|
|
| Re: Silverliner V problems (1401054) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Silverliner V problems |
|
|
Posted by Jace on Wed Jul 6 12:33:46 2016, in response to Re: Silverliner V problems, posted by Bill West on Tue Jul 5 01:16:10 2016. The SDP40F derailment problems were due to a combination of a stiff secondary suspension on all EMD HTC trucks (SP had derailment issues on their SD45T-2 units), very heavy locomotives and track standards (specifically FRA's detailed spiking pattern standards). The heavy locomotive would tend to transfer high lateral loads into the high rail on curves thanks to the stiff secondary, while the spiking standards ended up being insufficient to handle the load. As a result of these issues, EMD softened the secondary, changed the dampers on the center axle and the FRA changed their regs to state only that spiking needs to be sufficient for the intended loads.The problems on the Silver V's could very well be due to systemic manufacturing issues or it could be a design problem. If the seats are welded to the beam then the weld has to be specified to minimize the possibility of fatigue (crack initiation). It could be the wrong weld was specified or poor technique was used. The latter should have been caught be inspection, presumably by Columbus as a fully built truck would be very tough to inspect there by Hyundai or SEPTA. One disadvantage with this being a more or less standard truck is that it could lead to a less stringent inspection/testing program than one would see on a new design. That would be fine for an unmodified truck (assuming of course the loads going into the truck match the original design intent), but not where there have been changes. |
|
|
|