|
|
LEVEL
CROSSINGS: RUBBER OR CONCRETE? WHY ARE RUBBER PLATFORMS
WINNING?
June
2005
Ever since
the demise of the old slatted timber crossings, specifiers were limited
to choosing concrete and asphalt replacements. Of course, asphalt
is no longer deemed a surface sufficiently able to withstand traffic
loads and meet safety requirements and so concrete platforms became
the standard platform.
However, across the European networks there is a growing trend for
engineers to replace concrete platforms with rubber crossing systems.
We examine why.
There are around 9,000 level crossings in the UK with approximately
8,000 crossings on the mainline network, controlled by Network Rail.
Level crossings on heritage railways and those within factory premises
and docks, etc account for the balance. Of these, most are concrete
based platforms. However, this is all changing.
The recent renaissance in the reputation of rubber follows a chequered
history since its introduction some twenty five years ago, when US
based OMNI and a German company were the only global manufacturers.
With the growing pressure to reduce road closure times, engineers
were keen to test these new rubber surfaces. However, the obvious
advantages in installation and tamping simplicity presented by these
new modular systems were dogged by recurring problems relating to
poor skid values, white lining adhesion and panel gapping (already
a major issue in concrete crossings).
Indeed, for some years the predominant reason for choosing a rubber
system would be speed and ease of installation and removal for tamping.
There were otherwise few other benefits in choosing rubber.
There became a desperate need to improve the design and manufacture
of rubber crossings to counter gapping and skid resistance problems.
It is, indeed, new manufacturing techniques and a series of innovations
which have now turned the tables and secured a bright future for rubber
platforms.
Furthermore, it is a UK based company, HoldFast Level Crossings, who
are recognised as leading these developments.
Such is the success of their system, they now export to 19 countries.
They have been awarded the Queen’s Award for Innovation and
were awarded Rail Supplier of the Year last year.
HoldFast’s Managing Director, Peter Coates Smith, explains:
“An inherent weakness of early rubber systems was the need for
a surface layer which was a weakness and could peel. Small panels
and complicated fixing systems further weakened the crossings.
“We engineered production plant to manufacture panels as 100%
solid recycled blocks of rubber. We also made the decision to reduce
the number of components and make the panels larger to reduce the
number of joints and improve stability. This does make the panels
very heavy but we have recently introduced the HoldFast Lifting Pins
to counter this”.
SAFETY
Level crossings represent the highest risk of a multi-fatality railway
incident. The vast majority of level crossing incidents are caused
by crossing users. Between 1993/94 and 2003/04 there have been 449
train incidents at level crossings, with a total of 130 deaths and
336 injuries.
In 2003/04, 17 members of the public were killed using level crossings,
the highest figure since 1991/92. Of the members of the public, 8
were occupants of road vehicles and 9 were pedestrians, struck and
killed while using the crossings.
In this context, it is clear that safety has become one of the key
drivers in the trend towards rubber platforms. Coates Smith has spent
some 20 years campaigning to improve safety at level crossings and
is delighted to see the safety benefits of rubber being recognised
by the networks.
He explains: “Over 90% of HoldFast’s crossings are now
replacements for concrete systems where a combination of gapping between
panels, crumbling, an uneven surface and track circuitry failure have
created safety hazards for road and rail users.”
INSTALLATION
All engineers will be aware of the pressures to minimise road and
track closures! This is where, time and time again, rubber is the
winner.
Concrete crossings are inevitably cumbersome and take at least two
full working days and a whole team of men to install, with the additional
use of heavy machinery making the whole process long, drawn out and
expensive.
CAREFUL
In contrast, modular rubber systems comprise of panels that will simply
drop into place. A 40 metre crossing can be installed or replaced
in three hours without the need for overhead electrical isolation.
This is proving a major commercial attraction in selecting rubber.
Crossings can be delivered and off loaded direct from manufacturing
plant to the installation site on the day (or night) of installation.
This reduces fuel and road freight requirements.
HoldFast’s system does not even require bolts or screws. Instead,
just small rubber backed base plates are used to sit (not fixed) on
every fourth sleeper. This allows individual panels to be removed
and replaced easily and quickly without disturbing adjacent panels,
a considerable advantage when undertaking local track inspections.
TAMPING
The speed of routine removal and replacement of rubber crossings is
no better illustrated than at a particularly complex crossing at Gloucester.
The five track crossing comprises many full depth panels, but it took
just two and a quarter hours to remove and stack two of those tracks
prior to tamping them and no longer to replace.
The contractors, Fifth Rail Ltd, lifted out the panels using a p-ray
bar on each of the panels and with just one man on each they levered
the panels out without any mechanical assistance. They were then numbered
and stacked and with a little lubrication (soap) the panels were easily
re-inserted, without the need of even a JCB! As those of you who have
been involved with tamping through concrete crossings, there is no
comparison!It is estimated that there are now over 15km track of HoldFast’s
rubber crossings alone installed on the UK network. Underpinned by
the obvious benefits over concrete achieved through the accumulation
of years of experience and product innovation, it is clear that rubber
has finally come of age as the engineer’s preferred crossing
choice.
|
|
 |
| Rubber
platforms are able to protect the track bed by absorbing the shock
loads of heavy traffic |
 |
| Gaps
in crossings can be highly dangerous for pedestrians and cylists.
There has been a marked increase in orders for HoldFast’s
full depth rubber Pedestrian Crossings to address this issue. |
 |
| Rubber
is now chosen in preference to concrete for some of the country’s
most safety critical locations enduring the most demanding wear
and tear, such as Bicester’s ring road (pictured here). |
 |
| The
growing success of rubber is widely attributed to the pioneering
work of Peter Coates-Smith, here being received by HM The Queen
as one of Britain’s 500 Pioneers of The People for his work
in improving level crossing safety. |
 |
| Modular
rubber systems have long held the advantage over concrete crossings
for ease and speed of installation. It is only in recent years that
rubber has won over engineers in their quest for a long term solution
to durability and safety |
|