A project report on

COMPOSITE SLEEPERS

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

Masters of Technology
IN
Machine Design

By

SNEHAM MAJUMDER ROLL NO. 2240004

Under the guidance of

DR. SMITIRUPA PRADHAN

DR. MD. E. HASSAN

School of Mechanical Engineering

KIIT UNIVERSITY, BHUBANESWAR

--------------, 2024
 INDEX

1. Introduction
2. Different types of Railway sleepers with benefits and drawbacks.
2.1.1: Wooden sleepers: Benefits and Drawback

2.1.2:Concrete sleepers: Benefits and Drawback

2.1.3: Steel sleepers: Benefits and Drawback
2.1.4: Cast iron sleepers: Benefits and Drawback
2.1.5: Composite sleepers: Benefits and Drawback
2.2: Eco-friendly prestressed concrete sleeper:
2.2.1: Constituent materials
2.2.1.1: Binders.
2.2.1.2: Aggregates
2.2.1.3: Admixture.
2.2.2: Concrete mix design and a prototype of eco-friendly PSC sleepers.
2.3: Comparative experimental investigation of the vibration mitigation
characteristics of ballasted track using the rubber composite sleeper and
concrete sleeper.
3. Materials: Compositions and Raw materials
3.1: Composite Sleeper
3.2: Raw Material Selection and Handling
3.2.1: HDPE (High density polyethylene)
3.2.2: Crumbled Rubber
3.2.3: Glass reinforcement
3.2.4: Fillers
4. Process of Fabrication
5. Properties
5.1: Standard Gauge Hardwood Sleeper
5.2: Medium Duty Concrete Sleeper
5.3: Characteristics of plastic composite sleepers
6. Different Tests
 7. Compounding:
7.1: Preparation of plastic composite sleepers for product tests

8. Result:
8.1: Ballast less track for urban metro.
8.2: Pre-cast plinth
8.3: RHEDA
8.4: Patil PORR BLT

9. Conclusions.
10. References

1. INTRODUCTION:
The traditional materials used to manufacture railway sleepers are timber, concrete
and in some cases steel, which are generally designed for 20, 50 and 50 years,
respectively. Timber was the earliest material used [1] and more than 2.5 billion
timber components have been installed worldwide. They are adaptable and have
excellent dynamic, electrical and sound-insulating properties. Due to the scarcity of
timber and the sensitivity to its use, steel railway sleepers were introduced as an
alternative to timber. As their design has evolved, the original ones are now being
replaced by modern ‘Y’ shaped steel ones. During the last few decades, the railway
industry has focused on a cement-based concrete rather than timber and steel
sleepers. Mono-block prestressed concrete sleepers were first applied in 1943 and
are now used in heavy haul and high speed rail track constructions throughout the
world.
This leads to the question on why the railway industry uses a variety of sleeper
materials rather than a particular one. Undoubtedly, the main reason is that none of
the existing materials (timber, steel and concrete) does satisfactorily meet all the
requirements of a sleeper. The review by Manalo et al. [15] on alternative materials
to timber indicated the high demand for new sleeper materials. A recent study on the
potential causes of failures of railway sleepers showed that the traditional materials
have not satisfactorily met the demand requirements to resist mechanical, biological
and chemical degradation [12].
Wooden sleepers have been implemented since the beginning of the rail industry.
These are still being used where concrete and steel are too rigid for their application.
However, timber sleepers are subject to rot and plagued by insects and fungi, often
needing to be treated with hazardous substances (i.e., creosotes) for a longer
lifespan. This is not a problem when using high-quality hardwoods, but supply
shortage and adverse environmental impacts make that an unsustainable alternative
for large scale applications. Meanwhile, prestressed concrete and steel sleepers are
widely used for their durability. However, concrete sleepers have high initial costs,
small impact resistance, are vulnerable to chemical damage, and are very heavy.
The heavy weight attracts higher transportation, handling, and installation costs. On
the other hand, steel has a higher risk of electrical conductivity, environmental
deterioration from corrosion and is prone to fatigue cracking. Furthermore, steel and
concrete sleepers cannot replace wooden sleepers on existing tracks and their
production emits huge amounts of carbon dioxide in the environment. Thus, several
research initiatives around the globe are focusing to create an effective alternative
railway sleeper technology.
Several composite sleeper technologies have been developed in different parts of
the world. These technologies have emerged as a potential alternative to timber
sleepers. Different from steel and concrete, composite sleepers can be designed to
mimic timber behaviour (an essential requirement for timber track maintenance), are
almost maintenance free, and are more sustainable from an environmental
perspective [11]. This section discusses the different classifications based on the
amount, length and orientation of fibres in composite railway sleepers that are
currently available and including technologies that are still in the research and
development stage.
The major challenges of using Type-1 composite railway sleepers are their limited
strength, stiffness and dynamic properties which, in most cases, are not compatible
with those of timber. The limitations of low structural performance in Type-1 sleeper
has been overcome in Type-2 and Type-3 but their high prices compared to
standard sleeper materials are still remaining a big challenge. Moreover, the lack of
knowledge on their long-term performances and the unavailability of design
guidelines restricts their widespread applications and utilizations.

2. Different types of Railway Sleepers with benefits and drawbacks.

Based on the materials used, railway sleepers are classified into following types.
1. Wooden sleepers

2. Concrete sleepers

3. Steel sleepers
 4. Cast iron sleepers

5. Composite sleepers

2.1.1: Wooden Sleepers

These are sleepers made of wood. Wooden sleepers are used since olden days.
These are still widely using in some western countries. Either hardwood or softwood
can be used to make wooden sleepers. However, hardwood sleepers made of oak,
jarrah, teakwood are more famous.

Benefits of Wooden Sleepers

 Wood sleepers are cheaper than others and easy to manufacture.

 They are light in weight so, they can be easily transported and handled while
installing.

 Fasteners can be easily installed to wooden sleepers. They are good

insulators so, rails are well protected.

 Any type of gauge can be maintained by wooden sleepers.

 They are suitable for all types of rail section.

 They are well suitable for tracks in coastal areas.

Drawbacks of Wooden Sleepers
 Life of wooden sleepers is very less compared to others.

 Weak against fire.

 Easily affected by humidity which will cause dry rot, wet rot etc.

 Vermin attack can be possible if it is not properly treated.

 Poor creep resistance.

 Good Attention is required even after laying.

2.1.2: Concrete Sleepers

Concrete sleepers are manufactured by concrete with internal reinforcement.

Concrete sleepers used in many countries due to its high stability and small
maintenance. These are more suitable for high speed rails. Most of the concrete
sleepers are made from pre-stressed concrete in which internal tension is induced
into the sleeper before casting. Hence, the sleeper withstand well against high
external pressure.

Benefits of Concrete Sleepers

 Concrete sleepers are heavier than all other types hence, gives good stability
to the rails.
  They have long life span so, economically preferable.

 They have good Fire resistance.

 Corrosion is not occurred in concrete sleepers.

 Vermin attack, decay etc. are not occurred. Hence, they are suitable for all
types of soil and moisture conditions.

 Bucking strength is more.

 Concrete is good insulator so, this type of sleepers are more suitable for
circuited tracks.

 Concrete sleepers holds the track strongly and maintains gauge.

Drawbacks of Concrete Sleepers

 Because of heavy weight, handling is difficult.

 For tracks on bridges and at crossings, concrete sleepers are not suitable.

 Damage may occur while transporting.

2.1.3: Steel Sleepers

Steel sleepers are more often used because of stronger than wood and economical
than concrete. They also have good life span. They are molded in trough shape and
placed on ballast in inversed trough shape.

Benefits
 They are light in weight so, easy to transport, to place and to install.
  They are recyclable hence possess good scrap value.

 Life span of steel sleepers is more and is about 30 years.

 They are good resistant against fire.

 They have good resistance against creep

 They cannot be attacked by vermin etc.

 They are well suitable for tracks of high speeds and larger loads.

 They holds the rail strongly and connecting rail to the sleeper is also simple.

Drawbacks
 Steel can be effected by chemicals easily.

 Steel sleepers requires high maintenance.

 They are not suitable for all types of ballast which is provided as bed for
sleepers.

 If derailment is happened, they damaged very badly and not suitable for re
using.

 These are not suitable for all types of rail sections and gauges.

2.1.4: Cast Iron Sleepers

Cast iron sleepers are widely used in the world especially in Indian railways. They
are available in 2 types, pot type sleepers and plate type sleepers. Pot type sleepers
are not suitable for curves sharper than 4 degrees. CST 9 type sleepers more
famous in Indian railways.
Benefits
 Cast iron sleepers can be used for long period up to 60 years.

 Their manufacturing is also easy and it can be done locally so, there is no
need for longer transportation.

 Vermin attack is impossible in case of cast iron sleepers.

 They provide strong seat to the rail.

 Damaged cast iron sleepers can be remolded into new sleepers hence, scrap
value of cast iron is good.

 Creep of rail can be prevented by cast iron sleepers.

Drawbacks
 Cast iron is brittle in nature and it can be damaged easily while handling. So,
transportation, placing is difficult to deal.

 Cast iron sleepers can be easily damaged and corroded by salt water so,
they are not suitable for coastal regions.

 They may damage badly when derailment happened.

 Cast iron is expensive in market when compared to some other sleeper

materials. Hence it is uneconomical.

 So many fastening materials are required to fix the rail to the sleeper.

 Proper Maintenance is required.

2.1.5: Composite Sleepers

Composite sleepers are modern type sleepers which are made from waste plastic
and rubber. Hence, it is also called as plastic sleepers. They have many combined
properties of all other types.

Benefits
 Composite sleepers are serviceable for longer spans about 50 years.

 Composite sleepers are eco-friendly sleepers.

 They are light in weight but possess great strength.

 Their scrap value is good because of recyclable property of composite

sleepers.

 They can be resized easily like wooden sleepers. So, they can be used for
any type of rail section.

 Vibrations received from rails are reduced well by these composite sleepers.

Drawbacks
 Composite sleepers are not that much good against fire.
  The cost of sleepers may increase for large scale production.

2.2: Eco-friendly prestressed concrete sleeper:

The eco-friendly concrete composed of the two recycled slags follows the
requirements of the concrete mix design of prestressed concrete (PSC) sleepers in
accordance with the Korea Railway Standard [18]. The details of the requirements of
the prestressed concrete sleeper mix design are summarized in Table 1. The
minimum compressive strength at 28 days shall not be less than 50 MPa, and the
minimum initial compressive strength at the time of prestressing release shall not be
less than 35 MPa, which is 70% of the 28-day compressive strength. Due to its high
early strength requirement of the prestressed concrete sleeper mix design, Portland
type III cement is recommended and has been used. The maximum size of coarse
aggregate shall not be greater than 19 mm.
2.2.1: Constituent materials
2.2.1.1: Binders:
In order to minimize the amount of Portland type III cement, ground granulated blast
furnace (GGBF) slag was introduced as a binder together with the Portland cement.
Reducing the amount of cements results in improving not only the environmental
issue of CO2 emissions, but also the issue of alkali-aggregate reactivity. The
durability of concrete with GGBF slag could be an issue, but a research showed that
concrete made of GGBF slag and Portland type III cement exhibited an enhanced
long-term strength and freeze–thaw resistance. CaO and SiO2 are the first and
second highest compositions, respectively for both Portland type III cement and
GGBF slag. The density of GGBF slag is approximately 92% of that of the Portland
cement, but the specific surface area of GGBF slag is 104% of that of the Portland
cement.
2.2.1.2. Aggregates:
As aforementioned, the lack of natural resources is another environmental issue in
South Korea. Especially, the concrete industry needs to deal with the shortage of
natural sand. Therefore, there is a need to find and/or develop a replacement of
natural sand. Electric arc furnace (EAF) oxidizing slag is a byproduct of the
steelmaking industry recovered after the oxidizing process, and it has been found to
be as an acceptable alternative to natural sand for fine aggregate specified in the
KS F 4571 Standard by the Korean Agency for Technology and Standards.
However, its application in the construction industry has been very limited in South
Korea, and it had not been used for producing PSC sleepers. Fe2O3 and CaO are
the first and second greatest compositions of the EAF oxidizing slag, respectively. It
is important to note that the density of the EAF oxidizing slag is the heavier than
natural fine aggregate, and the ratio between the density of the EAF oxidizing slag to
that of natural fine aggregate is 1.31. Therefore, by using the EAF oxidizing slag, it
increases stability of PSC sleepers on tracks due to its approximately 30%
increased self-weight.
2.2.1.3. Admixture:
Another important property of the concrete mix design is the water cement ratio (i.e.
W/C). The Korea Railway Standard requirement of the concrete mix design of PSC
sleepers specifies that W/C shall not be greater than 0.35. In order to achieve such
a low W/C ratio while not jeopardizing other required properties (e.g. reasonable
workability and slump requirement), a liquid type of a polycarbonic acid-based water
reducer was introduced as an admixture for the development of the eco-friendly
concrete.

2.2. Concrete mix design and a prototype of eco-friendly PSC sleepers:

 A series of laboratory mix and field mix designs had been tested to optimize the
most appropriate concrete mix proportions for the eco-friendly concrete, which
should satisfy the concrete mix design requirements. In the final concrete mix
design, 30% of the Portland type III cement was replaced by GGBF slag, and no
natural fine aggregate was used. In other words, only electric arc furnace (EAF)
oxidizing slag was used as the replacement of the natural fine aggregate.
Six 100 mm 200 mm cylinders for each concrete were prepared and the
compressive strength tests were carried out at the time of prestressing release and
28 days. The eco-friendly concrete showed higher compressive strengths than its
required strengths at prestresing release and 28 days, respectively. The average
initial strength of the eco-friendly concrete cylinders was recorded to be 51.2 MPa,
and the average 28-day compressive strength of eco-friendly concrete cylinders was
found to be 72.8 MPa. Table 6 summarizes the average initial and 28-day
compressive strengths and their standard deviations of the eco-friendly concrete and
normal concrete cylinders, respectively. Prototypes of the eco-friendly PSC sleepers
and normal PSC sleepers were manufactured to evaluate required structural
performances of PSC sleeper specified in the Korean Railway Standards (KRS) and
European Standards (EN) . Fig. ** shows the schematics of a prototype of an eco-
friendly PSC sleeper, which had the same geometrical and sectional properties with
a normal PSC sleepers. The length of a PSC sleeper is 2400 mm, and the width and
the height of the cross section of the sleeper are 280 mm 200 mm. 16 3-wire
prestressing strands are placed to prestress the concrete sleeper. In case of the
eco-friendly PSC sleepers, the weight gain of about 10% per sleeper was observed
compared with a normal PSC sleeper due to the higher density of the EAF oxidizing
slag instead of natural fine aggregate. This implies that installing eco-friendly PSC
sleepers in the field could positively contribute to increase the track safety and
stability due to its heavier weight by unit length.
Fig: Schematics of an Eco-friendly PC sleeper: (a) side view, (b) top view and (c)
section view (unit: mm)

Fig: Pictures of the cracks of: (a) an eco-friendly PSC sleeper and (b) a
normal PSC sleeper
 Fig: Comparison of the applied vertical force vs. deflection of a normal PSC
sleeper and an eco-friendly PSC sleeper.

Fig: Development of crack width of a normal PSC sleeper and an eco-

friendly PSC sleeper with respect to the vertical force

Table:
 Fig: Pictures of the cracks of: (a) an eco-friendly PSC sleeper and (b) a
normal PSC sleeper under the dynamic test.

With the aims of manufacturing an eco-friendly prestressed concrete (PSC)

sleeper, high-early-strength Portland cement (type III) was partially replaced by a
ground granulated blast furnace (GGBF) slag, and an electric arc furnace (EAF)
oxidizing slag was introduced as a replacement of natural fine aggregate. The
concrete mix design (the proportions of each constitute) for the eco-friendly concrete
were optimally determined in accordance with the concrete mix design criteria for a
PSC sleeper; the initial and 28-day compressive strengths shall not be less than 35
MPa, and 50 MPa, respectively. The water to cement ratio shall not be greater than
0.35.

2.3: Comparative experimental investigation of the vibration mitigation

characteristics of ballasted track using the rubber composite sleeper and
concrete sleeper.
As a component of the superstructure, a sleeper is a necessary part of the track
structure; it bears the pressure, load, and vibration of the rail in all directions and is
elastically distributed on the track structures. It also effectively maintains the
geometric shape and position of the track, especially the gauge and direction.
Moreover, the sleeper is vital for the stability and safety of the track structure,
connecting the superstructure with the substructure.

Fig. . Typical ballasted track system cross-section

Fig. . Two kinds of sleepers: (a) Chinese concrete sleeper (CSs) Type II, (I) Side
view (II), Plan view; (b) Rubber composite sleepers (RCSs).

Fig. . Acceleration peak of ballasted track components of case one: (a) Rail; (b)
Sleepers; (c) Ballast; (d) Ground
Fig. . PSD spread in a lateral direction over the sleeper with various IFHs in case
one: (a) PSD of CS at 50 IFH; (b) PSD of RCS at 50 IFH; (c) PSD of CS at 100 IFH;
(d) PSD of RCS at 100 IFH; (e) PSD of CS at 150 IFH; (f) PSD of RCS at 150 IFH.
Fig. . 1/3 octave curve of the ballasted track components for case one: (a) Rail; (b)
Sleepers; (c) Ballast; (d) Ground points at a 200 mm distance;
The damping effects of RCSs contributed significantly to decreasing the VAL on the
ballast and ground of the track equipped with RCSs. The vibration transmission
results that analyzed transmission from the rail, to the sleepers, and then to the
ground through the ballast show a significant reduction in VAL with the ballasted
track that utilized RCSs. Due to the different stiffness of each type of sleeper, the
stiffness/rigidity sleeper (CSs) transmits vibration waves to the ballasts faster and
produces a higher vibrational response in the rail, sleeper, and ground compared to
the RCSs.
The frequency-domain investigation on the vibration transmission over the lateral
direction of the track showed that the acceleration PSD of the rail with RCSs has
fewer evident peaks than the rail with CSs.

3. Materials: Compositions and Raw materials:

3.1: Composite Sleeper
The proprietary mixture of plastics is composed for composite sleeper (mainly
shredded HDPE), rubber from whole post-consumer tyers, rubber buffing from
retreaders, other waste materials, chemical additives and various fillers and
reinforcement agents like fiberglass or vermiculite. Approximately 20% of overall
mixture content in rubber. Following is 5 stages of manufacturing process that
establishes efficiency and consistency in production:

Fig. Composite sleeper

3.2: Raw Material Selection and Handling:

The composite sleepers consists of mixture of shredded HDPE, rubber form whole
post-consumer tyres, rubber from retreaters, other waste materials, chemical
additives, fiber as reinforcement and fillers. The composite sleeper may include
following materials.

3.2.1 HDPE (High density polyethylene):

As a chief component with fiber as reinforcement or fillers to enrich properties
polymer composite sleeper assimilate a polymer material recycled HDPE. Hence,
toxic preservatives will not be required by sleepers. No water absorption problem
which cause loss of strength.
Fig: HDPE

3.2.2 Crumbled Rubber:

Elastic property to the sleeper is provided by crumb rubber and it will also reduce
cracks problem in sleepers. Maintenance cost reduces due to reduction in cracks
and also increases lifespan of sleeper.

Fig. Crumbled Rubber

3.2.3 Glass reinforcement:

For sleepers fibres act as reinforcement. Fiber is both strong and stiff in tension and
compression.
Fig. Glass Reinforcement

3.2.4 Fillers (CaCO3, Mica):

Fillers are flexible and elastic and they have excellent mechanical and thermal
properties. They are moisture proof and have high flexural and tensile strength.
By combining above materials (on the basis of properties) a superior quality of
material can be achieved for railway sleepers.

Fig. Fillers
 Name of HDPE Scrumbled Glass Micca/
composite rubber fiber CaCO3
s
Tietek
Axion
Integri Co
Tufflex
KLP
MPW
Iplas
Natural
rubber

Composition of composite sleeper which we are using is given below-

Recycled HDPE - 55%
Crumbled Rubber - 12.5%
Glass reinforcement - 12.5%
Fillers (CaCO3, Mica etc.) - 20%

4. Process of Fabrication:

Some companies manufacture pre-stressed concrete (PSC) sleepers across its 12

Plants including two new automatic production plants across the country with a total
installed capacity of 4.85 million sleepers per annum.
The design for concrete sleepers had been constantly undergoing change in
conjunction with the R&D of Indian Railways to suit the changing requirements. With
the adoption of M60 grade cement, the life of these sleepers increased. With the
base width increased, the ballast pressure came down by 10% leading to
proportionate savings on ballast and maintenance costs.
Indian Railways has plans to go for higher axle loads in coming years and the new
design for concrete sleepers will suit future requirements of the railways. They also
envisages the use of special strand wire with higher UTS by which the overall weight
of steel per sleepers will be brought down by 25%.

THE SLEEPERS MANUFACTURED BY THE COMPANY ARE SUITABLE FOR

THE FOLLOWING:
1. Normal Broad Gauge: This sleeper has a trapezoidal cross section having a
width of 154 mm at the top and 250 mm at the bottom and a height of 210
mm at rail seat.
2. Points & Crossing: These specialized sleepers are used to hold switches,
CMS crossings and lead rails for main line and turnouts. High speed trains
can run on these PSC layouts with utmost safety.
3. Guard Rail: These are used at the approaches to girder bridges to prevent a
derailed train from capsizing.
4. Switch Expansion Joints: These are PSC sleepers for switch expansion joints
(with 120 mm maximum gap) for long welded rails for 52 kg & 60 kg rails
using corresponding chairs.
5. Check Rail on Curves: Check rails are absolutely essential to offer an inner
side for sharper curves, which are more than 50 to prevent derailment.
6. Level Crossings: This is formed at various points where a road crosses a
railway track at the same level and sleepers used here are made with 60 kg
UIC or 52 kg check rail.
7. Dual Gauge: The unique pre-stressed concrete dual gauge sleepers have
been designed to cater to handle meter and broad gauge trains so that both
trains can run on the same track. All the sleepers are manufactured under
stress bench system with very strict quality control measures.

Composite Sleepers are manufactured using recycled materials. The group

developed composite sleepers as an alternative material in lieu of steel
channel sleepers for girder bridges

With increasing rail traffic and faster train speeds, railway boards across the
globe are migrating to composite sleepers because of their increasingly
obvious benefits. Also as the loads per car are increasing and availability of
old growth hardwood trees is drastically reducing, the use of composite
sleepers has witnessed a huge growth trajectory.

The ability to recycle these sleepers due to its composition has won approval
from railway boards across countries. Even as the functional properties are
similar to wooden sleepers, these are not subjected to corrosion and don't
need insulation since they are self insulated. Composite sleepers have less
components than steel channel sleepers, hence rendering inspection and
maintenance easier. Painting is also not required on composite sleepers and
it possesses the additional benefit of reduced noise pollution due to the
natural dampening effect of the product.

Being environmentally friendly since it keeps a check on deforestation,

composite sleepers help keep sound pollution low and offer 100% insulation.
Even its fasteners are similar to those of wooden sleepers. One of the biggest
advantages of these sleepers is that it is 40% cheaper than cost of steel
channel sleeper used in girder bridges.

No or short fibre reinforced recycled plastic sleepers

5. Properties:
Table 1: Minimum dimensions and tolerances for sleepers SPC 231.
5.1: Standard Gauge Hardwood Sleeper

Length 2440 mm
Width at Base 230 mm
Depth at Centre of Rail Seat 130 mm
Approximate Weight 65 kg

Table 2: Standard sleeper dimensions CRN 232.

5.2: Medium Duty Concrete Sleeper

Length 2390–2500 mm
Width at Base 220–255 mm
Depth at Centre of Rail Seat 180 mm
Approximate Weight 285 kg
Table: 3 Performance comparison of different fibre reinforced polymer sleepers
Performance
AREMA code Composite sleepers
measurement
No or
Unidirectiona
Softwoo Gluela short Bidirectional
Oak l
d m glass glass fibres
Glass fibres
fibres
109 850-
Density, kg/m3 855 960 740 1040-2000
6 1150
Modulus of 1.5-
8.4 7.4 12 8.1 5.0-8.0
elasticity, GPa 1.8
Modulus of 17.2-
57.9 49.3 66.9 142 70-120
rupture, MPa 20.6
Shear strength,
5 4 4 4 10 15-20
Mpa
Rail seat
15.2-
compression, 4.6 3 3.9 28 40
20.6
Mpa
Screw 31.6-
22.2 13.3 n/a 65 >60
withdrawal, kN 35.6
Firstly, according to the ISO standard provision, two-point loads (50 kN each) are
applied with the distance of Lc/3 (500 mm in this case) in between the two-point
loads. Secondly, the distance between two-point loads are reduced to 150 mm to
comply with the Australian Standard. Thirdly, the uniform distributed load of 40 kN/m
(equivalent to a total of 100 kN point load) is applied to reflect the full redistribution
condition of ballast support (this condition represents poor track maintenance).
However, in the railway industry, a proper ballast tamping and packing enable the
partial support condition in practice. These activities can affect the flexural response
of railway sleepers subjected to a spectrum of ballast stiffnesses including the
asymmetrical ballast condition. A number of composite railway sleeper technologies
have been developed but their applications in rail tracks are still limited. This paper
rigorously reviews the recent developments on composite sleepers and identifies the
critical barriers to their widespread acceptance and applications. Currently the
composite sleeper technologies that are available ranges from sleepers made with
recycle plastic materials which contains short or no fibre to the sleepers that
containing high volume of fibres. While recycled plastic sleepers are low cost, the
major challenges of using this type of sleepers are their limited strength, stiffness
and dynamic properties which in most cases, are incompatible with those of timber.
On the other hand, the prohibitive cost of high fibre containing sleepers limit their
widespread application. Moreover, limited knowledge on the historical long-term
performance of these new and alternative materials restricts their application.
Potential design approaches for overcoming the challenges in the utilisation and
acceptance of composite sleeper technologies are also presented in this paper.
Timber is the most widely used material for railway sleepers, however, as a sleeper
material it deteriorates with time and needs appropriate replacement. In recent
years, hardwood timber for railway sleepers is becoming more expensive, less
available and is of inferior quality compared to the timber previously available. There
are also now various environmental concerns regarding the use and disposal of
chemically-impregnated timber sleepers. This has resulted in most railway industries
searching for alternative materials to replace existing timber sleepers. This paper
presents a review of recent developments and presents an initiative focusing on
fibre composites as an alternative material for railway sleepers. Fibre composites
are emerging as an alternative viable construction material. Crumb rubber and short
fibres are introduced into the epoxy polymer core of composite railway sleepers to
reduce cost and improve mechanical performance. The study investigates the
effects of increasing content of crumb rubber, chopped glass fibres and
polypropylene fibres. The experimental results including the microstructure of the
polymer mixes demonstrate that short fibres enhanced the flexural and shear
performance while the crumb rubber improved flexibility of polymer mixes. A
simplified prediction equation was proposed to predict critical properties using the
compressive strength.

5.3: Characteristics of plastic composite sleepers:

In order to evaluate the efficiency of the NPCS and the materials used to make it,
the test experiments should be considered in accordance with those of conventional
sleeper criterion mentioned in European and American rail standards. That is, the
test experiments are studied and an experimental procedure is proposed based on
the corresponding standards. A review of the literature indicates that water
absorption, hardness, flexural, bending, impact attenuation, pull-out, electrical
resistance, aging, and microstructure characteristics are the main influencing
parameters, that cover various requirements expected from PCS. The above
parameters are selected and used in this investigation in two categories of material
and product parameters as presented in Fig. 3. The testing setup for each
parameter is arranged according to the method adapted by the corresponding
standards. The physical and mechanical material tests including water-absorption,
hardness, flexural, electrical resistance, and impact absorption are carried out
according to the methodology of each test expressed in its related standard. For
water absorption, according to ISO 62, the specimens are dried in an oven and then
placed in a desiccator to cool. The specimens are then weighed and emerged in
water at 23 ◦C for 24 h. The ASTM D2240 standard is used to evaluate the hardness
of composite sample with a durometer [66]. The flexural properties was measured
based on the ASTM D790 using a three-point bend fixture installed on a universal
test machine [67]. For electrical resistance, based on ASTM D257 a standard size
sample is inserted between two electrodes. Then, an input voltage is applied for 60 s
and the resistance is measured. The volume resistivity is finally reported. For impact
absorption test, according to ASTM D256, the impact stress is applied to a notched
specimen that is gripped on one end. The thickness-related energy absorption of the
specimen is then reported. One of the main duties of the sleeper is to transfer the
load received from rail to the track base. This property is evaluated by conducting
bending test. That is, the bending test is conducted according to EN 13230-2. In
order to evaluate the capability of the NPCS to attenuate the impact load received
from wheel-rail interaction, impact attenuation test is conducted according to EN
13146-3. In order to evaluate the resistance of the PCS against pull-out loads, pull-
out test is carried out according to EN 13146-10. The capability of the sleeper
product to suppress the stray current is an important parameter in track
superstructure elements. That is, electrical resistance test is conducted according to
EN 13146-5. In order to evaluate the long term life of the NPCS, the aging test is
performed according to ISO 12856-1 and ISO2578. Finally, microstructure
evaluation test is performed to study the condition of matrix in contacted filler parts
in PCS. It should be noted that the measurement of glass transition temperature is
also an important property when considering composites in general for any
application, but as this temperature is far from the temperature range of the NPCS
use, it is not considered in the above evaluations.
6. Different tests:

Table 5: Mechanical properties comparison of several composite sleeper

technologies
Types Timber FFU Tie Tek Axion IntegriCo Wood Glue
Property core laminated
Density, 1085 670-820 1153 849-897 1121 993 -
(kg/m3)
Modulus of 16 8.1 >1.7 1.7 1.67 1.5 5.2
Elasticity, (GPa)
Modulus of 65 142 >18.6 20.6 18.6 17.2 103
Rupture, (MPa)
Compressive - - 269 176.5 262 241 -
MOE, (MPa)
Rail-Seat 60 58 16.5 20.6 15.9 15.2 -
Compression,
(MPa)
Screw Pull-out 40 65 35.6 31.6 73.4 - 63.8
Force, (kN)

Table:
Table:

7. Compounding
Based on the mixtures designed, the composite granules of each mixture are
produced from raw materials using a SHJ-20 twin-screw extruding machine (Fig.
4(a)). The length to diameter ratio and feeding rate of the machine is 40 m/mm and
2 kg/h, respectively. Based on the author’s experience, the temperature and
spinning speed of the screw are set in a way to achieve a homogenous granule
without burning of the raw materials or insufficient melting of RHDPE. That is, the
heating temperature is adjusted equal to 90 ◦C and 200 ◦C for the feeder and heater
parts of the machine, respectively. The spinning speed is also set equal to 60 rpm.
Note that in order to avoid any porosity in the granules, the fillers were completely
dried in the oven before using them in making the compounds. That is, the fillers
were oven dried for nearly 15 h at 100 ◦C and their final moisture content was
checked after putting them in the oven to ensure zero moisture content.

7.1 Preparation of plastic composite sleepers for product tests:

The PCS samples are produced by melting the granules of the nominated
composition and casting it in a rectangular mold. The NPCS has a dimension of
2600 × 300 × 150 mm which is similar to the dimension of typical wooden sleepers.
A view of different parts of the plastic extrusion line used to produce the NPCS is
presented in Fig. 5 (a) to 5 (c). The extruder is SHJ-63 brand which its speed,
capacity and screw diameter was set to the values of 600RPM, 200 kg/h and 62.4
mm, respectively (Fig. 5(a)). The melted composites exported from SHJ-63 are then
casted in to a slab shape mold (See Fig. 5(a)). The desired dimensions (Similar to
those of the wooden sleeper) is then sawed using a cutting machine (Fig. 5(b)). The
holes of the sleeper for fastener baseplates are drilled using radial drilling machine
(Fig. 5(c)).

Machines used in making NPCS products: (a) Extruding machine used for making
composite sleepers, (b) Cutting machine used to saw casted composite slabs in to
the wooden sleeper dimensions, and (c) Radial drilling machine used to make the
holes needed for sleeper screws
Instruments used in material tests: (a) Water absorption, (b) Hardness, (c) Flexural,
and (d) Impact absorption.

8. Results

The finite element analyses exhibit critical static effects stemmed from a variety of
boundary conditions (representing test methods and ballast conditions). The effects
of support conditions together with ballast conditions on the static flexural behaviors
of composite sleepers are highlighted for comparison. Under the conditions specified
by standards (ISO 12856 and AS1085.14), the results clearly show that the bending
moment resultants are affected by the spacing between load arms (Fc, n/2). The ISO
standard test method tends to yield a lesser bending moment by 35%, implying that
component testing by AS1085.14 method is more efficient. In addition, there was a
myth that the standard test methods could offer a situation close to in situ ballasted
conditions. When considering the deflected shapes, it is evident that none of
standardized test methods can completely mimic in situ behaviors. This new finding
is aligned well with other studies (Reiff et al., 2007; McHenry et al., 2008; Davis et
al., 2009; Tangtragulwong et al., 2011; Kaewunruen et al., 2018; McHenry and Gao,
2018; Qian et al., 2019). When considering the purpose of performance
benchmarking, it is apparent that the Australian test setup condition (AS1085.14)
can better represent the hogging deformations at the mid span than the test
provision of ISO standard (ISO 12856). The insight into the bending moment
resultants is very critical for track engineers and test engineers, who should be
aware that the results obtained from standard test methods should be interpreted
with cautions.
Composite materials have recently gained significant attention for applications in
railway industry. In recent practice, composite sleepers and bearers have been used
for bespoke replacements of aged timber components in critical areas such as
switches and crossings, bridge transom sleepers, and special locations with either
stiffness or clearance constraints. A new ISO standard has been drafted to
accommodate the need to carry out standardized tests to benchmark the
performance of polymeric composite sleepers and bearers. This study highlights the
test specifications in order to illustrate the profound insight into the test methods for
polymeric composite sleepers in comparison with in situ conditions in real life
situations. This study explores the effectiveness of the provision in the current
design code for bending test methods under various support conditions. The results
clearly demonstrate that the test methods cannot fully represent in situ track
conditions.

8.1: BALLASTLESS TRACK FOR URBAN METRO

Patil group is the pioneer in bringing Ballast-less tracks for the metro. These
systems have been designed and engineered by Patil group in collaboration with our
in-house Research and development teams and collaboration with global partners.
Urban metro requires very high availability of the track. Only ballast-less track can
provide this availability ensuring least maintenance and high strength. Following
metros are already using such type of plinths in India.
 1. Bangalore
 2. Delhi
 3. Chennai
 4. Mumbai

Apart from the above cities, Pune Urban Metro Rail is also planning to use Pre-cast
plinth, which is a very innovative design done by Patil group.

8.2: Pre-cast plinth:

The Pre-cast plinth Type Ballast less Track is a well proven design used at 3 metro
train projects across the world. This design has been developed by Patil Group in
co-ordination with leading international design consultants. The pre-cast plinth track
system is a continuously supported rail with discrete shoulders retained by rail clips.

Pre-cast plinth system of Urban Metro is meant for speeds up to 80 kmph, our varied
references in this product make us hopeful to aspire for further forthcoming urban
metro projects in various cities..

Key advantages of Pre- cast Plinth:

 Provides environmental construction and it reduces obstruction to traffic as
everything is factory made and onsite work is bare minimum.
 Productivity is very high
 Quality and finish is better than cast in situ
 Capability to provide pre-assembled fastening from factory
 Proven design on curves
 All technical approval and specifications in place.

8.3: RHEDA:
The advantages of using RHEDA Ballast less track systems include long life cycles,
high speeds ride comfort and great load-carrying capability. Practically maintenance
free, ballast less track systems ensure 100% availability over many years. In many
cases, a maintenance-free track system is indeed the more cost-effective solution
over the long run. The use of PATIL RHEDA sleepers is ideal for laying washable
aprons at railway stations thereby improving the cleanliness of the station yards. The
station aprons where the PATIL RHEDA sleepers have been implemented include
Bhubaneshwar , Kacheguda, Surat etc.,

8.4. Patil PORR BLT:

The Porr system was designed to replace the typical behavior of the ballasted track
by several elastic elements in the ballastless system. The typical behavior of a
ballasted track shows the elasticity in the ballast itself and in the rail fastening
system. These two elastic elements have to be copied by the elasticity of the rail
fastening system in the ballastless track and of the elasticity of a second layer which
is situated at the bottom of the prefabricated slabs. This system leads to a
distribution of the elasticity between the elastic coating of the slabs and the rail
fastening system of 10% to 90%.
BALLASTLESS TRACK SYSTEM ON MAIN LINE

Ballast less track system is a far more superior system than what is being used
currently in India, with a very competitive price. This is very much necessary where
ballast cannot be used and maintained especially on Aprons, Tunnels, Stations /
Bridges etc., Patil Group along with their overseas partners with decades of
experience in railway infrastructure-have combined their resources to support the
Indian Government in the implementation of their plans. We offer the following
systems to Main Railway track in Indian Railways.
The above systems in Indian Railways are currently being used on Jammu Kashmir
lines, various through station lines, Tunnels with an overall population of over 100
KM.

9. Conclusions.
The advantages of composites are clear – the material can be manipulated and
sawed just like wood, without any of the inbuilt disadvantages of its all-natural
counterpart. It has the durability of concrete (composites have a service lifespan of
50 years or more), without concrete’s weight and ponderous installation process.
Unlike concrete sleepers, for which a track must be completely overhauled,
composite sleepers can be installed piecemeal alongside older timber models.

Composite sleepers have the additional advantage of being made from mostly
recycled material, and are fully recyclable (they can be recycled into new sleepers).
A 2006 report by the waste and resources action programme (WRAP) notes that a
mile of wooden sleepers requires 810 mature oak trees, while an equivalent length
of composite sleepers uses two million plastic bottles, 8.9 million plastic bags and
10,800 post-consumer tyres that could otherwise end up in landfill.
9. References
1. Majid Muttashar et al, “Composites for Alternate Railway Sleeper”,
Researchgate, Publication 347855475.
2. Centre of Excellence in Engineered Fibre Composites (CEEFC), University of
Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia
3. Birmingham Centre for Railway Engineering and Education, School of Civil
Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
4. School of Civil, Mining and Environmental Engineering, University of
Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia

5. Australian Standard: AS1085.14 (2003). Railway Track Material - Part 14:

Prestressed Concrete Sleepers. Sydney, NSW: Standards Australia.
6. Cai, Z. (1992). Modelling of Rail Track Dynamics and Wheel/Rail Interaction
(Ph.D. thesis). Department of Civil Engineering, Queen's University, Kingston,
Canada.
7. Davis, D. D., LoPresti, J., Li, D., Otter, D. E., and Maal, L. (2009). “Evaluation
of improved track components under heavy axle loads,” in Proceedings - 9th
International Heavy Haul Conference: “Heavy Haul and Innovation
Development” (Shanghai), 258–266.

8. Prof Rahul Shewaler, et, al “International Research Journal of Engineering

and Technology (IRJET)”, Volume: 05 Issue: 09 | Sep 2018

9. Composite Sleeper: Circular Economy in Rail Research Report 079006-88

Report Version 3 | 25 February 2022.

10. INDIAN RAILWAY STANDARD SPECIFICATION FOR COMPOSITE

SLEEPERS, Serial No. IRS: T 59-2021
 11. W. FERDOUS et.al, ‘COMPOSITES FOR ALTERNATIVE RAILWAY
SLEEPERS’, 16th East Asia-Pacific Conference on Structural Engineering &
Construction (EASEC16), Brisbane, Australia, December 3-6, 2019

12. Wahid Ferdous et. al, COMPOSITE RAILWAY SLEEPERS: NEW

DEVELOPMENTS AND OPPORTUNITIES, IHHA 2015 Conference, 21 – 24
June 2015, Perth, Australia

13. Samuel Thompson, Christopher King, John Rodwell, Scott Rayburg, and
Melissa Neave, ‘Life Cycle Cost and Assessment of Alternative Railway
Sleeper Materials’, ustainability 2022, 14, 8814. https://doi.org/10.3390/
su14148814, www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

14. Wahid Ferdous, Allan Manalo, Gerard Van Erp, Thiru Aravinthan, Sakdirat
Kaewunruen, Alex Remennikov Centre of Excellence in Engineered Fibre
Composites (CEEFC), University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD 4350,
Australia Birmingham Centre for Railway Engineering and Education, School of Civil
Engineering, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UKSchool of Civil, Mining and
Environmental Engineering, University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia

15. Manalo, T. Aravinthan, W. Karunasena, A. Ticoalu, Centre of Excellence in

Engineered Fibre Composites (CEEFC), Faculty of Engineering and Surveying,
University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, 4350 Queensland, Australia

16. Peng Yu, Allan Manalo, Wahid Ferdous, Rajab Abousnina, Choman Salih,
Tom Heyer, Peter Schubel, University of Southern Queensland, Centre for
Future Materials, West Street, Toowoomba, QLD 4350, Australia Austrak Pty
Ltd., 140 Creek Street, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia.
17. Jianxing Liu, et. al, “Study of the characteristics of ballast bed resistance for
different temperature and humidity conditions”, ELSEVIER, Construction and
Building Materials 266 (2021) 121115.

18. Teahoon Koh, et al, “Structural performances of an eco-friendly prestressed

concrete sleeper” ELSEVIER, Construction and Building Materials 102 (2016)
445-454.

19. Pouria Mansouri, et. al, “Discrete element method analysis of lateral resistance
of different sleepers under different support conditions”, ELSEVIER,
Construction and Building Materials 327 (2022) 126915.

20. S. M. Farman, F. Rezaie, “Simulation of crack propagation in prestressed

concrete sleepers by fracture mechanics” ELSEVIER, Engineering Failure
Analysis 96 (2019) 109–117.

21. M. Hassan Esmaeili *, Hamed Norouzi, Fateme Niazi, “Evaluation of

mechanical and performance characteristics of a new composite railway
sleeper made from recycled plastics, mineral fillers and industrial wastes”
ELSEVIER, Composite Part B 254 (2023) 110581.

22.