BALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEMS EXPERIENCES GAINED IN AUSTRIA ... · PDF fileBALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEMS EXPERIENCES GAINED IN AUSTRIA AND ... the German railway company, ... (Monolithic systems

BALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEMSEXPERIENCES GAINED IN AUSTRIA AND GERMANY

Dieter PichlerFCP Fritsch, Chiari & Partner ZT GmbHDiesterweggasse 3, 1140 Vienna, Austria

+43 1 90292 1127, [email protected]

Jörg FenskePorr Bau GmbH

Absberggasse 47, 1110 Vienna, Austria+43 1 50 626 2258, [email protected]

Number of Words: 1.749

ABSTRACT

The railway companies in Austria and Germany use ballastless track systems for many years. Due to their experiences it is obvious that such systems show a lot of advantages compared to ballasted tracks.

Their experience demonstrates that such systems have substantial advantages when compared with ballasted tracks. Especially, on high-performance and high-speed routes, ballastless track systems like elastically supported slab track ÖBB-PORR are installed to ensure maximum track availability and minimum maintenance needs.

INTRODUCTION

Since the middle of the 20th century, several countries across the world have adopted and developed the use of ballastless slab-track systems.

The major reasons for these developments came as a result of increased levels of track traffic,which in turn restricted track maintenance time; this was coupled with the fact that train speeds increased up to 300 km/h.

In the last 50 years many different types of ballastless track systems have been developed in different countries. The reason that each country developed its own system was due to different applications. Some countries focused on tracks in tunnels or on bridges, othersfocused on high speed lines and earthwork. The main types of systems are:

Compact systemsBaseplate systemsBlock systemsEmbedded rail systemsPrefabricated slab systems

Depending on the different aspects such as gained experience with the system and local circumstances the choice for one system is driven by determining the applicability and the life cycle costs of the system [1].

© AREMA 2013® 81

DEVELOPMENT IN AUSTRIA

Within the national network of the Austrian Federal Railways (German: Österreichische Bundesbahnen, ÖBB) the use of slab track systems initially began in the 1980s.

As traffic loads, permissible travelling speeds and availability increased, it was proven that at least in tunnel routes the slab track has numerous advantages over ballasted track. Therefore in Austria, for new tunnel routes over lengths of 500 m, the installation of slab track is preferred.

Between 1982 and 1995 several types of ballastless track system were tested on the ÖBBnetwork [2], which focused on the three main groups of systems:

Monolithic systems (compact systems)Rubber booted sleeper systems (block systems)Prefabricated slab systems

After this first trial period, a concrete-based slab track system with elastically supported precast slabs called system ÖBB-PORR was identified as most suitable for applications for the ÖBB network.

This system consists of prefabricated reinforced concrete slabs which are placed with a 40 mm wide open joint between two adjacent slabs. The slabs are coated with an elastic layer to separate them from the under poor concrete. This design principle compensates for any deformations caused by creeping, shrinking and temperature changes. Furthermore the elastic coating leads to reduced noise and vibration levels. The system comprises two elastic layers: the highly elastic rail fasteners type 300-1 and the elastic coating.

© AREMA 2013®82

Figure 1: Elastically supported slab track system ÖBB-PORR

Since 1995, nearly all ÖBB ballastless tracks have been equipped with the elastically supported slab track ÖBB-PORR system. Since the first installation of the system near Langenlebarn, 25 years of experience has been gathered. The main result of this experience is that ballastless track systems like ÖBB-PORR are nearly maintenance free permanent ways. The only regular maintenance work needed is rail grinding, similar to what is needed for ballasted tracks.

© AREMA 2013® 83

Figure 2: System ÖBB-PORR in Langenlebarn (first installation in 1989)

For reduction of ground-borne noise and in particular vibration emission, modifications of slab track in the form of mass-spring-systems (floating track slab systems) have been developed in the past years. With such systems the emissions can be reduced far below the level of ballasted track systems even with sub-ballast mats. For sensitive urban areas, the above-mentioned elastic-layered slab track system ÖBB-PORR alone is insufficient to mitigate against vibration. Therefore, a mass-spring-system constructed continuously from in-situ concrete without joints was developed. Since 1996, such mass-spring-systems are under operation in the railway network. At that time the new design principle of continuous concrete troughs carrying the ballastless track system ÖBB-Porr was installed in the Römerbergtunnel. Until now, many additional installations of that design have been realised, e.g. in the Wienerwaldtunnel and Lainzer Tunnel in Vienna.

© AREMA 2013®84

Figure 3: Mass-Spring-Systems with ballastless track system ÖBB-PORR

BALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEM ÖBB-PORR IN GERMANY

The Deutsche Bahn, the German railway company, installs slab track systems not only in tunnels and on bridges but also on earthwork sections. Since 2001 the ÖBB-PORR system is also used by Deutsche Bahn in the area of the main station in Berlin. There, the system is installed on a large number of bridges on the East-West corridor and also in the north-south line tunnels, partly on mass-spring-systems. For the design of these mass-spring-systems the experience in Austria was taken into account.

Ballastless track Floating slab trackFigure 4: System ÖBB-PORR in Tunnels of North-South Corridor in Berlin

More than 150 km of double track ÖBB-PORR slab track system are currently under construction on the corridor VDE 8 – the high speed line between Berlin and Munich. Beside earthwork these sections contain a large number of bridges and tunnels.

© AREMA 2013® 85

The different types of bridges as e.g. short bridges (L < 25 m), long bridges and large viaducts for crossing valleys resulted in different solutions for the ballastless track on these bridges.Figure 5 shows for example the design principle for a double track long bridge.

The interaction between bridge and track superstructure leads to special ballastless track design on the bridge and causes transition elements for the expansion joints at the ends of the bridge decks. At the ends of the bridge superstructure, the track system has to resist the movements and rotations between bridge and abutment. These movements and rotations lead to an increase of rail stresses and forces on the rail fasteners adjacent to the bridge joint. Movements occur in longitudinal and lateral track direction, rotations lead to vertical pressure and tension forces on the rail fastening system. Figure 5 shows the impacts on the track system at bridge joints.

Figure 5: Transition bridge superstructure – abutment [3]

© AREMA 2013®86

Figure 6: Cross-section of bridges with ballastless track system

© AREMA 2013® 87

Figure 7: Cross-section of tunnel with ballastless track system

Figure 8: Cross-section of earthwork with ballastless track system

© AREMA 2013®88

Due to the very high train operation speed, additional investigations were made to ensure a well-tempered dynamic system behaviour avoiding resonance effects. These investigations proof that the dynamic adjustment of the elastically supported slabs is very well suited for train speeds up to 330 km/h.

MAINTENANCE, REPAIR AND LIFE CYCLE COSTS

Experience shows that following parts of ballastless track systems may need maintenance works during lifetime of the system:

Rails: grinding or milling, repair of welds, exchange of railsRail fasteners: adjustment works, exchange of angled guide plates, exchange of elastic pads, exchange of clips, exchange of screwsDrainage system: cleaning of pipes, trenches

Long-term studies from ÖBB and extrapolations of these results show that the concrete elements of ballastless tracks will have a lifetime of about 80 years without maintenance needs caused by environmental conditions and regular train operation.

ÖBB-experiences concerning maintenance costs per km track are published in [5]. In comparison to ballasted tracks, figure 8 shows the break-even point for the total track costsafter 24 years of operation based on a daily track loading of about 70,000 gross-tons.Thereafter, the payback of the higher initial investment costs of ballastless track is achieved.

Figure 9: Comparison of costs for ballasted and ballastless track per km

Beside these results for regular train operation, it has to be considered that extraordinary situations can occur. E.g. derailment of train may lead to severe damage on the track system. Therefore, the ease of reparability of a track is of major importance. It is obvious that ballastless track systems are more difficult to repair than ballasted tracks. The development of

© AREMA 2013® 89

the elastically supported slab track ÖBB-Porr was particularly driven by the repair ability aspect. The system allows the following repair measures:

Repair of rails, rail-welds, a.s.o. and exchange of rails (see above mentioned maintenance needs)Repair/exchange of Rail fasteners (see above mentioned maintenance needs)Repair of concrete slabs, e.g. of seats/shoulders for rail fasteners (e.g. after derailment of boogies/trains)Repositioning/replacement of concrete slabs (e.g. in case of large settlements of sub-construction)

For every single repair measure, detailed consultations have taken place and the required time-span for each measure has been investigated. Therefore, in case of repair, minimum investment in time is required to conduct the works. This ensures maximum availability of the track.

Step 1 Step 2

Step 3 Step 4

Step 5 Step 6Figure 10: Exchange of slabs

© AREMA 2013®90

CONCLUSIONS

The ballastless track system ÖBB-PORR is used for many years on earthwork as well as on bridges and in tunnels. The system is proven for usage on high-performance lines as well as on high-speed lines and shows many advantages in comparison with other types of ballastless and ballasted track systems.

REFERENCES

1) UIC Project Ballastless Track “Report about the application and the experience with ballastless track” version 2005-11-03, not published.

2) Schilder, R., 2005: “Experiences in Ballastless Track gained on ÖBB”, European Slab Track Symposium, Bruxelles.

3) Eisenmann, J.; Leykauf, G., 2000: “Feste Fahrbahn für Schienenbahnen“, Betonkalender 2000, p. 291 – 326. Verlag Ernst & Sohn (German).

4) Adam, C., 2011: “Expertise concerning the dynamic performance of the ballastless track system ÖBB-PORR” (German), not published.

5) Mach, M.: “Zustandsbewertung und Nutzungsdauerprognose von Festen Fahrbahn Systemen im Netz der ÖBB”, doctor‘s thesis certified at Vienna University of Technology 2011 (German).

6) Lichtberger, B.: „Track Compendium“. 2nd Edition 2011, Eurailpress.7) Pichler, D.; Fenske, J.: “Interaction Structure – Track Exemplified on the High-Speed

Line VDE 8”, Innsbrucker Bautage, Austria.

FIGURE CAPTIONS

Figure 1: Elastically supported slab track system ÖBB-PORRFigure 2: System ÖBB-PORR in Langenlebarn (first installation in 1989)Figure 3: Mass-Spring-Systems with ballastless track system ÖBB-PORRFigure 4: System ÖBB-PORR in Tunnels of North-South Corridor in BerlinFigure 5: Transition bridge superstructure – abutment [3]Figure 6: Cross-section of bridges with ballastless track systemFigure 7: Cross-section of earthwork with ballastless track system Figure 8: Cross-section of earthwork with ballastless track systemFigure 9: Comparison of costs for ballasted and ballastless track per kmFigure 10: Exchange of slabs

© AREMA 2013® 91

Sept

embe

r 29

–O

ctob

er 2

, 20

13In

dian

apol

is,

IN

Balla

st-l

ess

trac

k sy

stem

sEx

peri

ence

Gai

ned

in A

ustr

ia a

nd

Ger

man

yD

ipl.

-Ing

. D

r.te

chn.

Prok

. D

ipl.

-Ing

. D

ipl.

-Ing

.(FH

)D

iete

r PI

CHLE

RJö

rg F

ENSK

EFC

P Fr

itsc

h Ch

iari

& P

artn

er Z

T G

mbH

PORR

Bau

Gm

bH,

Railw

ayD

epar

tmen

t

© AREMA 2013®92

September 29 – October 2, 2013Indianapolis, IN

GeneralBallastless Track

Heavy concrete sleepertrack(uniform European track)

Ballasted trackElasticity without subsoil

Ballast substructure40%

Rail fasteningRail pads60%


GeneralThe Main Construction Principles for Ballastless Track


GeneralThe Main Construction Principles for Ballastless Track

Compact Systems (Monolithic systems e.g. System Rheda,System Rheda 2000)

Baseplate Systems (e.g. Vossloh, DFF21, Pandrol VIPA)

Block Systems (Booted sleeper systems e.g. System Stedef, System LVT)

Embedded Rail Systems (e.g. Edilon-Sedra EBS, CDM-Track)

Prefabricated Slab Systems(e.g. System Bögl, System ÖBB–PORR)


Practical Examples in AustriaDevelopment in Austria

1982 – 1995: FIRST PERIOD OF TESTING DIFFERENT SYSTEMS

Project Year System Feature Length

GroßerTürkenschanzparktunnel 1982 Rheda Tunnel rehabilitation 480 m

Hausrucktunnel 1985 JOARB 112 Tunnel rehabilitation 638 m

FJB Wien – GmündBereich Langenlebarn 1989 Slab track ÖBB-PORR Embankment 264 m

Dürrebergtunnel 1989 Züblin Tunnel rehabilitation, embankment 576 m

Arlbergtunnel 1990/1991 Booted sleeper Rheda Tunnel rehabilitation

3 491 m145 m

Tauerntunnel 1992Slab trackbooted sleeper

Tunnel rehabilitation2 629 m4 196 m

Sittenbergtunnel 1992/1993 Rheda New tunnel, light MSS, 4 turnouts 9 010 m

Helwagstraße 1993 Slab track Bridge 52 m

Sonnbergtunnel 1994 Züblin New tunnel, embankment, bridge 1 150 m

Total length 22 631 m


Decision-making of ÖBB Slab Track System in Austria

1. Construction (space requirements,...)

2. Method (sensitivity of laying,...)

3. Quality (track set, acoustics,...)

4. Economy

System ÖBB–PORR is the STANDARD SYSTEM in Austria


Decision-making of ÖBB – ConstructionSystem ÖBB-PORR

1 Holes for spindles

2 ÖBB-PORR slab

3 Elatomeric layer

4 Concrete joint sealing compound

5 Rail support seat

6 Long rail

7 Concrete base

122

3344

7

5

6

1

4

© AREMA 2013® 93


Decision-making of ÖBB – ConstructionSystem ÖBB-PORR

Low construction height

Vergussbeton

40

Cross-section throughpouring aperture

Vergussbeton

40

Cross-section beside pouring aperture

1.600 1.700

3.3001.730 1.570

1.52086.0 66.0 94.0

1.68074.0

78.0

45.5

32.5

Gle

isac

hse

Tunn

elac

hse

Vergussbeton

Gleistragplatte

Schotterauffüllung

+0,18

-0.60

SOK ±0.00

High degree of prefabrication

>43


SeptSept beembeember 29r 29 – OctoctOctOcOOO rerebebebebe 2, 2222222222 331311110101010101IndiInIn ppanappanapolisolisolioli NN, INN, INNN


Decision-making of ÖBB – MethodStructural Implementation


Criteria: Quality Results of the Track Recording Vehicle

Ballastless track


Criteria: Quality System Comparison

Comparision of evaluatedvibration emission KBbetween the ballast trackand different slab tracksystems in ÖBB.

3

2

1

00 1 2

KB

KB

Ballasted track

A

B

CD

ÖBB-PORR

Balla

stle

sstr

ack


Criteria: Quality System Comparison

Comparison of structural-borne noise –Slab Track vs. Ballast Track

Slab Track – ÖBB-PORRSlab Track – Type A20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

dB (A)

25

31,5 40 50 63 80 100

125

160

200

250

315

400

20

15

10

5

0

-5

-10

-15

dB (A)

10

12,5 16 20 25

31,5 40 50 63 80 100

125

160

00Level

Ballast

© AREMA 2013®94


Decision-making of ÖBB – QualityAcceptance Certificate

Frequency distribution of deviationsExample 638 measurement points, specifications in %

Deviation Position Hight Cant Gauge Moving chordposition

Moving chordheight

-4 0.2

-3.5 0.6

-3 1.3

-2.5 4.4

-2 0.2 10.5 29,3 0,1

-1.5 0.2 18.5 1.1 3,0

-1 9.1 21.9 5.8 45,1 1,1 10,3

-0.5 46.4 19.9 21.8 19,0 23,3

0 37.5 14.3 32.9 22,7 60,9 30,0

0.5 6.6 5.6 26.3 18,1 19,3

1 0.2 2.5 8.6 2,8 0,2 7

1.5 0.2 3.4 7

2 6

2.5 0.2

[%] 95 %

-1,0 -0,5 0 +0,5 +1,0

5,8

21,8

32,9

26,3

8,6


Decision-making of ÖBB – Quality Precision of Track Base Plate

+/- 0,3 mm tolerance for precast


Decision-making of ÖBB – Economy Life-Cycle-Costs (LCC)


Decision-making of ÖBB – SummarySystem Comparison

System Space Track Quality Safety Repair

Concept

Settle-ment

Adjust-ment

Vibration Installa-tion

Invest-ment

Mainten-ance Proven

Rheda2000 + + ++ -- -- +/- + + + +

LVT + + + ++ -- ++ +/- - ++ +

Bögl + ++ ++ - -- +/- - - ++ +

ÖBB –Porr ++ ++ ++ + + ++ + + ++ +

Ballast - +/- - ++ ++ + ++ ++ - ++

++ very good +/- satisfactory

+ good - below satisfactory

-- unsatisfactory


Decision-making of ÖBB


Decision-making of ÖBB

© AREMA 2013® 95


Special Soulutions for Ballastless TrackMass-Spring-Systems

Modification of superstructure for ground born noiseand vibration attenuation

Mass-Spring-Systems (floating track slab systems)

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

01 2 3 4 5 6 7 80.5 2

=0

=1.00

=0.25

=0

=0.50

=0.25=0.50

=0

D... dynamic maginification factor... damping ratio... frequency ratio

P (t)

ck F (t)

m(wheel, track, sleeper,

concrete track)base (e.g.: tunnelbottom floor)

rail carryingelements

concrete trough (mass)

bearings(springs)


Special Soulutions for Ballastless TrackMass-Spring-Systems

Example Römerbergtunnelsingle bearing

surface bearing

reinforced concrete troughprefabricated slabsbearing

70. 260.70. 70.

470.

260.70.

348.00

cut-and-covermethod

mining method

longitudinalsecuring device

single bearing surface bearing

open construction methodopen constructionmethod

tunnel portalin 366m

tunnel portalin 56m

ballasted track ballasted tracksurface bearing


Special Soulutions for Ballastless TrackTransistions

Ballastless Track vs. Ballasted Track Austria RZ 17220

65 65

Upper edgeof foundation

Concrete subbase

Concrete joint sealing compound

Track base plate

Elastic bond ballast

60

Section A-A

AA

6060

60606565

60

Slab trackTrack base plate

Slab Track Special track baseplates (ÜKO-GTP)2 straight or4 bent

Slab Track Ballast

Ballast25 reinforced concrete sleepers, 2.60 m longUSP ks=0,3 N/mm³15.00 m

20 concrete sleepers for turnouts USP ks=0,3 N/mm³15.00 m

Ballast withstandard sleepers

Partial bonding: 1. Rail foot 0.7-0.8 m wide, 0.15 m deep2. Every second space 0.15 m deep22.8 m

Elastically bonded ballast 30.00 m - 35.00 m

Surface bonding includes strip along sleeper ends, 0.2-0.3 m wide and 0.2-0.3 m deep30.00 m - 35.00 m

Full bonding 2.60 m wide, approx. 0,15 m deep7.2 m

Rail form 60E1(E2) Auxiliary rail: rail form 60E1(E2)

2.79

52.

400



Ballastless Track vs. Ballasted Track – Germany, Berlinregulation plate elastic

regulation platebaseplate

Section C-C

BBAA

6060

2.40

02.

795

6565

60

Slab trackTrack base plate

Slab trackTrack base plateAuxiliary tracks on L=5 m

Slab track Ballast

25 components B 320 W60 Ü15.00 m

44 components B320 W60 Ballast

Partial bonding GS und RB15 m

Elastically bonded ballast

Full bonding 15 m

Rail Form 60E1(E2) Auxiliary rail: rail form 60E1(E2)

6 components B70 W60

Partial bonding GS15 m

HGT 10 m

C

C

auxiliary track

65 60

concrete subbase

concrete joint sealing compound

Track base plate

HGT

Section A-A60

FSS upper edge of foundation

60 60

HGT

Section B-B60

upper edge of foundation

elastically bonded ballast

FSS





© AREMA 2013®96



1982 – 1995: FIRST PERIOD OF TESTING DIFFERENT SYSTEMS


GroßerTürkenschanzparktunnel 1982 Rheda Tunnel rehabilitation 480 m

Hausrucktunnel 1985 JOARB 112 Tunnel rehabilitation 638 m

FJB Wien – GmündBereich Langenlebarn 1989 Slab track ÖBB-PORR Embankment 264 m

Dürrebergtunnel 1989 Züblin Tunnel rehabilitation, embankment 576 m

Arlbergtunnel 1990/1991 Booted sleeper Rheda Tunnel rehabilitation

3 491 m145 m

Tauerntunnel 1992Slab trackbooted sleeper

Tunnel rehabilitation2 629 m4 196 m

Sittenbergtunnel 1992/1993 Rheda New tunnel, light MSS, 4 turnouts 9 010 m

Helwagstraße 1993 Slab track Bridge 52 m

Sonnbergtunnel 1994 Züblin New tunnel, embankment, bridge 1 150 m



Practical Examples in AustriaLangenlebarn – First Installation in 1989



1996 – ONGOING: PERIOD OF SLAB TRACK ÖBB-PORR (EXTRACT)


Galgenbergtunnel 1996/1997 Slab track New tunnel, light MSS, embankment, bridge, 4 turnouts 11 040 m

Römerbergtunnel 1997 Slab track New tunnel,Light and heavy MSS

638 m

Zammertunnel 1998/1999 Slab trackNew tunnel,Light and heavy MSS

4 477 m

Wolfsgrubentunnel/Arlbertunnel 1999/2000 Slab track, passable with cars New tunnel, medium-weight MSS,

6 turnouts 3 730 m

Siebergtunnel 2000/2001 Slab track New tunnel 12 902

Birgltunnel 2004 Slab track passable with cars New tunnel, 6 turnouts 2 650 m

Arlbergtunnel 2005/2007 Slab track passable with cars Tunnel rehabilitation, 8 turnouts 20 812 m

Lainzer Tunnel 2010 Slab track New tunnel, light, medium-weight and heavy MSS 18 075 m

Kundl/Radfeld – Baumkirchen 2010 Slab track High-speed line, new tunnel, light, medium-weight and heavy MSS 69 879 m

Wienerwaldtunnel 2010/2011 Slab trackHigh-speed line, new tunnel, bridge and embankment, light, medium-weight and heavy MSS

26 406 m

Total 580 031 m


Practical Examples in Austria Lainzer Tunnel

Ballastless Track on Floating Track Slab


Practical Examples in Austria Wienerwaldtunnel

Light Mass-Spring-System (MSS)

4.4 t/m, 18 Hz



Heavy MSS with strip layers

9 t/m, 8 Hz

© AREMA 2013® 97



Heavy MSS with single layers

9 t/m, 7.5 Hz


Practical Examples in GermanyDevelopment in Germany


Lehrter Bahnhof(Connection East-West)

2001/2002 Slab track 14 extenxion joints, total length on bridge 4 216 m

Lehrter Bahnhof(Connection North-South)

2002/2006 Slab track approx. 10 000 m light, medium-weight and heavy MSS 14 200 m

VDE 8.2 Erfurt – Leipzig/Halle 2012/2013 Slab track High-speed line, tunnel,

embankment and bridge 179 352 m

VDE 8.1 Ebensfeld – Erfurt, Lot 2 2012/2013 Slab track High-speed line, tunnel,


VDE 8.1 Ebensfeld – Erfurt, Lot 3 2012/2013 Slab track High-speed line, tunnel,




Practical Examples in Germany North-South Corridor in Berlin



Track Equipment

Accessablenoise absorbersGuard railsTrack magnetsBuffer stopsPower rails

Schallabsorber

Schnitt A-A

FührungsschieneAdapterplatte

Ausgleichsplatte

Elastomere Ausgleichsplatte

ElastomereAusgleichsplatte

Gewindestange

Grundplatte

Ankerstange

Schnitt B-B

Gleismagnet

Fahrsperre

Beschichtete Bewehrungz.B. mit AGROVAN 209 in FTGS-Bereichen

Stromschienenträger REHAUhöhenverstellbar

Adapterplatte

Ausgleichsplatte


Adapterplatte

Ausgleichsplatte


Schnitt C-C



Cross-section Tunnel

b 29 O t b 2 2013

Berlin



Structural Implementation

© AREMA 2013®98




Practical Examples in Germany High-speed Line VDE 8

Structural Implementation

VDE 8.1.2VDE 8.1.3VDE 8.2

track withÖBB-PORR System



Cross-section on Embankment



Cross-section Bridge Sectorsection Briddddddddgegegegegegg SeSeSeSSSS ctcttctctctttc orrr



Cross-section Tunnel



© AREMA 2013® 99








Ballast-less track systemsExperience Gained in Austria and Germany

Dipl.-Ing. Dr.techn. Prok. Dipl.-Ing. Dipl.-Ing.(FH)Dieter PICHLER Jörg FENSKEFCP Fritsch Chiari & Partner ZT GmbH PORR Bau GmbH,

Railway Department

© AREMA 2013®100

Documents

BALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEMS EXPERIENCES GAINED IN AUSTRIA ... · PDF fileBALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEMS EXPERIENCES GAINED IN AUSTRIA AND ... the German railway company, ... (Monolithic systems