On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>
>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>> wheels or rollers.
>>
>>
>
>Just like the rack railway points.

They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
points.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>
>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Just like the rack railway points.
>
> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
> points.
>
>

To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
front of the train and watched them move across?

In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
moving parts.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>
>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>
>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>
>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>
>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>> points.
>>
>>
>
>To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>front of the train and watched them move across?
>
>In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>moving parts.

How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>
>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>
>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>
>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>
>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>> points.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>> Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>> front of the train and watched them move across?
>>
>> In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>> moving parts.
>
> How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
> 12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
> and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?
>
Even on a rough calculation that seems a bit light.

Ordinary concrete sleepers weigh around 300 kg so 5 or six of them will
weigh more than your Ton so we have reached that figure even before
allowing that a conventional switch or point whose larger sleepers normally
known as crossing timbers are longer and thicker.
And only some crude stub points as used in quarries just have two rails,
most have have two stock rails on the outside and and another two forming
the moving switch rails from the toe to the crossing nose which is itself
quite a heavy component often a casting. Other metal will be the wing and
check rails .modern rail will be around 60kg a metre so it won’t take many
metres to reach a ton
Then there will be the the baseplates ,track fixing clips stretcher bars to
add. For an example I found Indian Railways reckon their modern point
assemblies weigh around 55-65 tonnes so track handling equipment has to be
capable of lifting at least 70T.

GH

In message <t5trqm$109c$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 15:49:42 on Mon, 16 May
2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
>Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2
>>>>>>>foot thick
>>
>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than
>>>>>>concrete.
>>
>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>
>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>
>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>
>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>> points.
>>
>>To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>>Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>>front of the train and watched them move across?
>>
>>In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>>moving parts.
>
>How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
>12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
>and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?

I've just had some sleepers delivered (a popular garden feature m'lud)
and they are surprisingly heavy.

Pine are 60kg each, oak 90kg and while not used for gardening, concrete
ones can be up to 300kg
--
Roland Perry

On 2022-05-16 22:12:40 +0000, Marland said:

> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>
>>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>>
>>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>>
>>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>>> points.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>>> Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>>> front of the train and watched them move across?
>>>
>>> In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>>> moving parts.
>>
>> How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
>> 12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
>> and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?
>>
> Even on a rough calculation that seems a bit light.
>
> Ordinary concrete sleepers weigh around 300 kg so 5 or six of them will
> weigh more than your Ton so we have reached that figure even before
> allowing that a conventional switch or point whose larger sleepers normally
> known as crossing timbers are longer and thicker.

If the sleepers are "moving parts" on your railway pointwork, something
has gone *very* wrong.

> And only some crude stub points as used in quarries just have two rails,
> most have have two stock rails on the outside and and another two forming
> the moving switch rails from the toe to the crossing nose which is itself
> quite a heavy component often a casting. Other metal will be the wing and
> check rails .modern rail will be around 60kg a metre so it won’t take many
> metres to reach a ton
> Then there will be the the baseplates ,track fixing clips stretcher bars to
> add. For an example I found Indian Railways reckon their modern point
> assemblies weigh around 55-65 tonnes so track handling equipment has to be
> capable of lifting at least 70T.

Right, but how much of that is fixed in place? The question pertains
to the bits of the points that move, not the whole installation.

Robin

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-05-16 22:12:40 +0000, Marland said:
>
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>>>
>>>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>>>> points.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>>>> Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>>>> front of the train and watched them move across?
>>>>
>>>> In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>>>> moving parts.
>>>
>>> How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
>>> 12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
>>> and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?
>>>
>> Even on a rough calculation that seems a bit light.
>>
>> Ordinary concrete sleepers weigh around 300 kg so 5 or six of them will
>> weigh more than your Ton so we have reached that figure even before
>> allowing that a conventional switch or point whose larger sleepers normally
>> known as crossing timbers are longer and thicker.
>
> If the sleepers are "moving parts" on your railway pointwork, something
> has gone *very* wrong.
>
>> And only some crude stub points as used in quarries just have two rails,
>> most have have two stock rails on the outside and and another two forming
>> the moving switch rails from the toe to the crossing nose which is itself
>> quite a heavy component often a casting. Other metal will be the wing and
>> check rails .modern rail will be around 60kg a metre so it won’t take many
>> metres to reach a ton
>> Then there will be the the baseplates ,track fixing clips stretcher bars to
>> add. For an example I found Indian Railways reckon their modern point
>> assemblies weigh around 55-65 tonnes so track handling equipment has to be
>> capable of lifting at least 70T.
>
> Right, but how much of that is fixed in place? The question pertains
> to the bits of the points that move, not the whole installation.

See the comment above from Anna about rack railway points.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-16 22:12:40 +0000, Marland said:
>>
>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>>>>> points.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>>>>> Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>>>>> front of the train and watched them move across?
>>>>>
>>>>> In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>>>>> moving parts.
>>>>
>>>> How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
>>>> 12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
>>>> and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?
>>>>
>>> Even on a rough calculation that seems a bit light.
>>>
>>> Ordinary concrete sleepers weigh around 300 kg so 5 or six of them will
>>> weigh more than your Ton so we have reached that figure even before
>>> allowing that a conventional switch or point whose larger sleepers normally
>>> known as crossing timbers are longer and thicker.
>>
>> If the sleepers are "moving parts" on your railway pointwork, something
>> has gone *very* wrong.
>>
>>> And only some crude stub points as used in quarries just have two rails,
>>> most have have two stock rails on the outside and and another two forming
>>> the moving switch rails from the toe to the crossing nose which is itself
>>> quite a heavy component often a casting. Other metal will be the wing and
>>> check rails .modern rail will be around 60kg a metre so it won’t take many
>>> metres to reach a ton
>>> Then there will be the the baseplates ,track fixing clips stretcher bars to
>>> add. For an example I found Indian Railways reckon their modern point
>>> assemblies weigh around 55-65 tonnes so track handling equipment has to be
>>> capable of lifting at least 70T.
>>
>> Right, but how much of that is fixed in place? The question pertains
>> to the bits of the points that move, not the whole installation.
>
> See the comment above from Anna about rack railway points.
>
>

The, erm, point there is complexity rather than weight. The rack lines use
flexi-points apparently without problem, so they shouldn't be a problem for
simpler but slightly [1] heavier monorail flexi-pointwork.

[1] the flexi parts are steel, not concrete.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-05-16 22:12:40 +0000, Marland said:
>
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 16:17:56 -0000 (UTC)
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:58:05 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 May 2022 14:50:31 -0000 (UTC)
>>>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I suspect the weight of rails is insignificant compared to a 2 foot thick
>>>>
>>>>>>>>> concrete beam so a lot more stress on the latter mechanism.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The flexible part of the monorail beam will be steel rather than concrete.
>>>>
>>>>>>>> And it's just one (series of) components to move, not three.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There'll be a whole lot of support mechanism underneath probably including
>>>>>>> wheels or rollers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just like the rack railway points.
>>>>>
>>>>> They could probably get away with grease and sliding stuff just like normal
>>>>> points.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> To slide an entire 5 foot wide flexible track structure, 7-8 feet sideways?
>>>> Have you travelled on a rack railway fitted with these, and stood at the
>>>> front of the train and watched them move across?
>>>>
>>>> In any case, modern conventional pointwork often has rollers under the
>>>> moving parts.
>>>
>>> How much do you reckon a concrete beam 0.5 * 1 * 10m weighs? Hint, its about
>>> 12 tons not including the mechanism. How much do you reckon a 2 rails
>>> and some sleepers weighs? A ton tops?
>>>
>> Even on a rough calculation that seems a bit light.
>>
>> Ordinary concrete sleepers weigh around 300 kg so 5 or six of them will
>> weigh more than your Ton so we have reached that figure even before
>> allowing that a conventional switch or point whose larger sleepers normally
>> known as crossing timbers are longer and thicker.
>
> If the sleepers are "moving parts" on your railway pointwork, something
> has gone *very* wrong.
>
>> And only some crude stub points as used in quarries just have two rails,
>> most have have two stock rails on the outside and and another two forming
>> the moving switch rails from the toe to the crossing nose which is itself
>> quite a heavy component often a casting. Other metal will be the wing and
>> check rails .modern rail will be around 60kg a metre so it won’t take many
>> metres to reach a ton
>> Then there will be the the baseplates ,track fixing clips stretcher bars to
>> add. For an example I found Indian Railways reckon their modern point
>> assemblies weigh around 55-65 tonnes so track handling equipment has to be
>> capable of lifting at least 70T.
>
> Right, but how much of that is fixed in place? The question pertains
> to the bits of the points that move, not the whole installation.
>
> Robin
>
>

I think when considering the installation you have to consider the whole.
On Monorails of the type that started this thread where the vehicles
straddle a beam that beam performs the function of both support and
guidance. and therefore has to be constructed accordingly including movable
sections so are heavy enough to both support and guide.
On a conventional railway track with steel rails the components of the
point do the guiding though the movable parts and length can vary depending
if the switch rails and closure rails are combined in a rail which flexes
at the toe end common in the REA designs which the SR,LMS,LNER and LPTB
adopted , as ever the GWR/WR ploughed their own furrow and stayed with
loose heel switches where the switch rails(blades) are relatively short
with a hinge made by joints. Naturally their variations especially since FB
started to displace bullhead.
Either way such rails without support would just bend and collapse as they
could not support the weight of a vehicle alone , there fore they need a
foundation which can be stone blocks,concrete slabs but most commonly
sleepers which though they don’t themselves move perform the essential
function of support and something attach and keep the rails to gauge.
Dismiss them and you haven’t got a point that could function.

GH