TY - GEN
T1 - Effectiveness of Chemical Grouting and Stone Blowing as remedial measures to mitigate differential movement at railroad track transitions
AU - Mishra, Debakanta
AU - Boler, Huseyin
AU - Tutumluer, Erol
AU - Hyslip, James P.
N1 - Research findings described in this paper were made possible through the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) BAA funding program for research and demonstration projects supporting the development of high-speed and intercity passenger rail service. The authors would like to thank Cameron Stuart and Gary Carr of the FRA for the financial support and guidance provided in this project. Dr. Steve Chrismer of LTK Engineering (previously Amtrak) worked as the project liaison throughout the remedial measure implementation and performance monitoring tasks in the project. Dr. Chrismer's contribution was critical to the overall success of the project, and is greatly appreciated. Dr. Chrismer's past experience with Stoneblowing proved particularly helpful for this project. Sincere thanks to David Staplin, Mike Trosino, Mike Tomas, Marty Perkins, and Carl Walker of AMTRAK for their help and support. Sincere thanks to Mr. Tom Planert for his help with the chemical grouting activity. Expert advice of Kevin Hansen throughout the stone blowing process is gratefully acknowledged. The design, manufacturing, and installation of all instrumentation components used in this study were conducted under the guidance of Mr. Mike Tomas of AMTRAK. Finally, acknowledgments are also due to Hasan Kazmee, Aaron Coenen, Jim Meister, and Liang Chern Chow of the University of Illinois for their help with the field activities. The contents of this paper reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. This paper does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - Railway transitions like bridge approaches experience differential movements related to differences in track system stiffness, track damping characteristics, foundation type, ballast settlement from fouling and/or degradation, as well as fill and subgrade settlement. A recent research study at the University of Illinois has used advanced geotechnical instrumentation to identify and quantify different factors contributing to recurrent differential movement problems at three different bridge approaches along Amtrak's Northeast Corridor (NEC) near Chester, Pennsylvania. Field instrumentation data have indicated excessive ballast movement to be the primary factor contributing to the "bump" development at these bridge approaches. Among the different remedial measures applied to mitigate the recurrent track geometry issues were: (1) Chemical Grouting, (2) Stone Blowing, and (3) Under-Tie Pads. This paper will discuss the implementation methods using track geometry records and instrumentation data, and highlight the effectiveness of chemical grouting and stone blowing to mitigate the differential movement problem at railroad bridge approaches. According to the trends in the transient ballast deformation data collected under train loading, both remedial measures were effective in significantly reducing excessive ballast deformation, which was the primary mechanism behind the bump development at these locations. Ballast degradation and presence of excessive fine particles in the ballast layer adversely affected the ability of the grout to bond with aggregate particles. A "clean" ballast layer, on the other hand, facilitated adequate bonding between the grout and ballast particles leading to significantly improved long-term track performance.
AB - Railway transitions like bridge approaches experience differential movements related to differences in track system stiffness, track damping characteristics, foundation type, ballast settlement from fouling and/or degradation, as well as fill and subgrade settlement. A recent research study at the University of Illinois has used advanced geotechnical instrumentation to identify and quantify different factors contributing to recurrent differential movement problems at three different bridge approaches along Amtrak's Northeast Corridor (NEC) near Chester, Pennsylvania. Field instrumentation data have indicated excessive ballast movement to be the primary factor contributing to the "bump" development at these bridge approaches. Among the different remedial measures applied to mitigate the recurrent track geometry issues were: (1) Chemical Grouting, (2) Stone Blowing, and (3) Under-Tie Pads. This paper will discuss the implementation methods using track geometry records and instrumentation data, and highlight the effectiveness of chemical grouting and stone blowing to mitigate the differential movement problem at railroad bridge approaches. According to the trends in the transient ballast deformation data collected under train loading, both remedial measures were effective in significantly reducing excessive ballast deformation, which was the primary mechanism behind the bump development at these locations. Ballast degradation and presence of excessive fine particles in the ballast layer adversely affected the ability of the grout to bond with aggregate particles. A "clean" ballast layer, on the other hand, facilitated adequate bonding between the grout and ballast particles leading to significantly improved long-term track performance.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84978884244
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84978884244#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1115/JRC2016-5805
DO - 10.1115/JRC2016-5805
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:84978884244
T3 - 2016 Joint Rail Conference, JRC 2016
BT - 2016 Joint Rail Conference, JRC 2016
PB - American Society of Mechanical Engineers
T2 - 2016 Joint Rail Conference, JRC 2016
Y2 - 12 April 2016 through 15 April 2016
ER -