways



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

Besides allowing vehicles to drive over it, is there a performance difference between girder (tram/streetcar) rail and flanged T (railway) rail? I've watched a number of different light rail videos on YouTube, and it seems almost always these trains run better on the latter than the former, regardless of right of way priorities. I know stop spacing and street regulations play a part, but is it more to it than that? Do girder rails lack traction, so it is harder for them to stop (and thus means they cannot reach higher speeds in case they need to stop quickly), or are they made to a lower standard than flanged-T?


----------



## elfabyanos (Jun 18, 2006)

I was going to reply in the other thread!!!

I would have thought a flanged T shape allows a greater contact area for stability and/or traction but saving on weight, or do I misunderstand what girder type rail is?


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

elfabyanos said:


> I was going to reply in the other thread!!!
> 
> I would have thought a flanged T shape allows a greater contact area for stability and/or traction but saving on weight, or do I misunderstand what girder type rail is?


Would make sense. For clairification:

Girder/tram rail:










Flanged T-rail/railway rail:


----------



## RawLee (Jul 9, 2007)

Our trams use both. I think the railway tracks are used when the tracks are not inside concrete panels.


----------



## elfabyanos (Jun 18, 2006)

I also bet then that the girder rail is only used in low speed areas when used on roads, and proper rail is required for faster running being mounted on sleepers.


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

RawLee said:


> Our trams use both. I think the railway tracks are used when the tracks are not inside concrete panels.


But do you notice a difference between velocity depending on which rail is used? Try and keep in mind stop distance as well (ie: compare speeds between two close by stops on both rails and try and compare between two distance stops on both rails).


----------



## FM 2258 (Jan 24, 2004)

I thought they were both the same type of track. The tram rails are just embedded on concrete, brick or whatever the current street surface is am I right?


----------



## elfabyanos (Jun 18, 2006)

^^ That would make the most sense actually.


----------



## RawLee (Jul 9, 2007)

elfabyanos said:


> I also bet then that the girder rail is only used in low speed areas when used on roads, and proper rail is required for faster running being mounted on sleepers.





elfabyanos said:


> ^^ That would make the most sense actually.


The tram-track has different shape. It is a "S" on its side,while the railroad-track is a "T". I think the tram-track is placed on tight curves,because it has an edge that keeps the wheels on the track(or in the trench). Railroad-tracks dont allow tight curves(trams can do 30m radius curves...have you ever seen a train doing it?).Though it can be countered with double-tracks...


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

FM 2258 said:


> I thought they were both the same type of track. The tram rails are just embedded on concrete, brick or whatever the current street surface is am I right?


This is tram rail sans concrete:










Flanged T-rail


----------



## elfabyanos (Jun 18, 2006)

Interesting. The tram rail looks like it has the benefit of it being sunk and then having the road surface poured around it, whereas the t-rail would need temporary borders put in place while the concrete sets. It looks like it's designed to transfer some of the forces into the concrete - the down-section of the the rail doesn't look as aptly designed to transfer stresses cleanly downwards to the base as does the t-rail. Saying that the stresses trams put on the tracks at 40km/h is going to be a 10th of what it puts on the track at 100km/h so it might not be an issue at tram's road speeds. I would assume that the main weight of the vehicle on the tram-rail is designed to rest on the wide flat area - I would have thought having the rim bearing pressure would wear it out and cause fatigue fractures in the trough of the tram rail. If I'm right I would say breaking performance would be little changed between the two types.


----------



## Blackpool88 (Nov 15, 2007)

when i worked as conductor for a summer on blackpool trams (best job in the world!) the tracks chopped and changed between T shape and S shaped and it had zero effect on speed or stopping times. The S is used where pedestrians cross the tracks or when the track is on a road, if the track is running on designated lines with no public access i think they use T shaped rails as it is cheaper and more accessible for repairs.

Also an interesting problem with the S track is that if the trenched part of the track gets blocked it can easily cause derailment, this happened alot in blackpool due to sand being blown onto the tracks.


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

^^ Thanks for the first hand information 

I've been watching a number of light rail videos recently, as well as comparing the performance on my bus routes and metros, and am thinking the speed difference between buses and trams is not as big as it seems. I think the problem is that buses and subways sound much louder at similar speeds as trams, so it seems that trams are moving slower than they really are.


----------



## UD2 (Jan 21, 2006)

one big difference in my books

T rails --> guided turns
S rails --> unguided turns, which is why TTC streetcar don't have switches. 

speed determined mostly by quality of foundation, and space in between tracks


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

^^Yeah, HK is a good example. Their double decker trams run on shoddy tracks, and run so slowly that they are being passed by buses running in heavy mixed traffic - regardless of stop spacing.


----------



## WotaN (Jun 15, 2004)

RawLee said:


> (trams can do 30m radius curves...have you ever seen a train doing it?).


A a matter of fact, trams can go as far as 15m radius. This is quite common with 1000mm gauge. Source: http://www.rail-info.ch/trams/VBZ/daten.en.html


----------



## RawLee (Jul 9, 2007)

I didnt know that..ours use standard gauge,and can do this(Tatra).


----------



## Tyson (May 2, 2006)

In Melbourne the use is varied but often normal rail is still embedded in concrete with the concrete shaped around the rail to form a groove. I think the specialized rail is used mainly where traffic is heavier. I think, but not sure, that conventional rail would be cheaper and easier to source than the special tram rails.


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

WotaN said:


> A a matter of fact, trams can go as far as 15m radius. This is quite common with 1000mm gauge. Source: http://www.rail-info.ch/trams/VBZ/daten.en.html


Isn't Toronto's 11m radius? It's among the tightest curves anywhere, worldwide.

As far as I can tell, while the S type has a built in curve guide (which is added as a separate piece of steel at tighter curves only for T type, see this image: http://www.tobu.co.jp/rail/torikumi/images/support_04.jpg). These curve guides are actually derailment guards. You will also find them at bridges and in parts where they can fit along switches. Why bridges? (Reference image)Wind tunnels over the valleys or other passageways they cross, and this, I would be inclined to suspect, is part of the reason the tram tracks have this derailment guard built into it - every intersection is a potential wind tunnel that can slam the vehicle (yes, it would take a lot of wind to do anything, but it has happened. A Christmas Day derailment along a JR East Line express derailed due to high winds). On curves, the danger is centripedal force, the guard works by keep the inner wheel against the inner edge of the inner rail, thus it is only needed on one side, which is different from bridges where it is on both sides - however, I have seen some train lines in Japan that are 80 years old where they have this guard on the wrong side of the curvehno:. I think in third rail systems, the derailment guard is not needed because the third rail is always on the inner side of curves (bridges on surface sections are exception). As for switches, it is in place there since there are added vibrations at switches on the inner curve side. With trams running in mixed traffic, the threat of collision with a road vehicle acts as a potential derailment threat in the event of an accident. The S rail becomes a key feature in guarding against that ever present possibility, and since it is built into the rail shape itself, this becomes an extremely efficient choice of rail shape.

On top of all that, on in-road sections, there is a constuction advantage with S type that has already been pointed out by elfabyanos. Electrify, check the Queensway section, it should be T type.

Detail showing how it guards against derailment

Presence in switches

These derailment guards are simply built into S type.


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

elfabyanos said:


> Interesting. The tram rail looks like it has the benefit of it being sunk and then having the road surface poured around it, whereas the t-rail would need temporary borders put in place while the concrete sets.


One thing that makes me wonder on this, although I beleive you are right, why would they not simply use T rail and then in the middle anchor pre-cast concrete road panels?


----------



## Electrify (Mar 19, 2007)

TRZ said:


> Isn't Toronto's 11m radius? It's among the tightest curves anywhere, worldwide.
> 
> As far as I can tell, while the S type has a built in curve guide (which is added as a separate piece of steel at tighter curves only for T type, see this image: http://www.tobu.co.jp/rail/torikumi/images/support_04.jpg). These curve guides are actually derailment guards. You will also find them at bridges and in parts where they can fit along switches. Why bridges? (Reference image)Wind tunnels over the valleys or other passageways they cross, and this, I would be inclined to suspect, is part of the reason the tram tracks have this derailment guard built into it - every intersection is a potential wind tunnel that can slam the vehicle (yes, it would take a lot of wind to do anything, but it has happened. A Christmas Day derailment along a JR East Line express derailed due to high winds). On curves, the danger is centripedal force, the guard works by keep the inner wheel against the inner edge of the inner rail, thus it is only needed on one side, which is different from bridges where it is on both sides - however, I have seen some train lines in Japan that are 80 years old where they have this guard on the wrong side of the curvehno:. I think in third rail systems, the derailment guard is not needed because the third rail is always on the inner side of curves (bridges on surface sections are exception). As for switches, it is in place there since there are added vibrations at switches on the inner curve side. With trams running in mixed traffic, the threat of collision with a road vehicle acts as a potential derailment threat in the event of an accident. The S rail becomes a key feature in guarding against that ever present possibility, and since it is built into the rail shape itself, this becomes an extremely efficient choice of rail shape.
> 
> ...


Isn't the Queensway section T? I haven't been on it, but from videos I've seen it looks like T rail.


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

Electrify said:


> Isn't the Queensway section T? I haven't been on it, but from videos I've seen it looks like T rail.


That's what I just said. The reason is that it isn't in-road, thus isn't subject to the traffic threat. The design of that area also doesn't pose the wind-tunnel effect that I talked about.


----------



## Blackpool88 (Nov 15, 2007)

TRZ said:


> That's what I just said. The reason is that it isn't in-road, thus isn't subject to the traffic threat. The design of that area also doesn't pose the wind-tunnel effect that I talked about.


Is this wind threat taken into consideration on all tram networks? because Blackpool tram system runs the length of the coast and is regularly hit by 70mph winds (granted no specific wind tunnel) and many of the trams are double deckers and they have no derailment protection on the T-rails.


----------



## elfabyanos (Jun 18, 2006)

TRZ said:


> One thing that makes me wonder on this, although I beleive you are right, why would they not simply use T rail and then in the middle anchor pre-cast concrete road panels?


Not sure how easy pre-cast concrete road panels would be - certainly not cheap, plus the joins between panels would be really susceptible to wear and freeze/thaw weathering. But, just getting the builders to lay concrete and use temporary wood bordering that gets taken up as you said before would be easy. I think there must be some other benefits to s-rail as well otherwise it doesn't make much sense. It must be lighter weight normally though?


----------



## RawLee (Jul 9, 2007)

I think we have a different type of tram-track:








That hole is nowhere near as deep as a full-sized track would require.
BTW,this is how tracks are laid here:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=15657805&postcount=223


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

Blackpool88 said:


> Is this wind threat taken into consideration on all tram networks? because Blackpool tram system runs the length of the coast and is regularly hit by 70mph winds (granted no specific wind tunnel) and many of the trams are double deckers and they have no derailment protection on the T-rails.


That's on the coast. That's different. Same can be said of the Queensway in Toronto, which is also along the shoreline and on T-rails. What I was arguing was the constant passing of wind-tunnels in a gridded street network every 50-100m, the constant shift between strong wind and no wind suddenly as you cross a downtown. Along a coast, the shifts are not sudden, unless there's a real nasty storm, but gradual, so the vehicle can absorb these strengths of wind on T-rails. It is the sudden changes in force where S rail, I imagine, would become most beneficial, and that would only happen in a grid street network.


----------



## trainrover (May 6, 2006)

> Tram rail vs railway rail?


Hmmm, meanwhile, Montreal's pondering introducing a couple of «Tram-trains» . . .


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

trainrover said:


> Hmmm, meanwhile, Montreal's pondering introducing a couple of «Tram-trains» . . .


Regardless of how many cars they use, their classification actually does not change. It is about the individual car design, not the number of cars in a trainset.


----------



## invincible (Sep 13, 2002)

From what I can see, there are a few types of construction method used for tram tracks in Melbourne - rail which is held together by the concrete and gauge kept by metal rods, rail on sleepers which is then encased in concrete for really heavy duty track, and sleepers on ballast which was common up until the 1940s but is only presently found on sections where the tram track is totally separated from road traffic or on converted railway lines.

The best ride quality is on sleepers and ballast (then sleepers and concrete), concrete has a tendency after a couple of decades to become uneven and it feels like it takes the track with it when that happens.

Maintenance also becomes an issue - with the majority of tracks being encased in concrete (even sections separated from road traffic), all maintenance vehicles are road based which can cause problems for the sections of tram track which aren't in concrete.


----------



## TRZ (Sep 18, 2004)

invincible said:


> The best ride quality is on sleepers and ballast (then sleepers and concrete), concrete has a tendency after a couple of decades to become uneven and it feels like it takes the track with it when that happens.


I wonder if this has to do with freeze-thaw cycles, but you don't get much for winter in Melbourne, do you?


----------



## Yardmaster (Jun 1, 2004)

^^ A long time since there's been a real frost in Melbourne: many decades. While I remember frozen ponds in my childhood, forget it today!


----------



## mouadh25 (Oct 16, 2013)

.. i think that TRAMWAY's system is a must have for every mid-sized city who wanna organize their urban transportation system.

*African Cities with Tramways;*

Algeria there are three Tramways in service for some years now, but still there are 17 more tramway systems under construction in all mid-sized cities over the country.

Also in Morroco there are two in service but there are two more planned to be constructed in big cities
Tunis have One tramway in service the oldest in the maghreb since the 80's

*Algiers - ALGERIA *




























*Constantine - ALGERIA *





























*Oran - ALGERIA*




























*Casablanca - MOROCCO *



















*Rebat - MOROCCO *




























*Tunis - TUNISIA*



















*Cairo - Egypt*

there are tramways but those are so Old 





















Thats all Tramway systems I think there is in Africa .. I sincerely hope that it will more generalized to all the country's


----------



## Stainless (Jun 7, 2009)

mouadh25 said:


> *Tunis - TUNISIA*


That has got to be the least sensible place to dry some laundry. :nuts:


----------



## Guajiro1 (Dec 23, 2012)

Argentina has only two Tramways, one in Buenos Aires City and the other one in Mendoza City. Both use girder rails in the parts where the trams move in the streets or close to traffic and flanged rails when they are separated from traffic.


----------

