Office of Research and 

Development 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Federal Railroad

Administration

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Fiberglass Wrapped Tie Performance 

Evaluation Report 

DOT/FRA/ORD-05/01 August 2005 This document is available to the

U.S. public through the National

Technical Information Service

Springfield, Virginia 22161
Notice 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of 

the Department of Transportation in the interest of 

information exchange. The United States Government 

assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. 

Notice 

The United States Government does not endorse products 

or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear 

herein solely because they are considered essential to the 

objective of this report. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments 

regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Washington 

Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to 

the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0702-0288), Washington, D.C. 20503 

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

August 2005 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS 

Fiberglass Wrapped Tie Performance Evaluation Report 

6. AUTHOR(S) 

Joe LoPresti

DTFR-53-00-C-00012 

Task Order 207 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NUMBERS

Transportation Technology Center, Inc. 

P.O. Box 11130 

Pueblo, CO 81001

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY 

REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENGY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration 

Office of Research and Development, MS 20 

1120 Vermont Avenue, NW 

Washington, DC 20590

DOT/FRA/ORD-05/01

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

This document is available through National Technical 

Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

13. ABSTRACT

Forty-two fiberglass fabric wrapped, solid-sawn wood ties during 300 million gross tons (MGT) of heavy 

axle load (HAL) traffic and eight fiberglass fabric wrapped ties with metal cover plates were recently 

evaluated during 125 MGT of HAL traffic at the Transportation Technology Center in Pueblo, Colorado. 

This observational test was a followup to West Virginia University’s test of 200 fiberglass wrapped ties test 

that concluded in 2002 after 145 MGT of HAL traffic. The original test showed that the fiberglass wraps 

were not as durable as intended, thus prompting this evaluation of improved fiberglass and metal covered 

fiberglass wraps. The second test showed that the changes made to the fiberglass wraps improved their 

durability.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF 

PAGES

Heavy axle load, fiberglass wrapped ties, tie plates, anchors, and metal cover plates 

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

OF THIS PAGE 

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

20. LIMITATION OF 

ABSTRACT 

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED SAR 

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rec. 2-89) 

Prescribed by ANSI/NISO Std. 

239.18 

298-102

i 
(Blank page) 

ii 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0 Introduction.......................................................................................................1

2.0 Objectives.........................................................................................................1

3.0 Procedures .......................................................................................................1

4.0 Results .............................................................................................................3

5.0 Conclusions/Observations................................................................................5 

iii 
(Blank page) 

iv 
1.0 INTRODUCTION 

Transportation Technology Center (TTC), located in Pueblo, Colorado, recently completed an 

evaluation of the performance of 42 fiberglass fabric wrapped, used solid-sawn wood ties 

under 300 million gross tons (MGT) of heavy axle load (HAL) traffic, and 8 fiberglass fabric 

wrapped ties with metal cover plates under 125 MGT of HAL traffic. West Virginia 

University (WVU) at Morgantown, West Virginia, supplied the ties. The fiberglass wraps are 

intended to extend tie life by refurbishing used ties. 

This evaluation was a followup to a test of WVU’s 200 fiberglass wrapped ties that was 

concluded in 2002 after 145 MGT of HAL traffic at TTC. Those fiberglass wraps showed 

significant degradation, and WVU requested a new test on ties with wraps that were intended 

to better withstand the effects of tonnage. After 175 MGT of traffic on the ties with the new 

wraps, WVU asked for an evaluation of 8 additional ties with metal cover plates. The cover 

plates were intended to protect the wraps from damage caused by tie plates or rail anchors. 

Two of the ties had solid, light-weight cover plates; two had solid, heavier plates; and four 

had perforated plates. 

The test was observational, with the objective of monitoring durability of the fiberglass fabric 

wrap. 

2.0 OBJECTIVES 

The objectives of the evaluation were to determine the following: 

• The durability of the fiberglass fabric wraps 

• The spike retaining and gage holding ability of the ties based on need for maintenance 

to Federal Railroad Administration Class 4 track standards 

• The durability of the metal cover plates 

3.0 PROCEDURES 

The ties were installed during August 2002 in Section 3 of the High Tonnage Loop (HTL) at 

the Facility for Accelerated Service Testing (FAST) at TTC. The ties were handled in the 

same way railway crossties are normally handled during unloading and installation. Table 1 

lists test conditions. 

Table 1. Test Conditions at the Original Installation Site 

Location Section 3 on the HTL at FAST 

Test Zone 68 track-feet, 42 ties at 19.5-inch spacing 

Track Geometry 5-degree, 4-inch superelevation curve 

Ballast Section Existing ballast; nominal 18-inch depth with 15-inch shoulders 

14-inch AREMA tie plates; cut pike hold-down and rail spikes; rail anchors 

on every tie Fastening System 

Rail Section 136 pound-per-yard RE welded rail 

Train 70 to 80 315,000 pound (39-ton axle load) cars 

Operating Speed 40 mph 

Suspension Standard suspension trucks 

- 1 - 
After the ties had accumulated 175 MGT, the 42 ties were moved during the fall of 2003 to 

accommodate installation of two test bridges at FAST. The ties were moved to a spiral, near 

the point of curvature of the five-degree curve in which they were originally installed. The 

rail spike holes were plugged with wood plugs when the ties were reinstalled. The eight ties 

with cover plates were installed at that time. 

The ties were visually inspected at the start of the test and at 25 MGT intervals. Figure 1 

shows the ties before installation. During the test, the portion of fiberglass wrap that was 

visible under typical track conditions was inspected. At the conclusion of the test, ballast was 

moved away from two ties to document the condition of the sides of the ties. At the same 

time, two ties were removed by pulling them through the ballast section to expose the bottoms 

of the ties and to determine if removal in this manner caused damage to the wrap. Tie plates 

were removed from the ties that had been removed from the track to allow observation of the 

condition of the wrap that had been under the plates. 

Figure 1. Wrapped Ties before Installation

- 2 - 
4.0 RESULTS 

The following summarizes the condition of the 42 original ties after 300 MGT: 

• The test zone held gage, surface, and alignment without maintenance. 

• Rail anchors had damaged 77 of the 84 wraps (Figure 2). 

• Tie plates had damaged 36 of the 84 wraps (Figure 3), but it did not appear that the 

wrap had been cut completely through on most of those ties. Removal of the tie plates 

would be necessary to further determine the condition of the wraps. 

• Nine of the 420 spikes were up more than 0.5 inch. No maintenance was required. 

This is comparable to other used ties in the same area that had been plugged with 

wood plugs and re-spiked when installed. 

• Two of the wraps showed clear indications of loosening from the tie. 

• Seven of the wraps had wear and abrasion extending through the wraps to the tie 

corners. 

• On the two ties that had ballast moved away so the sides were exposed: 

o The sides on the low rail side of one tie were in poor condition (Figure 4). The 

sides of the other three wraps were in good condition (Figure 5). 

• On the two ties that were removed by pulling them through the ballast and that had 

their plates removed: 

o None of the four wraps had plate cutting damage that penetrated the entire 

wrap (though two of the four wraps had minor damage, as noted, during the 

final in-track inspection). 

o There was no indication that pulling the ties through the ballast had damaged 

the wraps. 

o The sides of all four wraps were in good condition. 

o The bottoms of both wraps on one tie were in good condition (Figure 6). 

o The bottoms of both wraps on the other tie were in poor condition (Figure 7). 

o The wraps of both ties were in better condition than wraps on the original 200 

ties were after 356 MGT (Figure 8). 

- 3 - 
The following summarizes the condition of the eight ties with metal cover plates after 125 

MGT: 

• The two ties with light-weight solid cover plates: 

o Were not able to withstand normal tie handling and train traffic. One of the 

plates was damaged during transit to TTC, and one was damaged during tie 

installation. 

o The two that were in good condition at 0 MGT were sufficiently damaged after 

25 MGT, in that they no longer provided protection to the fiberglass wraps 

(Figure 9). 

• The two ties with heavier solid cover plates: 

o One cover was damaged during installation. 

o Fail anchors had damaged four of the four cover plates (Figure 10). 

o Tie plates had damaged two of the four cover plates. 

• The four ties with perforated cover plates: 

o Rail anchors had damaged five of the eight cover plates. 

o Tie plates had damaged three of the eight cover plates (Figure 11). 

- 4 - 
5.0 CONCLUSIONS/OBSERVATIONS 

• The changes made to the fiberglass wraps improved their durability compared to the 

original 200 test ties.

• The reconditioning/filling of the spike holes before the application of the fiberglass 

wraps resulted in ties that required no spike maintenance in 175 MGT (the tonnage at 

which the ties were relocated). No spike maintenance was required in the additional 

125 MGT after the ties were moved (wood tie plugs were used when spikes were 

reapplied).

• Rail anchors damaged nearly all of the wraps. The only wraps that were not damaged 

were those that were protected from contact with the anchors by the shape of the ties.

• Forty-three percent of the wraps showed some damage caused by tie plates. It did not 

appear that the wrap had been cut through on most of those ties.

• The heavier metal plates and perforated metal plates provided the fiberglass wraps 

some protection from plate and anchor damage. The perforated plates were more 

durable.

• The track crew reported that it was difficult to drive spikes through the heavier solid 

and the perforated metal plates with a spike maul.

• One potential benefit of the wraps, protecting ties from moisture, was not evaluated in 

the dry climate at TTC. The wraps might perform differently in wet conditions.

• The test was observational. There were no quantitative comparisons with earlier 

wrapped ties tested or non-wrapped ties tested.

• Based on their performance and current condition, the ties should provide several 

more years of acceptable service at FAST. Tie life cannot yet be estimated.

• Evaluating the economics of attempting to extend tie with fiberglass wrap is beyond 

the scope of this project.

- 5 - 
Figure 2. Damage to Wrap Caused by Rail Anchor 

Figure 3. Tie Plate Cutting into Wrap 

- 6 - 
Figure 4. Side of Tie with Ballast Moved to Expose Wrap (poor condition)

Figure 5. Side of Tie with Ballast Moved to Expose Wrap (good condition) 

- 7 - 
Figure 6. Bottom of Tie Removed from Track Showing Wrap in Good Condition 

Figure 7. Bottom of Tie Removed From Track Showing Wrap in Poor Condition 

- 8 - 
Figure 8. Bottom of Tie with First Generation Wrap after 356 MGT 

Figure 9. Light-Weight Cover Plate after 25 MGT 

- 9 - 
Figure 10. Heavier Cover Plate Damaged by Rail Anchor 

Figure 11. Perforated Cover Plate Damaged by Tie Plate 

- 10 -