Do you mean from a map, from a drawing or actually on the ground?Can anyone explain to me how to measure track curve and radius simply?
This short thread might help:Can anyone explain to me how to measure track curve and radius simply?
CheersThis short thread might help:
How to measure Curve radius?
Hi, does anyone know and could tell me how to measure curve radius? I would like to compare the sharpness of curves (Rutherglen, Earlestown, Shipley, St Pancras LL) for example to see which one is the sharpest. Thank you!www.railforums.co.uk
How'd you save 1 minute by raising 25mph to 40mph for less than half a mile?I would like to be able to measure curves radius.
I often travel over the 25 mph (uncanted) rail curve on the London side of Southampton station & fantasise about how, using railway land on either side, they might be raised to 40 mph..probably saving a minute each for 8 passengers trains an hour.
That is 800 passenger minutes saved an hour, 14,000 passenger minutes saved a day. 70,000 passenger hours saved a year.
Easiest way is to download Google Earth for free and use the circle tool to measure the radius.I reckon(from sight) the curvature is no tighter then the 45mph(canted) curve on the four tracks between Clapham Junction & Battersea Park which you see from the Southampton train after Clapham Junction.
I want to compute if I am talking rubbish by measuring these curves on a map.
But exactly how, with just a ruler?
The Southampton tight curve is about a 200 yard radius, we had a thread about it before. It definitely isn’t railway land on both sides though, I don’t see how the radius can be increased without property demolition north and west of the line.How'd you save 1 minute by raising 25mph to 40mph for less than half a mile?
Easiest way is to download Google Earth for free and use the circle tool to measure the radius.
Changing the curve isn't possible because of the pointwork at Northam Jn and the various bridges around it.The Southampton tight curve is about a 200 yard radius, we had a thread about it before. It definitely isn’t railway land on both sides though, I don’t see how the radius can be increased without property demolition north and west of the line.
It’s not good quality property though. Probably not impossible to widen the rail corridor eventually, but highly unlikely in the present economic climate.
Tbf the OP just asked how to measure it.If the op is fantasising and having a bit of fun there is no need to let the economics get in the way of a theoretical exercise. Whilst travelling at less than walking pace on the ordsall chord in Manchester, I've often thought about the buildings I would knock down to provide a proper route between Piccadilly and Victoria. In fact the trip has often been so slow I would have had time to producing detailed engineering drawings.
pretty much. Retrofitting is expensive.It seems that everything on the railway costs a monumental figure.
When they got mk3's on west coast there was a project to speed things up a little. Cl87 could do 110. Mk3 could do 125. They tweaked the brakes to allow harder braking. Passengers felt more force when braking but was thought worthwhile.
But back to topic, they did work to see if they could go round curves faster.
They elevate the outside rail so the passenger feels less sideways force when cornering. The idea is the elevation or cant counteracts the sideways force so the passenger doesnt know they are cornering. But they thought 'what if we allow some lateral acceleration.' So they did that. The elevation lacking in the outside rail was known as cant deficiency.
The radius of the curve and desired speed sets the cant.
Well, very slightly more complicated ( and quite some time since I looked at it ) -
* Maximum track cant is determined by what happens if you have to stop a train on it - last time I looked one rail could be up to 6" above the other, but that may date it if it's changed!
* Maximum cant deficiency is I think limited by passenger comfort - someone please correct me there - handily that is iirc measured in inches of cant, too.
* You have to go from flat to fully canted, and there's a limit to how fast you can do that which ( partly - the other part is the transition to the actual curve itself ) sets the minimum length of transition curves at a given line speed - so that is another geometry constraint.
The rules are all readily available at the RSSB, or at least were.
For the record, years ago we were permitted 7" cant on certain curves between Penrith and Carlisle.Correct - max cant 150mm / 6’’
There were other sections too, like Watford but they went back to 150mm.For the record, years ago we were permitted 7" cant on certain curves between Penrith and Carlisle.
What happened to the rail/wheel interface when you ran a heavy freight train over that at under 50mph? They must have heard the flange squeel in Keswick!!For the record, years ago we were permitted 7" cant on certain curves between Penrith and Carlisle.
Wasn't there / isn't there a higher figure than 150 mm on the curves between Cullompton and Hele on the way to Exeter?For the record, years ago we were permitted 7" cant on certain curves between Penrith and Carlisle.
I just had a look at this using OS maps and I reckon your estimation that they’re similar is way out.I would like to be able to measure curves radius.
I often travel over the 25 mph (uncanted) rail curve on the London side of Southampton station & fantasise about how, using railway land on either side, they might be raised to 40 mph..probably saving a minute each for 8 passengers trains an hour.
That is 800 passenger minutes saved an hour, 14,000 passenger minutes saved a day. 70,000 passenger hours saved a year.
I reckon(from sight) the curvature is no tighter then the 45mph(canted) curve on the four tracks between Clapham Junction & Battersea Park which you see from the Southampton train after Clapham Junction.
I want to compute if I am talking rubbish by measuring these curves on a map.
But exactly how, with just a ruler?