RTR 4/2010 25 RU 800 S – performance comparison after three years laying possessions and that we have been able to apply full mechanisation to many sections of track originally scheduled for conventional relaying work. The following examples taken from real projects provide evidence to confirm this. 3.1 S-Bahn line between Stuttgart and Zuffenhausen The original plan for this section was to relay the track and clean the ballast using the fully mechanised method but to revert to conventional relaying and ballast renewal over 700 metres. It was planned to close the line for three periods of 58 hours each at weekends. The reasons for having recourse to conventional relaying methods were the close spacing of the tracks of up to 3.60 m and a number of drainage shafts, Planning the delivery of materials is very considerably simplified. Given that the RU 800 S completes two work processes in one, it is possible to arrange for the delivery of both sleepers and rails before possession of the track is handed over to the contractors. Planning engineers no longer need to concern themselves in detail with which machines are to be used in order to satisfy what performance targets and which specific job step has to be carried out before the others. This radically improves planning dependability for the delivery of materials. 3 Examples taken from practice The experience of the last three years has shown that, using the RU 800 S, we have been able to reduce the time needed for re2 Savings The savings are appreciable, depending in detail on operational constraints. When it is possible for one track to be closed to permit uninterrupted work, it thus is possible to clean and relay up to 4000 metres of track in the course of a weekend on doubletrack railway lines. When it is possible for both tracks to be closed entirely for railway operations, the engineering work can be completed in a considerably shorter time still. There is no need for the additional tamping operations between cleaning the ballast and relaying the track nor for a large number of expensive and time-consuming repositioning jobs needing to be done by hand (Fig. 4) in cramped locations, where the working width available is less than that needed by conventional ballast-cleaning machines, making it necessary to revert to conventional methods. To sum up what has been said so far, the RU 800 S results in the following advantages compared with older methods: Elimination of the tamping runs between ballast cleaning and relaying, Elimination of the additional survey of the interim target/actual comparison, Elimination of most of the conventional repositioning jobs affecting level crossings, platforms and culverts and in places where the tracks are close together, Elimination of need to trim the edge of the ballast when cleaning it, and Shortening of the time needed for completion of the work and saving on the costs of site overheads and surveillance. Fig. 3: Assembly unit Fig. 2: Ballast excavation chain Fig. 4: Elimination of time-consuming and expensive manual jobs in cramped locations Assembly and doubleheaded bolt fastening unit Ballast application chutes for distributing the cleaned ballast across the whole track Ballast storage Double-screen wagon 1000 m3/h MFS 100 MFS 100 Ballast tailings
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjY3NTk=