3rd Rail corrosion - Durrington on Sea

[hwl]

On a related note, did composite aluminium-steel conductor rails ever enter widespread use?
I recall they were being seriously proposed and trialled at one point, but then it all went quiet.

On London Underground yes, but on NR they found new extra heavy section steel worked very well given the issues joining aluminium and the high overall cost.

 

[hwl]

Posted a picture about 2-3 years ago and published on the forum then.

Used the south coast station today, noted the corrosion had got worse. It must run for 10 feet with just thin metal keeping it in place.View attachment 62576 View attachment 62576

I just enjoy trains with no real knowledge so ask the following :

• Only ever seen this at Durrington, Is this unusual ?
• I assume its not safety critical? with shoe gear being in contact with 3rd rail think it could simply crumble and cause untold damage to a unit at speed?
• Is the track checked on say a weekly (?) basis?
• Would that rail date back to when the line was electrified i think around mid 1930s?View attachment 62575

To me that looks like an off-white corrosion product formed on the rail rather than a hole as you can't see through the rail to what is behind

 

[Why]

To me that looks like an off-white corrosion product formed on the rail rather than a hole as you can't see through the rail to what is behind

Ok everyone, give me 2 weeks when i am next down that way by train and will take a proper camera. Specsavers only able to sell me clear glass lenses !!!

 

[duffield]

These picture are a bit like 'magic eye' pictures, initially I see what *appears* to be surface corrosion and then something clicks and I can see that they are, in fact, dirty great holes! In one of them I can see ballast behind in places, in the other it's a running rail so it's less obvious.

 

[HaggisBotherer]

Ok everyone, give me 2 weeks when i am next down that way by train and will take a proper camera. Specsavers only able to sell me clear glass lenses !!!

I don't think you need take a 'proper' camera. All you need to do is to take the pics from an angle where the Pandrol clips of the running rail bahind are visible through the holes, then post an enlarged, cropped version.

I agree with duffield, at first I saw stuff flaking off, but then, no, I saw holes. But either way, it's not worth getting one's tits in a tangle about. You don't need to be a willy-waver and 'prove' you're right to the forum experts. They'll always be right...

 

[gazthomas]

It's third rail, so while not ideal it's not such a big problem had it been actual track

 

[yorksrob]

There’s plenty of original con rail out there all over the DC network.

A few years back (ok, about a decade) I pulled out running rail from Cromer that dated from 1899.

Goodness - They must have had to replace the sleepers at some stage !

 

[Deepgreen]

If the picture mentioned is the one attached to the first post, they are not holes, they are large flakes of metal coated with grease which are adhering to the side of the rail just below the head and reflecting the light to appear very vaguely like perforations. The head of the third rail is relatively thick so the rail has years of life left. There are countless stretches of third rail where such sticky flake deposits exist.

 

[aleggatta]

If the picture mentioned is the one attached to the first post, they are not holes, they are large flakes of metal coated with grease which are adhering to the side of the rail just below the head and reflecting the light to appear very vaguely like perforations. The head of the third rail is relatively thick so the rail has years of life left. There are countless stretches of third rail where such sticky flake deposits exist.

They most certainly are holes, I will try to get a photo from the other platform tomorrow (so you aren't looking through a hole onto a running rail a very similar colour) unless someone else wants to visit the station and use the Mark 1 eyeball to make an accurate inspection rather than a less than optimal photograph (@Why not knocking your photo! We know what's really going on if they don't believe us! )

 

[Deepgreen]

They most certainly are holes, I will try to get a photo from the other platform tomorrow (so you aren't looking through a hole onto a running rail a very similar colour) unless someone else wants to visit the station and use the Mark 1 eyeball to make an accurate inspection rather than a less than optimal photograph (@Why not knocking your photo! We know what's really going on if they don't believe us! )

OK. The two pictures (by 'Why?') attached to the first post of this thread are as I described above. However, I'm not ruling out a proliferation of holes elsewhere on the same rail, no matter how unlikely it is, as I have no evidence either way. I await the photos with fascination.
It's worth pointing out too that there is no reason why a rail's upright section should corrode so much more than the flat running head, no matter how salty the air - the rain/spray clings to the upright for far less time than it sits on the head, in addition, of course, to the physical wear of the shoes on the rail head.

 

[furnessvale]

OK. The two pictures (by 'Why?') attached to the first post of this thread are as I described above. However, I'm not ruling out a proliferation of holes elsewhere on the same rail, no matter how unlikely it is, as I have no evidence either way. I await the photos with fascination.
It's worth pointing out too that there is no reason why a rail's upright section should corrode so much more than the flat running head, no matter how salty the air - the rain/spray clings to the upright for far less time than it sits on the head, in addition, of course, to the physical wear of the shoes on the rail head.

There may be no apparent reason but it can, and does, happen. Perhaps vibration removes formed rust from a vertical face more quickly, exposing fresh metal for further corrosion to occur?

In the mid 1960s I could certainly have shown you a road over rail bridge at Rose Grove where the holes in the web were large enough to walk through whereas the flanges were reasonably intact.

 

[big all]

OK. The two pictures (by 'Why?') attached to the first post of this thread are as I described above. However, I'm not ruling out a proliferation of holes elsewhere on the same rail, no matter how unlikely it is, as I have no evidence either way. I await the photos with fascination.
It's worth pointing out too that there is no reason why a rail's upright section should corrode so much more than the flat running head, no matter how salty the air - the rain/spray clings to the upright for far less time than it sits on the head, in addition, of course, to the physical wear of the shoes on the rail head.

deicer used to be a mxture off oil and antifeeze this would be applied daily as required during the winter
now this will run an rub off the top splashing a bit covering all flat surfaces and not staying on verticals very well
now a theory thats worth considering is because its within a platform the use off grit and salt used to clear the platform may later be swept onto the track

now off course because the running rails are perhaps 30% the age off the juice rail and possibly different steel composition wll be far less effected

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It's worth pointing out too that there is no reason why a rail's upright section should corrode so much more than the flat running head, no matter how salty the air - the rain/spray clings to the upright for far less time than it sits on the head, in addition, of course, to the physical wear of the shoes on the rail head.

There is absolutely reason. The flat running head is thicker section and is corroding all the time - the laws of kinetics, thermodynamics and even electrochemistry say so. However, the corrosion products are literally polished off every time a pick up shoe runs over it. The bits with the holes are in the much thinner section and the corrosion products are not constantly "polished off". Also (I say this for thought and believe it has relevance) stainless steel and aluminium corrode. It is just that the corrosion products formed are very tight and adherent (because of favourable Pilling-Bedworth ratios among other reasons) and the corrosion products formed protect the metal/alloys from further corrosion. This is not so with steel and iron oxide does not adhere well to iron/steel.

By the way, even if you suppose those middle sections bear some load (would be compressive not tensile) - the holes are right through the NEUTRAL AXIS anyway !!

 

[Deepgreen]

There is absolutely reason. The flat running head is thicker section and is corroding all the time - the laws of kinetics, thermodynamics and even electrochemistry say so. However, the corrosion products are literally polished off every time a pick up shoe runs over it. The bits with the holes are in the much thinner section and the corrosion products are not constantly "polished off". Also (I say this for thought and believe it has relevance) stainless steel and aluminium corrode. It is just that the corrosion products formed are very tight and adherent (because of favourable Pilling-Bedworth ratios among other reasons) and the corrosion products formed protect the metal/alloys from further corrosion. This is not so with steel and iron oxide does not adhere well to iron/steel.

By the way, even if you suppose those middle sections bear some load (would be compressive not tensile) - the wholes are right through the NEUTRAL AXIS anyway !!

So, the running head should wear and corrode more quickly than the upright. However, the running head shown is pretty thick - certainly nowhere near life-expired, and far too thick (i.e. young) for the upright to have corroded so much as has been alleged. In well over 40 years of using the third rail system very widely, I have never encountered any holes in the upright rail section, except those drilled for jointing purposes, but I have seen countless scenes like those shown, with shavings stuck to the rail edge with grease. The ones allegedly shown are not holes (or "wholes" as you put it), but we await further photos showing actual holes.
Seriously - has no-one else enlarged the shot by 'Why?' and seen that the 'holes' are all exactly the same colour throughout and have a small lip around the edges, consistent with them being flakes? Or wondered why the parts of the railway supposedly visible 'through' the 'holes' show no detail of rail edges, ballast, sleeper edges or any other shapes whatsoever?

 

[aleggatta]

not had a chance to get to the station yet, but had a little brainwave - see this post from last year

It shows a holed third rail at Portslade, a station some 8-10 miles away, which probably has a third rail of the same vintage

 

[Maxfly]

A casual look does make you think it’s flakes of paint or the like but when you look a bit more closely it is obviously holes, once I looked properly I was thinking how on earth I could have thought it was holes in the first place tbh.
I mean shadows would be different and you wouldn’t be able to see detail through the actual holes that is there plain to see, once you focus in of course.

 

[Deepgreen]

not had a chance to get to the station yet, but had a little brainwave - see this post from last year

It shows a holed third rail at Portslade, a station some 8-10 miles away, which probably has a third rail of the same vintage

I'll reserve judgement on that picture for now, but the one at Durrington also shows that the top of every 'hole' exactly matches the contours of the edge of the third rail with a thin, but consistent shadow line all along, whereas a series of holes would be far more random. Imagine the effect of, say. scraping a knife with butter at right angles across a slightly uneven metal edge. The result would look a little like this, with bits of butter adhering with varying lower edges but consistent lines where they meet the metal edge.

This is fun!

 

[Islineclear3_1]

From the low-res photo at Durrington, personally, I can't see any holes but not denying that it can't be possible - however even the picture at Portslade looks like there is enough metal to retain the integrity of the rail

If aleggata can post a high-res picture before the rain comes down and put us all out of our misery....

 

[aleggatta]

With any luck, these should provide enough clarity (had to resize as was too big to upload initially)

edit:- Also worth noting, that this is in the last 20m of con rail before a ramp, and the whole 20m looks pretty shot (if you'll pardon the pun!)

 

[Darandio]

So after all the toing and froing and arguments about whether it was holes or not, has anyone actually reported it to Network Rail? The OP has already said they won't do it (they can do their own work!) so has anyone else?

 

[aleggatta]

So after all the toing and froing and arguments about whether it was holes or not, has anyone actually reported it to Network Rail? The OP has already said they won't do it (they can do their own work!) so has anyone else?

definitely not me! NR caused me enough issues knocking off shoes, now I don't have to change them I'm leaving them to it!

 

[Why]

definitely not me! NR caused me enough issues knocking off shoes, now I don't have to change them I'm leaving them to it!

Thank you very much aleggatta for taking the trouble to visit said station and take photos. I bet a few passengers must have wondered what on earth you were doing?!!!

Relieved after so many questioning my eyesight is not as bad as first feared, after all this I really wondered why i bothered in the first place!! Least my my Labrador can stand down now!!

Sure you will agree rather a lot of holes in a long stretch of conductor rail?

Reading in Rail about NMT traveling all over the country, anyone know if its amazing box of tricks can check on the health of 3rd Rail ?

 

[themiller]

With any luck, these should provide enough clarity (had to resize as was too big to upload initially)

edit:- Also worth noting, that this is in the last 20m of con rail before a ramp, and the whole 20m looks pretty shot (if you'll pardon the pun!)

I agree that these photos show holes through the conductor rail as the ballast is clearly visible but the lack of variability within the light colour on the photos in post #1 would suggest that it's not the case with them but that contamination has dropped away from the web.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I agree that these photos show holes through the conductor rail as the ballast is clearly visible but the lack of variability within the light colour on the photos in post #1 would suggest that it's not the case with them but that contamination has dropped away from the web.

The lack of variability is camera angle thus having a constant colour background i.e. running rail. With these newer ones with a different angle you clearly have variable colour ballast in the background etc.

 

[aleggatta]

I agree that these photos show holes through the conductor rail as the ballast is clearly visible but the lack of variability within the light colour on the photos in post #1 would suggest that it's not the case with them but that contamination has dropped away from the web.

The lack of variability is camera angle thus having a constant colour background i.e. running rail. With these newer ones with a different angle you clearly have variable colour ballast in the background etc.

I think the thing to remember, is when two people visit somewhere and see something with their own eyes, that the barrage of doubt being thrown around by people who have only looked at low quality images can be quite frustrating! I don't expect to be believed just because I say so, but when no-one can offer a legitimate counter reason without having taken in all the information (information including seeing it for yourself!) or can give separate witness testimony as to the situation, and both witness accounts corroborate each other, it really does cast doubt as to the intelligence of the people making those statements!

 

[big all]

I think the thing to remember, is when two people visit somewhere and see something with their own eyes, that the barrage of doubt being thrown around by people who have only looked at low quality images can be quite frustrating! I don't expect to be believed just because I say so, but when no-one can offer a legitimate counter reason without having taken in all the information (information including seeing it for yourself!) or can give separate witness testimony as to the situation, and both witness accounts corroborate each other, it really does cast doubt as to the intelligence of the people making those statements!

as pointed out earlier it is so counter intuitive to logic that your brain will automatically amend what you physically see to what it expects to see

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Just as an update - the corroded conductor rail has been reported and is being looked into by Network Rail as a matter of urgency. I have had a direct communication from Sir Peter Hendy this morning confirming that.

 

[507 001]

On a related note, did composite aluminium-steel conductor rails ever enter widespread use?
I recall they were being seriously proposed and trialled at one point, but then it all went quiet.

There’s a fair bit of it on the Merseyrail network, predominantly on the Southport line.

As for the original topic, there used to be a fair bit of conductor rail with holes in the web on Kirkdale depot. It was on the disused wash road headshunt, where the 503 had been stored for a few years.

 

[Deepgreen]

With any luck, these should provide enough clarity (had to resize as was too big to upload initially)

edit:- Also worth noting, that this is in the last 20m of con rail before a ramp, and the whole 20m looks pretty shot (if you'll pardon the pun!)

Now these ARE holes! Is this Durrington or Portslade? If NR are now looking into it, that's good. I didn't understand your reason for not taking it to them, but no matter, we got there! It does, though, call into question the inspection regime - this hasn't happened overnight.

 

[aleggatta]

Now these ARE holes! Is this Durrington or Portslade? If NR are now looking into it, that's good. I didn't understand your reason for not taking it to them, but no matter, we got there! It does, though, call into question the inspection regime - this hasn't happened overnight.

The reason for me not taking it to NR is off topic, however, it was having spent three night shifts changing frangible joints and fitting new shoegear on a virtually continuous basis being wholly down to a bit of third rail 'walk' from the fishplate bolts find themselves being 'not fitted' at fishbourne (I say 'not fitted' as it was never clear if they broke or just worked loose). The issue took a week to locate, and the regular inspection of the network should not have taken that long to locate. I don't do that job any more, but I still have spite towards NR from it!