2020 MOTSU Detailed Visual and Ultrasonic Railroad Inspection Post Inspection Memo (1).pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER, CORPS OF ENGINEERS

GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURES LABORATORY

WATERWAYS EXPERIMENT STATION, 3909 HALLS FERRY ROAD

VICKSBURG, MISSISSIPPI 39180-6199

CEERD-GM-A September 2020

MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point, ATTN: Joseph Fahey and staff of Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point

SUBJECT: Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point Detailed Visual and Ultrasonic Railroad Track Inspection

1. As requested by the U. S. Army Materiel Command, personnel from the U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC) inspected approximately 120 miles of Army-owned railroad track at Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point, NC. ERDC personnel performing the inspection were Matt Norris, Jonathan Oldenburg, Chase Bradley, Andy Anderton, Abby Cisko, Ethan Russell, Dustin Smith, Ben Breland, Janet Simms, Don Embry and Jeremy Beasley. 757th Expeditionary Rail Center personnel assisting with inspection were MAJ Armstrong, CPT Pugh, CPT Keisling, CPT Diffenderfer, SFC Vacarro, SPC Dillard, and CDT Joyner. On August 24, 2020, an out-briefing was held to present the key results of the inspection. The attendees were:

Matt Norris, ERDC Jeremy Beasley, ERDC Malcolm Charles, MOTSU

Joe Fahey, DPW Jonathan Hatch, DPW

2. Critical findings are listed in the DEFCOM Report; 80 (Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point North Carolina). The inspection was completed in accordance with Unified Facilities Criteria

(UFC) 4-860-03.

3. There is approximately 120 miles of jointed track in the railroad network at Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point (MOTSU). This network is comprised of a mainline off post, six yards, sixteen lead tracks, three piers with track, two crane tracks, south holding area, north holding area, two engine houses, three suspect tracks, and three tracks for container restuffing. The serving rail of CSX connects to the mainline at the zero mile marker eighteen miles north of the perimeter gate at MOTSU.

4. Prior to the detailed track inspection, an internal flaw analysis of the track was conducted.

Internal flaw analysis was accomplished with a hi-rail truck equipped with an ultrasonic testing unit (NORDCO Testing and Rail Services) and operated by an ERDC personnel certified in Level 2 UT inspection. This ultrasonic testing device was able to test both rails at a rate of approximately 5 MPH. The testing apparatus is capable of detecting the following defects: (1) rail head defects and rail web defects inside and outside the joint bar area; (2) centrally located

CEERD-GM-A

SUBJECT: Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point Detailed Visual and Ultrasonic Railroad Track Inspection transverse defects in the rail head and elsewhere in the rail; (3) bolt hole cracks; (4) head and web separations; (5) vertical/ longitudinal defects in the head or web; (6) torch cut bolt holes;

and (7) torch cut rail ends.

Several of the tracks contained rail less than 90 lb/yd. According to UFC 4-860-03, rail with weights less than 90 lb/yd are considered lightweight rail and may not be suitable for use in track subjected to heavy wheel loads. If maintenance problems arise in areas of heavy vehicle loading, a structural evaluation and stress analysis should be performed to determine if the tracks should be replaced with heavier weight rail (115-136 lb/yd). The mainline and majority of the yard tracks are comprised of 100 lb/yd rail; with the exception of some 85 lb/yd rail in the interchange yard. There are some 115 lb/yd rail in tracks located in the north holding area, south holding area, selective wye tracks, and a small section of the mainline.

Some of the 100 lb/yd rail was rolled in the 1920's, which indicates it was not held to the same modern day manufacturing standards and processes as the new rail is today. When you factor in the 380 defects identified during the internal flaw inspection, there is a strong indication that the 100 lb/yd rail has reached the end of its life cycle. It is worth noting that only a few defects were found in the 115 lb/yd rail. Although 100lb rail is considered able to handle heavy loading, it is not ideal for the frequency of the heavy loadings taking place at MOTSU.

Numerous horizontal split heads, head web separations, split webs, compound fractures, detail fractures, and bolt hole cracks all attest to the overstressing of the rail under such frequent and heavy loadings. During the 2019 inspection, several engine burn fractures were identified along the mainline. Despite these fractured rails being replaced, the 2020 inspection revealed engine burns in these same locations. Although very few of them currently contain fractures, if the issue remains unaddressed, it will lead to future track closures.

Many of the defects listed above are a product of manufacturing issues and/or overstressing of the rail. Engine Burns and Engine Burn Fractures are strictly caused by the locomotive engine and its operator. When the locomotive is put under two much strain it loses some of its tractive force and the rail wheels slip on the rail. If the operator then increased the speed to help gain traction, the wheels spin faster, still slipping, and superheating the railhead thus creating an Engine burn. The degree of a burn can vary in severity, with the length of time the engine sat in one spot and the peak temperature the rail reaches being the main contributing factors. Once the rail reaches its melting point, the wheel begins to displace the railhead.

If these burns are created during the summer on a hot day and the rail is allowed to cool slowly, it can reduce to propagation of fractures. If the burns occur during the cooler months and the rail cools quickly, the railhead becomes more brittle and each impact from further movements propagates the fracture. There are two common ways to prevent these fractures from starting: 1.

Using an addition locomotive to increase tractive force and 2. dumping sand in the locomotive wheels to increase friction.

Track Inspection

Due to the sheer number of defects in this track network, it is recommend to replace all the 100 lb/yd and lighter rail with newer 115 – 136 lb/yd rail and to restrict the entire classification yard to 5 MPH to help minimize damage to government assets in case of a derailment. The national average for one stick of rail is approximately $2,000.00. To replace the defective rails with the same rail weight and section is estimated to be $760,000.00. Prices may vary depending on where the rail is purchased. This estimate does not include the price of upgrading rail weight.

5. The fastenings and other track materials (F&OTM) on the heavy weight rail ( 115 lb/yd) is in good condition. The F&OTM on the lightweight rail is in moderate to poor condition.

Numerous cracked and broken joint bars were identified during this inspection, which suggests insufficient strength of the joint bars to handle the heavy wheel loads they are experiencing. An axel load that over ranges the maximum axel load for that particular rail weight defines heavy wheel load.

The most common defects encountered during this inspection were cut spikes improperly positioned. Improper spiking or spiking in the slots of a slotted joint bar was a common practice in the 1930s-1960s. Over the years, it became apparent that these practices promote defects within the F&OTM and should no longer be continued. Several loose bolts were also recorded especially on the mainline, which is most likely a result of the longitudinal movement during thermal expansion and contraction of the rail. This movement can be minimized with the use of rail anchors. Rail anchors are discussed in the UFC 4-860-03, Section 6-5, and it is recommended to install a minimum of eight anchors, four in each direction (boxed), per 39-foot rail or 16 anchors per 80-foot rail. Track bolts are to be torched to 400 ft/lbs according to the UFC; when bolts are loose, they lose their ability to hold the rail ends in alignment. This weakens the joint allowing rail end mismatches to occur and promotes the development of end batter.

6. There are four functions that a crosstie is designed for, which include maintaining gauge, profile, and alignment, as well as, distributing the load from the rail to the ballast to the subgrade. The inability of a crosstie to adequately perform any of these functions constitutes a defective crosstie and shall be replaced. The majority of crossties are in poor condition. At the completion of this inspection, it was concluded that approximately 20,000 or 7 percent of the crossties were defective. The rough estimate to replace all the defective ties at MOTSU is based off a national average of $200.00 per tie for a total cost of $4,000,000.00. This price may vary depending on where the crossties are purchased and what type of crosstie is purchased.

The normal average for defective crossties on a nominal-condition track network is 1 to 3 percent. There were several areas identified with zero non-defective crossties within 24 inches of a joint in either direction, five or more non-defective crossties in a row, and tight gauge were recorded, which are close-to-traffic defects. When there is no tie support, near a joint it produces more stress on the joint bars, bolts, and rail ends than they are designed for. These components can only with stand the added strain for so long producing more broken bolts and eventually causing cracked or broken joint bars. An aggressive crosstie replacement program is

Track Inspection recommended. By instituting a more aggressive crosstie replacement program, over time, the possibility for defects such as internal flaws, striped joints, tight gauge, and surface and alignment issues will be reduced.

7. Ballast is a select, angular material placed on the subgrade to provide adequate drainage, restrain the track laterally, longitudinally, and vertically under the dynamic loads imposed by trains and the thermal stresses induced in the rails by changing temperature. In addition, it distributes the load of the track and trains to prevent overstressing the subgrade. UFC 4-860-03, Section 4-3, states the ballast section should be clean, free draining, and free of vegetation, soil (mud), and other foreign materials. Ballast materials shall provide a full crib and uniform shoulders, but shall not be allowed to cover or be at a level above the top of the crossties.

The majority of the ballast is fouled due to sand and other fines. The ballast of any track system plays a significant role in proper drainage, which further increases the usable life of crossties.

Vegetation issues are discussed in the UFC 4-860-03, Section 3-3. It states that vegetation shall be controlled so that it does not grow within the ballast section or obstruct proper ballast drainage. Vegetation can be removed chemically, mechanically, or manually. If herbicide is applied, it is recommended to spray to 8 feet from track centerline on both sides. The removal of vegetation will significantly improve track drainage, further increasing the usable life of the track system and its components.

8. Vegetation is in full compliance. There were very few vegetation issues observed during this inspection. UFC 4-860-03, Section 3-3. It states that vegetation shall be controlled so that it does not grow within the ballast section or obstruct proper ballast drainage. Vegetation can be removed chemically, mechanically, or manually. If herbicide is applied, it is recommended to spray to 8 feet from track centerline on both sides.

9. The majority of turnouts inspected are in full compliance. The turnouts of any track system are considered the most critical portion. Several of the turnouts inspected did include defective tie clusters some of which mandated closure to traffic in that location. Several turnouts in the north side of the class yard had tight gauge, resulting in closure to traffic. These defects can be easily remedied by replacing the middle defective tie or respiking the rail to its correct gauge. It is recommended that all switches be inspected prior to any movement across them to ensure that there are no switch point gaps. All switches should be lubricated and inspected for proper gauge and operation to ensure full compliance at all times.

10. The road crossings are in full compliance with the exception of a few of the flangeways being fouled with fine aggregate from precipitation runoff and a few decaying timbers at the north end of the interchange yard on the mainline. It is important to ensure that all safety signs, lights, and road markings are clearly visible. All crossing signs, signals, and/or warnings shall conform to the requirements of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), Part VIII, “Traffic Control Systems for Railroad-Highway Grade Crossings”.

Track Inspection

11. Track geometry describes the relative position of the rails in the vertical and horizontal planes. The primary measurements of track geometry are alignment, profile, crosslevel, and gauge. There were several locations noted to have gauge measurements tighter than 56 inches which is often caused by defective and/or skewed crossties. Tight gauge, often causing derailments, is a significant safety concern and these portions of track were closed to traffic. The majority of tracks meet the minimum required standards stated in the UFC 4-850-03; however, it is recommended that all tracks be surfaced and aligned with a 1-inch lift. It is recommended to surface and align the entire track system every five years. Although not required, a minimum of 1-in. superelevation is recommended on any curve greater than 4 degrees.

12. For track inspection purposes, bridges are only inspected from the stringers up which includes the bridge ties and the components resting on them. The bridges are in full compliance.

13. Since the last internal flaw inspection of the mainline in 2019, all deficiencies appear to have been corrected. This was the first detailed visual and ultrasonic inspection of the entire track network performed by ERDC.

14. Additionally, we need copies of any DA Form 4283 “Facilities Engineering Work Request” or DD Form 1354 “Transfer and Acceptance of Military Real Property” for any new construction, repair, or maintenance performed on the railroads since the last inspection by the ERDC (also includes service orders). These forms should be scanned and emailed to thomas.j.beasley@usace.army.mil

15. Further details, including defects and recommended remediation options, will be presented in the final report. Please do not hesitate to contact us for further details regarding this inspection.

Thank you for your assistance and patience during this inspection process. We appreciated your time and help during this event. If you have any questions or concerns, I may be reached at 601- 415-7133 or matthew.d.norris@usace.army.mil. Other contacts are Jeremy Beasley (Program Manager) 601-634-3472 or thomas.j.beasley@usace.army.mil

Matthew Norris Army Certified Track Inspector

Airfields and Pavements Branch mailto:matthew.d.norris@usace.army.mil

SUBJECT: Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point Detailed Visual and Ultrasonic Railroad Track Inspection

Critical Findings

Critical findings for this detailed track inspection are defects that place close-to-traffic operating restrictions on the track segment as specified by the UFC 4-860-03. These defects should be corrected immediately before operations over the tracks are allowed. DEFCOM Report 80 (Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point North Carolina) lists the close-to-traffic defects found at Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point, NC during the inspection on August 7, 2017 through August 24, 2020.

Table 1. Critical Finding Totals at Military Ocean Terminal Sunny Point.

Component Quantity

Rail 43

Geometry 70

F&OTM 24

Other Appliances 1

Ballast/subgrade 3

Grade Crossings 1

Ties 803