U.S. Department of 

Transportation

Federal Railroad 

Administration

Over-the-Road Testing of the Instrumented Tank 

Car—A Load Environment Study

Office of Research

and Development

Washington, DC 20590

DOT/FRA/ORD-10-04 Final Report

May 2010
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.
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18

298-102

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 (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE

May 2010

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Over-the-Road Testing of the Instrumented Tank Car—A Load Environment Study

5. FUNDING NUMBERS

6. AUTHOR(S)

Narayana Sundaram, Tim Martin, Brent Selby, Francisco González, III

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

ENSCO, Inc.

Applied Technology and Engineering Division

5400 Port Royal Rd.

Springfield, VA 22151

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NUMBER

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Railroad Administration

Office of Research and Development

Washington, DC 20590

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER

FRA/DOT/10-04

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

COTR: Program Manager Francisco González, III

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

This document is available to the public through the FRA Web site at http://www.fra.dot.gov

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

1. Fractures have been observed on stub sill tank cars for many years. Undetected and unattended, these fractures can 

develop into a variety of tank car failures. While tank car ruptures are relatively rare, the potential for a catastrophic 

HAZMAT release has made this a critical issue within the industry. The FRA contracted ENSCO, Inc., to instrument and 

run an instrumented tank car over the road during a special test. Testing was conducted in a special consist with the 

intent to collect data from the instrumented tank car, instrumented wheelsets and track geometry. The tank car used for 

this effort was provided by General Electric. The following key recommendations are inferred from testing and analysis:

• An autonomous test should be designed and run for the second phase of this test program. 

• This would allow measurement of revenue consist forces and the actual environment that the tank car operates in. Data 

from this test can then be analyzed in a statistical manner as well as using correlations to associate these big events with 

either track geometry and/or train handling. 

• Track geometry is a strong contributing factor to the load environment of the car and hence the fractures of the stub sill. 

The test zone selected for the autonomous measurement should be measured for track geometry either immediately prior 

to or immediately after the test.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

36

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF REPORT

Unclassified

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF THIS PAGE

Unclassified

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION

OF ABSTRACT

Unclassified

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS

ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH

LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) LENGTH (APPROXIMATE)

1 inch (in) = 2.5 centimeters (cm) 1 millimeter (mm) = 0.04 inch (in)

1 foot (ft) = 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) = 0.4 inch (in)

1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (ft)

1 mile (mi) = 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) = 1.1 yards (yd)

1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile (mi)

AREA (APPROXIMATE) AREA (APPROXIMATE)

1 square inch (sq in, in2) = 6.5 square centimeters (cm2) 1 square centimeter (cm2) = 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2)

1 square foot (sq ft, ft2) = 0.09 square meter (m2) 1 square meter (m2) = 1.2 square yards (sq yd, yd2)

1 square yard (sq yd, yd2) = 0.8 square meter (m2) 1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2)

1 square mile (sq mi, mi2) = 2.6 square kilometers (km2) 10,000 square meters (m2) = 1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres

1 acre = 0.4 hectare (he) = 4,000 square meters (m2)

MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE)

1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gm) 1 gram (gm) = 0.036 ounce (oz)

1 pound (lb) = 0.45 kilogram (kg) 1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb)

1 short ton = 2,000 pounds 

(lb)

= 0.9 tonne (t) 1 tonne (t) =

=

1,000 kilograms (kg)

1.1 short tons

VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) VOLUME (APPROXIMATE)

1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz)

1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 2.1 pints (pt)

1 fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 1.06 quarts (qt)

1 cup (c) = 0.24 liter (l) 1 liter (l) = 0.26 gallon (gal)

1 pint (pt) = 0.47 liter (l)

1 quart (qt) = 0.96 liter (l)

1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (l)

1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3) = 0.03 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3)

1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3) = 0.76 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3)

TEMPERATURE (EXACT) TEMPERATURE (EXACT)

[(x-32)(5/9)] °F = y °C [(9/5) y + 32] °C = x °F

QUICK INCH - CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION

0 1 2 3 4 5

Inches

Centimeters 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

QUICK FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSIO

 -40° -22° -4° 14° 32° 50° 68° 86° 104° 122° 140° 158° 176° 194° 212°

 

°F

 °C -40° -30° -20° -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100°

For more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and 

Measures. Price $2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286 Updated 6/17/98
ii

Acknowledgments

This report documents the efforts of a task force involving many people at several organizations 

who were brought together under the leadership of Mr. Francisco González, III, and Mr. William 

Schoonover of the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA). 

The authors would like to express their gratitude to Mr. John Byrne and Mr. John Woodstock of 

General Electric Railcar Services for donating the tank car and providing it to the FRA and the 

industry as a research base to conduct studies on tank cars. The authors would also like to 

express gratitude to Mr. Arthur Clouse of FRA’s Office of Safety for providing support via a 

geometry test under the Automatic Track Inspection Program. Although many individuals were 

committed to this effort, the authors would like to express gratitude to Mr. Kevin Kesler,

previously with ENSCO, Inc., for his technical guidance and numerous inputs during the entire 

project. The authors also wish to recognize and extend special thanks to Dr. Ray Owings,

previously with ENSCO, Inc., for his invaluable guidance in the data analysis efforts. 
iii

Contents

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................. 1

1.1. Background..................................................................................................................... 1

1.2. Test Objectives and Approach ........................................................................................ 2

1.3. Program Time Line ......................................................................................................... 3

1.4. Report Organization........................................................................................................ 3

2. Test Methodology ................................................................................................................... 4

2.1. Instrumentation for Testing............................................................................................. 4

2.2. Test Logistics................................................................................................................ 14

2.3. Test Route and Collected Data ..................................................................................... 15

2.3.1. Data Collection and On-Board Analysis............................................................... 16

2.3.2. Data Processing Methods...................................................................................... 16

2.4. Issues Encountered During Testing .............................................................................. 16

2.4.1. Accelerometer on the carbody .............................................................................. 16

2.4.2. Synchronization problems for IWS ...................................................................... 17

3. Test Results........................................................................................................................... 18

3.1. General Statistical Analysis.......................................................................................... 18

3.1.1. Accelerations......................................................................................................... 18

3.1.2. Forces.................................................................................................................... 19

3.2. Geometry Data .............................................................................................................. 20

3.3. Instrumented Wheelset Forces...................................................................................... 20

3.4. Analysis of Important Parameters................................................................................. 21

3.4.1. Positive Longitudinal Coupler Force .................................................................... 21

3.4.2. Negative Longitudinal Coupler Force .................................................................. 23

3.4.3. Positive Vertical Coupler Force............................................................................ 25

3.4.4. Negative Vertical Coupler Force .......................................................................... 27

3.4.5. Vertical Axle Accelerations.................................................................................. 29

3.4.6. Geometry Defects ................................................................................................. 32

3.4.6.1. 62-Feet Profile Deviation...................................................................................... 32

4. Observations ......................................................................................................................... 34

4.1. Accelerations................................................................................................................. 34

4.2. Forces............................................................................................................................ 34

5. Conclusions and Recommendations..................................................................................... 35
iv

Illustrations

Figure 1. Tank Car Supplied by General Electric for Conducting Research...................................2

Figure 2 Instrumentation Layout for the Over-the-Road Testing....................................................4

Figure 3 Shear Gages Measuring Vertical Coupler Force. Left: Close up of installation. 

Right: New gages on the right replace gages (covered with sealant) on the left 

which were then disconnected. .......................................................................................6

Figure 4 Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Side Bearing Loads ......................................................7

Figure 5 Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Center Bowl Load ........................................................7

Figure 6 Triaxial Accelerometer Mounted on Top of Carbody......................................................8

Figure 7 Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Stub Sill and Each End of the Car ...................8

Figure 8 Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Axle on Both Sides of the Car.........................9

Figure 9 Vertical Load Adapter....................................................................................................10

Figure 10 Brake Pressure Transducer...........................................................................................11

Figure 11 Instrumented Wheelsets................................................................................................12

Figure 12 Consist with Instrumentation........................................................................................15

Figure 13 Route Map Used for Testing of the Tank Car is Highlighted in Green ........................16

Figure 14 Highest Positive Longitudinal Coupler Force Observed During Testing ....................22

Figure 15 Corresponding Vertical Coupler Force for this Event..................................................22

Figure 16 Deceleration of the Consist causes High Positive Longitudinal Coupler Forces.........23

Figure 17 Highest Negative Longitudinal Coupler Force Observed During Testing...................24

Figure 18 Corresponding Vertical Coupler Force for this Event..................................................24

Figure 19 Acceleration of the Consist causes High Negative Longitudinal Coupler Forces .......25

Figure 20 Highest Positive Vertical Coupler Force Observed During Testing ............................26

Figure 21 Corresponding Longitudinal Coupler Force for this Event..........................................26

Figure 22 Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event .............................................................27

Figure 23 Highest Negative Vertical Coupler Force Observed During Testing...........................28

Figure 24 Corresponding Longitudinal Coupler Force for this Event..........................................28

Figure 25 Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event .............................................................29

Figure 26 Highest Axle Left Vertical Accelerations during the Testing......................................30

Figure 27 Right Side Axle Vertical Accelerations for this Event.................................................30

Figure 28 Corresponding Bolster Forces for this Event ...............................................................31
v

Figure 29 Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event .............................................................31

Figure 30 Two Class Drop in 62- Feet Profile Chosen for Analysis............................................32

Figure 31 Corresponding Longitudinal Forces showing Large Variations ..................................33

Figure 32 Corresponding Vertical Coupler Forces showing Large Variations............................33

Tables

Table 1 Tank Car Filling Schedule from Tank Trucks...................................................................5

Table 2 Input Channels for DAQ System.....................................................................................13

Table 3 Input Channels for the IWS System ................................................................................13

Table 4 Testing Schedule used for the Tank Car..........................................................................15

Table 5 General Statistics of Acceleration Measurements on the Tank Car ................................19

Table 6 General Statistics of Force measurements on the Tank Car............................................19

Table 7 Summary of Geometry Exceptions during the Over-the-road Testing from DOTX218.................................................................................................................................20

Table 8 Number of Locations which triggered IWS exceptions...................................................21
vi

Technical Definitions

Definition

Instrumented 

Coupler

A standard coupler which is instrumented using strain gages to measure 

longitudinal forces acting between any two cars

Bolster Part of a railroad carbody underneath that connects the truck’s pivot to the body

Truck/Bogie

Swiveling carriage consisting of a frame, two pairs of wheels and a collection of 

springs used to carry and guide one end of a railroad car during navigating over 

railroad tracks

Cant Deficiency

For a train traveling through curved track at a given speed, the cant deficiency is 

the additional height that the elevated rail would have to be raised in order to 

produce a condition in which there is no net lateral force exerted on the rail.

°F Temperature measured in degrees Fahrenheit

g Acceleration of gravity

mph Miles per hour 

PSD Power Spectral Density; describes how the variance, or power, of a time series is 

distributed as a function of the different frequencies that form the signal

PSI, psi Pounds per square inch

FFT Fast Fourier Transform; describes how the magnitude of a time series is distributed 

as a function of the different frequencies that form the signal

GPS Global Positioning System

FRA Federal Railroad Administration

TSS Track Safety Standards

V/TI Vehicle/Track Interaction
vii

Executive Summary

Fractures have been observed on stub sill tank cars for many years. Undetected and unattended, 

these fractures can develop into a variety of tank car failures. Although tank car ruptures are 

relatively rare, the potential for a catastrophic hazmat release has made this a critical issue within 

the industry. As a result of this concern, special requirements for the construction, inspection, 

and repair of tank cars have been implemented.

Research into the underlying cause of stub sill tank car cracking and propagation continues. 

Some researchers believe that the fractures are initiated by discrete events resulting in high 

stresses. Multiple tests and models have focused on extreme loading events and their 

contribution to the development of the fatigue cracks. Furthermore, it is believed by some that 

the cracks are propagated by the stresses of regular over-the-road service. The Federal Railroad 

Administration (FRA) contracted ENSCO, Inc., to instrument and run a second instrumented 

tank car over the road during a special test. Testing was conducted in a special consist with the 

intent to collect data from the instrumented tank car, instrumented wheelsets, and track 

geometry. The tank car used for this effort was provided by General Electric. This report 

describes the instrumentation, calibration, and testing efforts conducted by ENSCO. 

The tank car ran in consist with the FRA geometry car (DOTX-218) between Gettysburg, PA, 

and Hamlet, NC, from June 9 to June 17, 2008. The consist included the tank car, filled to 

capacity, with DOTX-218, an empty hopper car, and a locomotive. The train was run in the 

same condition as a normal service train would be, including track speed.

The following key conclusions are drawn from testing and analysis:

• The axle acceleration provides the input to the carbody and the data does not show 

extremely high acceleration input from the axle as measured by this test. High 

acceleration events were accompanied by observation of high bolster forces. These high 

vertical acceleration events are mostly caused by switches on the track.

• Maximum carbody accelerations in the negative direction reached about -1g which 

represents downward motion of the carbody on to the bolster. These accelerations 

represent high vertical forces to the stub sill. 

• The highest vertical coupler forces were attributed to track geometry deviations 

specifically, a dip or bump on both rails. The speeds in which these events occurred were 

between 24 and 43 mph. Although track geometry seems to be the cause of these high 

vertical coupler forces, TSS exceptions for the respective classes were not flagged at 

these locations. An approximate wavelength of 100 ft seemed to be common among the 

top locations. 

• The highest longitudinal coupler forces can be attributed to braking/acceleration of the 

consist resulting in a jerk in the longitudinal direction. These events generally occurred 

at low speeds (below 35 mph). Track geometry parameters were not found to be a 

contributing factor for the occurrence of high longitudinal coupler forces. Generally, 

high longitudinal force locations exhibited large vertical coupler forces too. 
viii

• Bolster forces were not extensively analyzed but it seems that typically axle acceleration 

events gave rise to changes in the bolster forces. 

• The analysis of the instrumented wheelset forces showed us that not many locations exist 

where exceptions took place. There were four vehicle/track interactions (V/TI)

exceptions for the truck side L/V ratio threshold as per the V/TI standards (in place for 

track class 6 and above). 

• Track geometry appears to be a strong contributing factor to the load environment of the 

tank car especially the vertical and the longitudinal coupler forces. 

The following key recommendations are inferred from testing and analysis:

• An autonomous test should be designed and run for the second phase of this test program. 

• This would allow measurement of revenue consist forces and the actual environment in 

which the tank car operates. Data from this test can then be analyzed in a statistical 

manner as well as using correlations to associate these big events with either track 

geometry and/or train handling. 

• Track geometry is a strong contributing factor to the load environment of the car and 

hence the fractures of the stub sill. The test zone selected for the autonomous 

measurement should be measured for track geometry either immediately before or 

immediately after the test.

• The autonomous testing to be conducted in Phase 2 should be conducted on track that has 

lower than average track geometry to study the relationship of the high forces and track 

geometry.
ix
1

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

Fractures have been observed on stub sill tank cars for many years. Undetected and unattended, 

these fractures can develop into a variety of tank car failures. While tank car ruptures are 

relatively rare, the potential for a catastrophic hazardous material (hazmat) release has made this 

a critical issue within the industry. As a result of this concern, special requirements for the 

construction, inspection, and repair of tank cars have been implemented.

Research into the underlying cause of stub sill tank car cracking and propagation continues. The 

fractures are believed to be initiated by discrete events resulting in high stresses. Multiple tests 

and models have focused on extreme loading events and their contribution to the development of 

the fatigue cracks. Furthermore, the cracks are thought to be propagated by the stresses of 

regular over-the-road service. Under direction of the Tank Car Operating Environment Task 

Force (TCOE-TF) and the Stub Sill Working Group (SSWG), a test program was initiated to 

develop a methodology for both the measurement and reporting of events approaching and 

exceeding stub sill tank car design specifications; the TCOE-TF and the SSWG represent 

cooperative efforts between the Association of American Railroads (AAR), the Railway Supply 

Institute (RSI), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and Transport Canada (TC). 

Phase I of this test program addressed the development and proof of a method to record vertical 

and longitudinal coupler forces while employing relatively low-cost transducers and 

instrumentation. Phase II of the test program was established to validate the approach developed 

in Phase I by instrumenting several tank cars with a minimal set of sensors and instrumentation 

and conduct over-the-road tests. The Transportation Technology Center, Inc. (TTCI) has 

conducted the initial stages of Phase II on a single instrumented vehicle. 

FRA contracted ENSCO, Inc., to instrument and run a second instrumented tank car over the 

road during a special test. Testing was conducted in a special consist with the intent to collect 

data from the instrumented tank car, instrumented wheelsets, and track geometry. The tank car 

used was for this effort was provided by General Electric (GE) and is shown in Figure 1. This 

report describes the instrumentation, calibration and testing efforts conducted by ENSCO.
2

 

Figure 1. Tank Car Supplied by General Electric for Conducting Research

1.2. Test Objectives and Approach

The objective is to better understand the operational environment and forces exerted on tank cars 

in over-the-road service using methods based on results from the initial efforts conducted during 

Phase II of the TCOE-TF/SSWG research program. It is anticipated that the results of this test 

effort will either 1) confirm the industry’s current understanding of fracture initiation and

propagation or 2) reveal additional factors that are critical to the understanding of the 

phenomena. This will also make available a great deal of robust, real world ride condition data 

for further research in the future.

ENSCO installed six types of sensors on the tank car: accelerometers, strain gages, vertical load 

adapters, instrumented coupler, instrumented wheelsets, and a pressure transducer. With the tank 

car coupled adjacent to FRA’s DOTX-218 track inspection vehicle, cables were run from the 

sensors to the equipment located on DOTX-218. The data acquisition equipment was 

synchronized to the track geometry system onboard DOTX-218, which simultaneously measured 

the track geometry. This dynamical testing took place over normal freight track at track speed.
3

1.3. Program Time Line

Key dates in the program time line are given below. 

Installation on Tank Car Dec 2006 – Nov 2007

Calibration of Sensors Apr 2008 – May 2008

Low Speed Test Run Jun 03 2008

Over-the-Road Testing Jun 09 2008 – Jun 18 2008

Draft Report/Presentation Aug 2008 to Jan 2009

Final Report Apr 10 2009

1.4. Report Organization

The test methodology is discussed in Section 2, along with a review of the physical 

measurements recorded and the equipment used during testing. Section 2 also details the route 

on which the over-the-road testing was conducted. 

Section 3 presents the results of the analysis of the collected test data; much of the information 

presented in Section 3 is supported by detailed analyses provided in the appendices. Section 4

presents the major observations of the test program. Conclusions based on the observations 

discussed in Section 4 are presented in Section 5.

Supplemental material is provided in the appendices. A list of the appendices follows: 

• Appendix A: Record of Test Plan–The documentation of the test plan used in the test 

program.

• Appendix B: Listing of Collected Data F– Tabulated details of each data file collected 

during the testing.

• Appendix C: Listing of Geometry Exceptions during Testing–Tabulated details of each 

exception during the testing.

• Appendix D: List of IWS Exceptions from T–Tabulated details of each instrumented 

wheelset exception as per the vehicle/track interaction (V/TI) standards (for track class 6 

and above).
4

2. Test Methodology

A tank car was donated by GE for conducting this research supported by the FRA. The 

instrumentation on the tank car, in addition to DOTX-218’s geometry system, included two IWS 

axles, a brake pressure sensor, eight strain bridges, four vertical load adapters, five 

accelerometers and one instrumented coupler. Thus, the systems simultaneously collected 

information about the features of the track, the speed and location, the motion of the train, the

dynamics of the tank car and the forces and strains on the tank car’s structural parts. 

Car Manufacturer –Union Tank Car

Under Frame Design –UTLZBG Stub Sill w/ Head brace

Coupler Design –A End & B End: SE60DE

Draft Gear Design –E/F Top & Bottom Shelf

2.1. Instrumentation for Testing

The overall instrumentation layout is shown in Figure 2. Details for the sensors are provided in 

the following few paragraphs. 

Figure 2. Instrumentation Layout for the Over-the-Road Testing

The tank car was filled to its weight capacity with water for the test—22,000 gal (184 kips). The 

weight of the car with an empty tank is 78 kips. The filling was done in five steps using tanker 

trucks of approximately a 6,000-gallon capacity—these steps are shown in Table 1. The filling 

was monitored and strains on the bolster were measured before filling, halfway through the first 

tanker truck, and before the second tanker truck. Because the capacity is weight-based, the tank 

car’s tank was not filled to the very top or 100 percent of the tank’s volume. Table 1 provides 

the filling schedule used for the tank car loading from empty to full on basis of the gauge table 

provided by GE. 
5

Table 1. Tank Car Filling Schedule from Tank Trucks

Halfway through first tanker truck 3,238 gal

After first tanker 6,018 gal

After second tanker 12,210 gal

After third tanker 18,253 gal

After partial fourth tanker 22,132 gal

To more accurately measure the strains caused by loading at each point, steel blocks were used 

to control the load path of the carbody’s weight to the truck. Blocks would, for example, be set 

on the left side of the bolster such that the carbody was not touching the center or right contact 

point. A load cell placed in the load path between the carbody and truck at left, right, or center 

contact point, measured the force.

The coupler vertical strains were tested using a device with a hydraulic ram and a load cell,

which applied upward and downward loads to the coupler. This test correlated the vertical 

loading on the coupler to the strains measured in the vertical coupler load channel.

2.1.1 Coupler Forces

Coupler forces were measured between the tank car (A-end) and the rest of the consist. A 

special coupler instrumented with strain bridges was used to measure the longitudinal forces. 

The instrumented coupler was provided by FRA for the purpose of this test. To measure vertical 

forces a pair of shear gages is mounted on each side of the coupler channel as shown in Figure 3. 

These gages are wired using a completion card to form a full bridge. A second set of gages are 

mounted next to the original set as a spare (total eight gages, four on each side). The mounting 

process included grinding the surface to provide a smooth area to which the strain gages could 

adhere. To increase resolution after unsatisfactory initial testing, new gages were applied at a 

location closer to the end of the car but not beyond the points on contact between the coupler 

channel and the coupler.
6

 

Figure 3. Shear Gages Measuring Vertical Coupler Force. Left: Close up of installation. Right: 

New gages on the right replace gages (covered with sealant) on the left which were then 

disconnected

2.1.2 Bolster Forces

A second set of strain gages were mounted on the truck bolster underneath the side bearing as 

shown in Figure 4. One gage is mounted on each side to form a half bridge. Bridge completion 

resistors were used to complete the bridge. A spare set of gages were mounted adjacent to the 

main gages. An identical set of gages were mounted on the truck bolster on the other side of the 

vehicle. These gages were used to measure the side bearing loads.
7

Figure 4. Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Side Bearing Loads

A third set of strain gages are mounted on the each side of the bottom center of the bolster as 

shown in Figure 5. One gage is mounted on each side to form a half bridge. Bridge completion 

resistors are used to complete the bridge. A spare set of gages are mounted adjacent to the main 

gages. These gages are used to measure the bolster center bowl load.

Figure 5. Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Center Bowl Load

2.1.3 Carbody and Axle Accelerations

Accelerometers are installed at several locations on the tank car. The first is a triaxial 

accelerometer mounted on top of the carbody as shown in Figure 6. The second and third 

accelerometers are mounted on the stub sill at each end of the car as shown in Figure 7. These 

measure accelerations in the vertical direction only. The fourth and fifth accelerometers are on 
8

the bearing adapter on both sides of the first axle as shown in Figure 8. These measure 

accelerations on the axle in the vertical direction.

Figure 6. Triaxial Accelerometer Mounted on Top of Carbody

Figure 7. Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Stub Sill and Each End of the Car
9

Figure 8. Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Axle on Both Sides of the Car

2.1.4 Vertical Loads

Vertical load adapters are modified bearing adapters used to measure the vertical wheel forces. 

The vertical load adapters are made using strain gages. After they are calibrated, they are used 

like any other load cells. Figure 9 shows a vertical load adapter mounted on the tank car. Four 

of these were mounted on the B-End of the tank car, opposite to most of the instrumentation.
10

Figure 9. Vertical Load Adapter

2.1.5 Brake Pressure

Brake application data was gathered to correlate the force and strain data to the operation of the 

car. This measurement was achieved by using a pressure transducer to measure the brake 

cylinder pressure. Only one pressure transducer is needed for the entire vehicle. Figure 10

shows the installation of the brake pressure transducer with the wires disconnected and protected 

from moisture before the test.
11

Figure 10. Brake Pressure Transducer

2.1.6 Instrumented Wheel/Rail Forces 

One of the most sophisticated and useful tools to measure the vehicle dynamics is to use 

instrumented wheelsets. Each wheel and axle of one truck is instrumented with strain gages in 

several configurations. Once calibrated, these are used to measure the vertical, lateral, and 

longitudinal forces at the wheel/rail interface. They are also used to measure the contact position 

on the wheel. Figure 11 shows the instrumented wheelsets mounted on the A-end of the tank 

car. The instrumented wheelsets have their own signal conditioning units and computers. There 

are fully synchronized with DOTX-218’s track geometry system. 
12

Figure 11. Instrumented Wheelsets

2.1.7 Data Acquisition and Hardware Settings

Data Acquisition was performed using two separate systems: one for IWS and one for all other 

tank car sensors. The IWS system consists of 32 channels using Ectron transducer conditioner 

amplifiers and Michigan Scientific resolver electronics. Twenty-four channels of strain, four

rotation resolver channels, and four IWS-specific acceleration channels exist. Details for these 

channels are provided in Table 3. These provided input to a QNX computer which used custom 

software to monitor the system, perform calculations and record 64 channel binary files. An 

additional computer was used to display the data in real time. Both computers were monitored 

during the test.

The (non-IWS) data acquisition system (DAQ), which acquired the tank car sensor data, 

consisted of two sixteen-channel signal conditioning units (SCUs) and a portable computer. Of 

the 32 available channels, only 21 were used—1 instrumented coupler channel, 7 acceleration 

channels, 8 strain channels, 4 vertical load channels, and 1 brake pressure channel. Details of 

these channels are provided in Table 2. The output from the SCUs was passed through a filter 

card and into a data acquisition card, both of which were in the computer. LabVIEW based 

software then acquired, recorded and displayed the data in real time. The SCU also provided 

GPS data using an antenna which was affixed to the roof of DOTX-218.

The DOTX-218 track geometry inspection vehicle served two primary functions. It provided a 

location for the signal conditioning equipment, computers, and personnel for the dynamic 

testing. DOTX-218 also collected the track geometry measurements as well as all associated 

data such as GPS location. The track geometry system will provide synchronization signals, 
13

including milepost, feet-after-milepost, sync count, and sync foot to the tank car (DAQ) system 

and the IWS system.

2.1.8 Channel Assignments

Channel assignments and the respective descriptions for the DAQ system and the IWS system 

are provided in Table 2 and Table 3. 

Table 2. Input Channels for DAQ System

Serial Num Type Channel Name

1 Full bridge strain Coupler Longitudinal Force

2 Acceleration Acceleration Carbody Longitudinal

3 Acceleration Acceleration Carbody Lateral

4 Acceleration Acceleration Carbody Vertical

5 Acceleration Stub Sill Vertical A

6 Acceleration Stub Sill Vertical B

7 Acceleration Axle Left Vertical

8 Acceleration Axle Right Vertical

9 1/2 bridge strain Coupler Vertical

10 1/2 bridge strain Coupler Vertical (spare)

11 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Left

12 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Center

13 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Right

14 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Left (spare)

15 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Center (spare)

16 1/2 bridge strain Bolster Right (spare)

17 Full bridge strain Vertical Load Adapter Left Axle 3

18 Full bridge strain Vertical Load Adapter Right Axle 3

19 Full bridge strain Vertical Load Adapter Left Axle 4

20 Full bridge strain Vertical Load Adapter Right Axle 4

21 Pressure Brake Pressure

Table 3. Input Channels for the IWS System

Type Full Name

1 Resolver Resolver, SIN Θ

2 Resolver Resolver, COS Θ

3 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Field Side

4 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Gauge Side

5 Strain Vertical "b" Bridge, 8 gauges, both sides

6 Strain Lateral "a" Bridge

7 Strain Lateral "b" Bridge

8 Strain Torque Bridge (Longitudinal)

9 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Field Side

10 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Gauge Side

11 Strain Vertical "b" Bridge, 8 gauges, both sides

12 Strain Lateral "a" Bridge
14

13 Strain Lateral "b" Bridge

14 Strain Torque Bridge (Longitudinal)

15 Resolver Resolver, SIN Θ

16 Resolver Resolver, COS Θ

17 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Field Side

18 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Gauge Side

19 Strain Vertical "b" Bridge, 8 gauges, both sides

20 Strain Lateral "a" Bridge

21 Strain Lateral "b" Bridge

22 Strain Torque Bridge (Longitudinal)

23 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Field Side

24 Strain Vertical "a" Bridge, Gauge Side

25 Strain Vertical "b" Bridge, 8 gauges, both sides

26 Strain Lateral "a" Bridge

27 Strain Lateral "b" Bridge

28 Strain Torque Bridge (Longitudinal)

29 Acceleration Vertical acceleration, carbody

30 Acceleration Lateral acceleration, carbody

31 Acceleration Vertical acceleration, truck frame

32 Acceleration Lateral acceleration, truck frame

2.2. Test Logistics

The test was conducted between Gettysburg, PA, and Hamlet, NC, on CSX track with an 

additional short run between Biglerville, PA, and Gettysburg on GET track, from June 9 to June 

18, 2008. This route was chosen over a previous plan to test in New England or in the Midwest 

for several reasons. Cold weather was a great concern because of the negative effect snow has 

on the geometry car’s laser sensors. Though the test occurred in June, it was not clear initially 

that this was to be the timeframe. Second, keeping the test in the mid-Atlantic region, 

specifically around Washington, DC, reduced travel costs and greatly increased access to 

ENSCO equipment and personnel in the event of a problem. 

The consist, shown in Figure 12, included four cars: DOTX-218, the instrumented tank car, the 

locomotive and an empty hopper. One of the requirements of instrumented wheelsets is that the 

brakes on those wheels/axles need to be removed or disabled. This is to ensure accurate 

measurements and to prevent damage to the wheelsets. This required that there be at least four 

vehicles in the train consist to ensure that there is at least 85 percent braking. The consist shown 

below was used for most of the testing except the move from Biglerville to Gettysburg. The 

consist used for this short move was Locomotive 1, Locomotive 2, tank car, DOTX-218, and the 

empty hopper. 
15

Figure 12. Consist with Instrumentation

2.3. Test Route and Collected Data

The data were collected over 8 days, between June 9, 2008, and June 18, 2008, on CSX track 

from Gettysburg, PA, to Hamlet, NC, and back as provided in Table 4. Details of the files and 

number of seconds of data collected are provided in Appendix B. A map of route tested is 

shown in Figure 13. 

Table 4. Testing Schedule used for the Tank Car

Day Railroad From To Distance

6/03/2008 GET Biglerville, PA Gettysburg, PA 8

6/09/2008 CSX Gettysburg, PA Baltimore, MD 72

6/10/2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Richmond, VA 155

6/11/2008 CSX Richmond, VA Rocky Mount, NC 105

6/12/2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Hamlet, NC 154

6/13/2008 CSX Hamlet, NC Rocky Mount, NC 154

6/16/2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Richmond, VA 105

6/17/2008 CSX Richmond, VA Baltimore, MD 155

6/18/2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Gettysburg, PA 72
16

Figure 13. Route Map Used for Testing of the Tank Car is Highlighted in Green

2.3.1. Data Collection and On-Board Analysis

The data collection system and the IWS data were monitored in real time for any events of 

interest during the entire test. Log sheets were created to note down any problems with any 

channels and also to keep track of files and associated start and end locations. 

2.3.2. Data Processing Methods

General statistical methods were used to find the maximum, minimum and other relevant 

parameters for each tank car channel. The geometry data was processed against the FRA Track 

Safety Standards (TSS) for the relevant class of track. The instrumented wheelset forces were 

also processed against the relevant FRA TSS. Data was also analyzed for a few important 

parameters to provide insight into the cause of high vertical and longitudinal coupler forces.

2.4. Issues Encountered During Testing

2.4.1. Accelerometer on the carbody 

The carbody accelerometer, which was mounted on the top of the car, had a significant 

magnitude of high frequency vibrations and the suspicion was these vibrations could be localized 

and do not represent rigid body motion. The stub sill accelerometers do not show this behavior 

and are more indicative of the rigid body motion.

 
17

2.4.2. Synchronization problems for IWS

The instrumented wheelset system lost synchronization pulses from the TGMS occasionally. 

This did not affect the overall synchronization because IWS still received the sync foot pulses,

which continued to increment to 4,000 or 6,000 instead of the usual 2,000. The next sync count 

pulse received was automatically updated with the correct value. Therefore, during data 

processing, this was considered and the right synchronized locations were used for analysis. 
18

3. Test Results

This section provides an overview of the results determined from analysis of the data collected 

and events observed during this test program. More detailed results, as well as the original data 

sets, are contained in the various appendices to this report. 

Each section below provides information of the various parameters studied during the over-theroad testing. Results obtained using general statistical analysis are presented in Section 3.1,

results from the acceleration data are presented in Section 3.1.1, results from the force analysis

are presented in Section 3.1.2, results from the geometry data analyses are presented in Section

3.2, and results from the instrumented wheelset analysis are presented in Section 3.3. Section 3.4

covers the analysis of the important parameters by using examples. 

3.1. General Statistical Analysis

As described in Section 2.1.8, measurements were made at multiple locations on the tank car 

with the forces being collected on one of the lead truck of the tank car. The following sections 

present the results obtained from analyses that were conducted on the recorded data by using 

statistical methods. 

3.1.1. Accelerations

Acceleration measurements were made on the carbody, truck and the axle on the tank car. The 

specific locations of these force measurements were previously described in Section 2.1. 

Acceleration data processing was conducted with a digital filter frequency of 10 Hz. The highest 

vertical acceleration observed on the axle during this testing was 21g, measured on the right end 

of the axle. The highest vertical acceleration observed on the left end of the axle was 13g. 

Highest carbody vertical accelerations were observed on the sensor placed on the top of the 

carbody in the center of the car. Maximum positive acceleration observed was 0.9g and 

maximum negative acceleration was -1.1g. Due to the placement of the carbody accelerometer, 

as desired by GE, the accelerations observed at this location might be localized vibration. One of 

the causes might be the proximity to the manway cover at the top of the tank car as show in 

Figure 6. The RMS value for this carbody acceleration was higher than the stub sill 

accelerations recorded indicating sustained localized vibrations. 

Table 5 provides the summary of the statistical methods used for the acceleration measurements 

made on the tank car. 
19

Table 5. General Statistics of Acceleration Measurements on the Tank Car

Min Max Average RMS Units

Parameter Accelerations in G's

Carbody Longitudinal -0.464 0.273 -0.074 0.017 g

Carbody Lateral -0.287 0.454 0.062 0.051 g

Carbody Vertical -1.142 0.873 -0.066 0.103 g

Stub Sill Vertical A End -1.05 0.529 -0.007 0.058 g

Stub Sill Vertical B End -0.472 0.557 0.033 0.059 g

Axle Vertical Left -5.18 13.86 -0.106 0.079 g

Axle Vertical Right -5.01 21.7 0.21 0.082 g

3.1.2. Forces

In addition to the acceleration measurements, force measurements were also made on the bolster, 

vertical bearing, and coupler in the longitudinal and vertical directions. The specific locations of 

these force measurements were previously described in Section 2.1. Force data processing was 

conducted with a digital filter frequency of 25 Hz. A summary of the statistical numbers for the 

forces thus measured is provided in Table 6. The two most important forces considered part of 

the tank car operating environment are the longitudinal and vertical coupler forces. The coupler 

vertical force is the force that is exerted on the stub sill from the ends of the car and is believed 

to be major cause of cracking of the stub sills. During the 1,000 mi of testing conducted, a 

maximum force of 11,860 lbs was observed. This value is lower than the value TTCI has 

reported (approximately 25 kips) and is attributed to the consist being a shorter consist and not 

being a regular freight consist. A maximum longitudinal coupler force of 185 kips was observed 

during this test. A maximum unloading of 37 percent was observed by using the vertical bearing 

load measurements made on the trailing truck. The instrumented wheelsets data will provide a 

better measure of unloading of the wheels. 

Table 6. General Statistics of Force measurements on the Tank Car

Min Max Average

Parameter Force in Pounds

Longitudinal Coupler Force -115695 185779

Coupler Vertical Force -10489 11857

Vertical Load Axle 3 Left 19062 56580 31374

Vertical Load Axle 3 Right 19961 52240 31377
20

Vertical Load Axle 4 Left 18295 57140 31381

Vertical Load Axle 4 Right 18768 53530 31383

Bolster Left Load -10441 114947 19594

Bolster Center Load 11230 141313 85353

Bolster Right Load -3350 57270 19530

3.2. Geometry Data

The collected geometry report was assimilated and a combined exception report was put 

together. Table 7 provides a summary of the number of exceptions found by DOTX-218. More 

details for the exceptions flagged as per FRA TSS are provided in Appendix C. Most of the 

exceptions are narrow gage exceptions and a few vertical surface exceptions. Details of a few 

exceptions including the effect on the tank car are analyzed in Section 3.4.6. 

Table 7. Summary of Geometry Exceptions during the Over-the-road testing from DOTX218

Type of 

Exception

Number of 

Exceptions

Narrow Gage 149

Wide Gage 2

Profile 62' Left 2

Profile 62' Right 2

Runoff Left 1

Runoff Right 1

Warp 62' 3

Twist 31' 3

3.3. Instrumented Wheelset Forces

The IWS forces were analyzed by using the V/TI standards as specified in the FRA TSS for 

classes 6 and above. Although the tank car usually runs at lower speeds and lower classes than 

Class 6, the instrumented wheelset data provide important information in determining the safety 

of the tank cars at locations of interest.

The data was analyzed by using a software program and the number of locations where 

thresholds were exceeded is tabulated below in Table 8. It is observed that only one type of 

exception was triggered during the entire testing route. Four locations were found which 
21

exceeded the current V/TI thresholds and the rest of the locations were triggered based on an 80

percent threshold level of the V/TI standards. Calculations of these exceptions were based on a 

digital filter of 25 Hz for the force data. Details for these exception locations are provided in 

Appendix D.

Table 8. Number of Locations which triggered IWS exceptions

Number of Exceptions

Type Safety Maintenance

Truck Side L/V Left 4 74

Truck Side L/V Right - 50

3.4. Analysis of Important Parameters

A few important parameters were analyzed in depth by using examples of each force case. 

These cases are presented in the following subsections. 

3.4.1. Positive Longitudinal Coupler Force

Positive longitudinal coupler force locations were chosen based on the highest positive values 

determined during the entire testing and by using a filter of 25 Hz. Three locations were 

analyzed in depth by using the array of data collected to see which parameters make the most 

impact on the longitudinal coupler force. The highest location with a longitudinal coupler force 

of 185 kips is presented with Figure 14–16. All the locations analyzed depicted the following 

characteristics:

• They can be attributed to braking, resulting in a jerk in the longitudinal direction.

• The speeds in which these events occurred were between 1–35 miles per hour (mph). 

• Track geometry parameters were not found to be a contributing factor for the 

occurrence of high longitudinal coupler forces.

• Each of these locations had large vertical coupler forces. 
22

Figure 14. Highest Positive Longitudinal Coupler Force Observed During Testing 

Figure 15. Corresponding Vertical Coupler Force for this Event
23

Figure 16. Deceleration of the Consist causes High Positive Longitudinal Coupler Forces

3.4.2. Negative Longitudinal Coupler Force

Negative longitudinal coupler force locations were chosen based on the highest negative values 

determined during the entire testing and by using a filter of 25 Hz. Three locations were 

analyzed in depth using the array of data collected to see which parameters make the most 

impact on these events. The highest location with a longitudinal coupler force of 130 kips is

presented using Figure 17–Figure 19. All the locations analyzed depicted the following 

characteristics:

• They can be attributed to train acceleration.

• The speeds these events occurred were near or at 0 mph speed.

• Speed was too slow to measure track geometry.

• Each of these locations had large vertical coupler forces.

• Water movement inside the tank may be attributed to cyclic force level change in the 

longitudinal direction after the initial jerk.
24

Figure 17. Highest Negative Longitudinal Coupler Force Observed During Testing

Figure 18. Corresponding Vertical Coupler Force for this Event
25

Figure 19. Acceleration of the Consist causes High Negative Longitudinal Coupler Forces

3.4.3. Positive Vertical Coupler Force

Positive vertical coupler force locations were chosen based on the highest positive values 

determined during the entire testing and by using a filter of 25 Hz. Three locations were 

analyzed in depth by using the array of data collected to see which parameters make the most 

impact on these events. The highest location with a vertical coupler force of 10.8 kips is 

presented by using Figure 20–22. All the locations analyzed depicted the following 

characteristics:

• They can be attributed to track geometry specifically, a dip or bump on both rails. 

• The speeds these events occurred were between 24 and 43 mph.

• Although track geometry seems to be the cause of these high vertical coupler forces, TSS 

exceptions for the respective classes were not flagged at these locations.

• An approximate wavelength of 100 ft seemed to be common among the top locations.

• These locations conversely resulted in longitudinal coupler forces at approximately 60

percent of the highest.

• Speed of the train consist was not found to be a contributing factor.
26

Figure 20. Highest Positive Vertical Coupler Force Observed During Testing

Figure 21. Corresponding Longitudinal Coupler Force for this Event
27

Figure 22. Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event

3.4.4. Negative Vertical Coupler Force

Negative vertical coupler force locations were chosen based on the highest negative values 

determined during the entire testing and by using a filter of 25 Hz. Three locations were 

analyzed in depth using the array of data collected to see which parameters make the most 

impact on these events. The highest location with a vertical coupler force of -9.8 kips is 

presented using Figure 23–25. All the locations analyzed depicted the following characteristics:

• Dips or bumps in space curve profile on both rails were observed in the geometry data at 

these locations. 

• An approximate wavelength of 100 ft seemed to be common among the top locations,

which is similar to the positive locations.

• No exceptions (and no near exceptions) to 62-feet MCO profile was observed for these 

locations. 

• One case was also at a switch point on the track, which may have been the input to the 

event.

• Another case had repeated profile deviations that contributed to several negative vertical 

coupler force spikes. 

• These locations conversely resulted in longitudinal coupler forces but not as high as those 

seen for the positive vertical coupler force events.

• Speed of the train consist was not found to be a contributing factor.

Location 

of start

Location 

of end

Location 

of max
28

Figure 23. Highest Negative Vertical Coupler Force Observed During Testing

Figure 24. Corresponding Longitudinal Coupler Force for this Event
29

Figure 25. Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event

3.4.5. Vertical Axle Accelerations

High vertical axle acceleration locations were chosen based on the highest values determined 

during the entire testing and by using a filter of 10 Hz. Three locations were analyzed in depth 

using the array of data collected to see which parameters make the most impact on these events. 

The highest location with a vertical coupler force of -9.7 g is presented using Figure 26–29. All 

the locations analyzed depicted the following characteristics:

• Speeds that these events were observed at range from 35 to 42 mph for the consist.

• These high vertical acceleration events are mostly caused by switches on the track. 

• The automatic location detector (know as ALD) signal showed one or more switches 

for each event analyzed for this case.

• High acceleration events were accompanied by observation of high bolster forces.

• One case also had moderate spike on vertical coupler force caused by dip in space 

curve profile (as described previously).
30

Figure 26. Highest Axle Left Vertical Accelerations during the Testing

Figure 27. Right Side Axle Vertical Accelerations for this Event
31

Figure 28. Corresponding Bolster Forces for this Event

Figure 29. Relevant Track Geometry Data for this Event

Location of Possible Alignment 

exception and maximum accelerations
32

3.4.6. Geometry Defects

The effect of geometry defects on the tank car parameters was studied in a limited fashion using 

a few of the exceptions flagged by DOTX-218. 

3.4.6.1. 62-Feet Profile Deviation

Geometry deviations, which were classified as two class drop locations, were chosen for this 

analysis. One 62-feet profile deviation was chosen for this report as illustrated below in Figure 

30. The corresponding tank car force data is shown in Figure 31 and 32. The analyzed locations 

depicted the following characteristics:

• These locations are very similar in characteristics to the high vertical coupler force 

locations. 

• The big profile deviations seem to result in triggering of several vertical coupler force 

spikes and corresponding longitudinal coupler force locations. 

Figure 30. Two Class Drop in 62-feet Profile Chosen for Analysis
33

Figure 31. Corresponding Longitudinal Forces showing Large Variations

Figure 32. Corresponding Vertical Coupler Forces showing Large Variations
34

4. Obs ervations

The following observations were made based on the test data and analysis provided in the report. 

4.1. Accelerations

1. The axle acceleration provides the input to the carbody and the data does not show 

extremely high acceleration input from the axle as measured by this test. High 

acceleration events were accompanied by observation of high bolster forces. These high 

vertical acceleration events are mostly caused by switches on the track.

2. Maximum carbody accelerations in the negative direction reached about -1g, which 

represents downward motion of the carbody on to the bolster. These accelerations 

represent high vertical forces to the stub sill. 

4.2. Forces

1. The highest vertical coupler forces were attributed to track geometry deviations;

specifically a dip or bump on both rails. The speeds these events occurred at were 

between 24 and 43 mph. Although track geometry seems to be the cause of these high 

vertical coupler forces, TSS exceptions for the respective classes were not flagged at 

these locations. An approximate wavelength of 100 ft seemed to be common among the 

top locations. 

2. The highest longitudinal coupler forces can be attributed to braking/acceleration of the 

consist resulting in a jerk in the longitudinal direction. These events generally occurred 

at low speeds (below 35 mph). Track geometry parameters were not found to be a 

contributing factor for the occurrence of high longitudinal coupler forces. Generally, 

high longitudinal force locations exhibited large vertical coupler forces too. 

3. The vertical and longitudinal coupler forces as reported by this test are lower than what 

TTCI has reported in their revenue service testing conducted on their tank car. It is 

attributed to the lighter and shorter consist used for this test rather than the usual freight 

consists the TTCI car ran in. 

4. Bolster forces were not extensively analyzed but it seems that typically axle acceleration 

events gave rise to changes in the bolster forces. 

5. The analysis of the instrumented wheelset forces show that not many locations exist 

where exceptions took place. There were four V/TI exceptions for the truck side L/V 

ratio threshold as per the V/TI standards (in place for track class 6 and above).
35

5. Conclus ions and Recommendations

The original goals of this evaluation were to gather data from which the load environment and 

contributing factors associated with the tank car operation on a hazmat route could be 

determined. The instrumentation on the tank car, in addition to DOTX-218’s geometry system, 

included two IWS axles, a brake pressure sensor, eight strain bridges, four vertical load adapters, 

five accelerometers and one instrumented coupler. Thus, the systems simultaneously collected 

information about the features of the track, the speed and location, the motion of the train, the 

dynamics of the tank car, and the forces and strains on the tank car’s structural parts. 

The following key conclusions are drawn from testing and analysis:

• The axle acceleration provides the input to the carbody, but the data does not show 

extremely high acceleration input from the axle as measured by this test. High 

acceleration events were accompanied by observation of high bolster forces. These high 

vertical acceleration events are mostly caused by switches on the track.

• Maximum carbody accelerations in the negative direction reached about -1g, which 

represents downward motion of the carbody on to the bolster. These accelerations 

represent high vertical forces to the stub sill. 

• The highest vertical coupler forces were attributed to track geometry deviations 

specifically, a dip or bump on both rails. The speeds in which these events occurred were 

between 24 and 43 mph. Although track geometry seems to be cause of these high 

vertical coupler forces, TSS exceptions for the respective classes were not flagged at 

these locations. An approximate wavelength of 100 ft seemed to be common among the 

top locations. 

• The highest longitudinal coupler forces can be attributed to braking/acceleration of the 

consist resulting in a jerk in the longitudinal direction. These events generally occurred 

at low speeds (below 35 mph). Track geometry parameters were not found to be a 

contributing factor for the occurrence of high longitudinal coupler forces. Generally, 

high longitudinal force locations exhibited large vertical coupler forces too. 

• Bolster forces were not extensively analyzed but it seems that typically axle acceleration 

events gave rise to changes in the bolster forces. 

• The analysis of the instrumented wheelset forces showed us that there were not many 

locations where exceptions took place. Four V/TI exceptions existed for the truck side 

L/V ratio threshold as per the V/TI standards (in place for track class 6 and above). 

• Track geometry appears to be a strong contributing factor to the load environment of the 

tank car especially the vertical and the longitudinal coupler forces. 

The following key recommendations are inferred from testing and analysis:

• An autonomous test should be designed and run for the second phase of this test program. 
36

• This would allow measurement of revenue consist forces and the actual environment in 

which the tank car operates. Data from this test can then be analyzed in a statistical 

manner as well as using correlations to associate these big events with either track 

geometry and/or train handling. 

• Track geometry is a strong contributing factor to the load environment of the car and 

hence the fractures of the stub sill. The test zone selected for the autonomous 

measurement should be measured for track geometry either immediately before or 

immediately after the test.

• The autonomous testing to be conducted in Phase 2 should be conducted on track that has 

lower than average track geometry to study the relationship of the high forces and track 

geometry.
A-1

APPENDIX A RECORD OF TEST PLAN

Test Plan for the Instrumented Tank Car
A-2

Test Plan for the Instrumented Tank Car

1 Background

Fractures have been observed on stub sill tank cars for many years. If undetected and 

unattended, then these fractures can develop into a variety of tank car failures. Although tank car 

ruptures are relatively rare, the potential for a catastrophic hazmat release has made this a critical 

issue within the industry. As a result of this concern, special requirements for the construction, 

inspection, and repair of tank cars have been implemented.

Research into the underlying cause of stub sill tank car cracking and propagation continues. It is 

believed by some that the fractures are initiated by discrete events resulting in high stresses. 

Multiple tests and models have focused on extreme loading events and their contribution to the 

development of the fatigue cracks. Furthermore, the cracks are believed to be propagated by the 

stresses of regular over-the-road service. Under direction of the Tank Car Operating 

Environment Task Force (TCOE-TF) and the Stub Sill Working Group (SSWG), a test program 

was initiated to develop a methodology for both the measurement and reporting of events 

approaching and exceeding stub sill tank car design specifications; the TCOE-TF and the SSWG 

represent cooperative efforts between AAR, the Railway Supply Institute (RSI), FRA and TC. 

Phase I of this test program addressed the development and proof of a method to record vertical 

and longitudinal coupler forces while employing relatively low-cost transducers and 

instrumentation. Phase II of the test program was established to validate the approach developed 

in Phase I by instrumenting several tank cars with a minimal set of sensors and instrumentation 

and conduct over-the-road tests. TTCI has conducted the initial stages of Phase II on a single 

instrumented vehicle. FRA would like to continue the research started within this program with 

a second instrumented tank car.

The objective is to better understand the operational environment and forces exerted on tank cars 

in over-the-road service using methods based on results from the initial efforts conducted during 

Phase II of the TCOE-TF/SSWG research program. The results of this test effort will either (1) 

confirm the industry’s current understanding of fracture initiation and propagation or (2) reveal 

additional factors that are critical to the understanding of the phenomena.

2 Technical Approach

ENSCO will install many different sensors on the tank car including accelerometers, strain 

gages, vertical load adapters, instrumented coupler, instrumented wheelsets, and a pressure 

transducer. With the tank car coupled adjacent to FRA’s T-18 track inspection vehicle, cables 

will run from the sensors to the equipment located on T-18. The data acquisition equipment will 

be synchronized to the track geometry system onboard T-18, which will be used to 

simultaneously measure the track geometry. The tank car will be dynamically tested in a special 

test over normal freight track.
A-3

3 Instrumentation

ENSCO plans to install instrumentation on the tank car to better understand the environment that 

it experiences. These sensors include accelerometers, strain gages, vertical load adapters, 

instrumented coupler, instrumented wheelsets, and a pressure transducer. These sensors will be 

cabled to the signal conditioning equipment and computers onboard T-18.

Strain gages will be attached in several locations to obtain the forces in several components. The 

first measures the vertical coupler force. A pair of shear gages is mounted on each side of the 

coupler channel as shown in Figure 1. These gages are wired to form a full bridge. A second set 

of gages are mounted next to the original set as a spare. These are cabled to a signal 

conditioning unit onboard T-18.

 

Figure 1. Shear Gages Measuring Vertical Coupler Force

A second set of strain gages are mounted on the truck bolster underneath the side bearing as 

shown in Figure 2. One gage is mounted on each side to form a half bridge. Bridge completion 

resistors are used to complete the bridge. A spare set of gages are mounted adjacent to the main 

gages. An identical set of gages are mounted on the truck bolster on the other side of the vehicle. 

These gages are used to measure the side bearing loads.
A-4

 Figure 2. Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Side Bearing Loads

A third set of strain gages are mounted on each side of the bottom center of the bolster as shown 

in Figure 3. One gage is mounted on each side to form a half bridge. Bridge completion 

resistors are used to complete the bridge. A spare set of gages are mounted adjacent to the main 

gages. These gages are used to measure the bolster center bowl load.

 

Figure 3. Strain Gages Measuring Bolster Center Bowl Load

Several accelerometers are installed at several locations on the tank car. The first is a triaxial 

accelerometer mounted on top of the carbody as shown in Figure 4. A second accelerometer will 

be mounted on top of the carbody near the plate shown in Figure 4 (several feet from the first 

accelerometer). This will be used to correlate with previous data collect by the car owner. A 

third and fourth accelerometer will be mounted on the stub sill at each end of the car as shown in 

Figure 5. These will measure the vertical accelerations. A fifth and sixth accelerometer will be 

mounted on the bearing adapter on both sides of the first axle as shown in Figure 6. These will 

measure the vertical axle accelerations.
A-5

Figure 4. Triaxial Accelerometer Mounted on Top of Carbody

Figure 5. Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Stub Sill and Each End of the Car
A-6

Figure 6. Vertical Accelerometer Mounted on the Axle on Both Sides of the Car

Vertical load adapters are modified bearing adapters used to measure the vertical wheel forces. 

The vertical load adapters are made using strain gages. After calibrated, they are used like any 

other load cells. Figure 7 shows a vertical load adapter mounted on the tank car. Four of these 

are mounted on the B-End of the tank car, opposite most of the instrumentation.

Figure 7. Vertical Load Adapter
A-7

One important piece of information needed is when the brakes have been applied. This 

measurement is achieved by using a pressure transducer to measure the brake cylinder pressure. 

Only one pressure transducer is needed for the entire vehicle. Figure 8 shows the installation of 

the brake pressure transducer.

Figure 8. Brake Pressure Transducer

One of the best tools to measure the vehicle dynamics is to use instrumented wheelsets. Each 

wheel and axle of one truck is instrumented with strain gages in several configurations. Once 

calibrated, these are used to measure the vertical, lateral, and longitudinal forces at the wheel/rail 

interface. They are also used to measure the contact position on the wheel. Figure 9 shows the 

instrumented wheelsets mounted on the A-end of the tank car. The instrumented wheelsets have 

their own signal conditioning units and computers. They are fully synchronized with T-18’s 

track geometry system. One of the requirements of instrumented wheelsets is that the brakes on 

those wheels/axles need to be removed or disabled. This is to ensure accurate measurements and 

to prevent damage to the wheelsets. This will require at least four vehicles in the train consist to 

ensure that there is at least 85 percent braking.
A-8

Figure 9. Instrumented Wheelsets

The last sensor is an instrumented coupler as shown in Figure 10. The instrumented coupler uses 

strain gages to measure the longitudinal coupler force. Because only one instrumented coupler 

was available, it will be mounted between the tank car and the rest of the consist (opposite T-18).

Figure 9. Instrumented Wheelsets

The T-18 track geometry inspection vehicle will serve two primary functions. It will provide a 

location for the signal conditioning equipment, computers, and personnel for the dynamic 

testing. T-18 will also collect the track geometry measurements as well as all associated data 
A-9

such as GPS location. The track geometry system will provide synchronization signals to the 

tank car system and the instrumented wheelset system.

4 Installation

ENSCO will perform the installation at its facility in Biglerville, PA. Strain gages will be 

installed using weldable gages to ensure a good bond during the cold weather. A crane or boom 

truck will be used to lift the tank car to install the instrumented wheelsets, vertical load adapters, 

and instrumented coupler. The accelerometers will be bolted at the appropriate locations. The 

cabling will run the length of the tank to T-18 while avoiding the walkways where possible. 

Appropriate service loops will be used between the truck and carbody and between the tank car 

and T-18.

5 Calibration

All of the sensors will need to be calibrated before dynamic testing. The accelerometers and 

pressure transducer have been calibrated by the manufacturer. The instrumented wheelsets, 

vertical load adapters, and instrumented coupler have been calibrated in the lab. The strain gages 

mounted to the tank car will need to be calibrated in the field. By using a crane or boom truck, 

the bolster side bearing loads and the bolster center bowl load will be calibrated by lifting the 

carbody. Then the load will be applied one at a time through each side bearing and the center 

bowl. The vertical coupler force will be calibrated by lifting the coupler.

6 Train Consist

The special train will consist of at least four vehicles. This is required because the brakes on one 

truck of the tank car were removed for the instrumented wheelsets. This is required to ensure 

that there is at least 85 percent braking on the train. The fourth vehicle can be a freight vehicle 

or another locomotive, depending on availability. Figure 10 shows the train consisting of a 

locomotive, a vehicle of any type, the tank car (NATX 250525), and T-18 (DOTX 218).

Figure 10: Train Consist
A-10

7 Dynamic Testing

To completely check out the system, a short shakedown test will be performed. Because the 

installation will occur in Biglerville, PA, which is located in approximately the middle of the 

Gettysburg and Northern Railroad, the shakedown test will start in Biglerville. The train will 

travel in either direction to Mount Holly Springs or Gettysburg and back to Biglerville. This 

railroad has a maximum speed limit of 10 mph. After completion of this trip, the data will be 

analyzed and any corrections to the system will be made.

The over-the-road dynamic test will be performed over an approximately 500-mile roundtrip. 

The track geometry system cannot measure during a snow storm or after a heavy snow. The test 

route will be longer than necessary to accommodate the need to extend it if there is snow. If all 

the data is good, the trip will be cut short to the normal length. The test route will start from 

Biglerville, PA. The train will travel south to Gettysburg, PA, on the Gettysburg and Northern

railroad. Then the train will travel east to Baltimore, MD on the CSX railroad. The train will 

continue south on CSX to Hamlet, NC. Assuming that the data is good to this point, the train 

will return on the same route. If necessary, the train will continue south on CSX to Savannah, 

GA, before returning back on the same route. The test will end back at Biglerville, PA. Table 1 

shows the full schedule if the extra data is needed. Table 2 show the reduced schedule if all of 

the data is good. The actual dates may change due to scheduling requirements.

Table 1. Full Test Schedule Including Extra Testing If Needed

Date Railroad Origin Destination Distance

5-5-2008 GET Biglerville, PA Gettysburg, PA 8

5-6-2008 CSX Gettysburg, PA Baltimore, MD 72

5-7-2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Richmond, VA 155

5-8-2008 CSX Richmond, VA Rocky Mount, NC 105

5-9-2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Hamlet, NC 154

5-12-2008 CSX Hamlet, NC Columbia, SC 108

5-13-2008 CSX Columbia, SC Savannah, GA 140

5-14-2008 CSX Savannah, GA Columbia, SC 140

5-15-2008 CSX Columbia, SC Hamlet, NC 108

5-16-2008 CSX Hamlet, NC Rocky Mount, NC 154

5-19-2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Richmond, VA 105

5-20-2008 CSX Richmond, VA Baltimore, MD 155

5-21-2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Gettysburg, PA 72

5-22-2008 GET Gettysburg, PA Biglerville, PA 8

Table 2. Shortened Test Schedule If Data Is Good

Date Railroad Origin Destination Distance

5-5-2008 GET Biglerville, PA Gettysburg, PA 8

5-6-2008 CSX Gettysburg, PA Baltimore, MD 72

5-7-2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Richmond, VA 155

5-8-2008 CSX Richmond, VA Rocky Mount, NC 105

5-9-2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Hamlet, NC 154

5-12-2008 CSX Hamlet, NC Rocky Mount, NC 154

5-13-2008 CSX Rocky Mount, NC Richmond, VA 105

5-14-2008 CSX Richmond, VA Baltimore, MD 155
A-11

5-15-2008 CSX Baltimore, MD Gettysburg, PA 72

5-16-2008 GET Gettysburg, PA Biglerville, PA 8
B-1

APPENDIX B Listing of Collected Data Files

Filename Time 

(min) Day

20080609CSX01 34.1 6/9/2008

20080609CSX02 22.1 6/9/2008

20080609CSX03 16.2 6/9/2008

20080609CSX04 27.1 6/9/2008

20080609CSX05 32.1 6/9/2008

20080609CSX06 34.7 6/9/2008

20080609CSX07 18.2 6/9/2008

20080609CSX08 63.2 6/9/2008

20080609CSX09 42.2 6/9/2008

20080610CSX01 6 6/10/2008

20080610CSX02 4.8 6/10/2008

20080610CSX03 8.3 6/10/2008

20080610CSX04 24.1 6/10/2008

20080610CSX05 15 6/10/2008

20080610CSX06 25.4 6/10/2008

20080610CSX07 4.7 6/10/2008

20080610CSX08 45.2 6/10/2008

20080610CSX09 59.7 6/10/2008

20080610CSX10 16.9 6/10/2008

20080610CSX11 63.5 6/10/2008

20080610CSX12 39.2 6/10/2008

20080610CSX13 53.4 6/10/2008

20080610CSX15 4.2 6/10/2008

20080610CSX17 4.2 6/10/2008

20080610CSX18 10.8 6/10/2008

20080610CSX19 1.2 6/10/2008

20080611CSX01 2.1 6/11/2008

20080611CSX02 15.4 6/11/2008

20080611CSX03 12.5 6/11/2008

20080611CSX04 29.1 6/11/2008

20080611CSX05 15.4 6/11/2008

20080611CSX06 62.7 6/11/2008

20080611CSX07 3.8 6/11/2008

20080611CSX08 70.5 6/11/2008

20080611CSX09 41.8 6/11/2008

20080611CSX10 27.2 6/11/2008

20080612CSX01 5.7 6/12/2008
B-2

Filename Time 

(min) Day

20080612CSX02 38.4 6/12/2008

20080612CSX03 66.9 6/12/2008

20080612CSX04 20.5 6/12/2008

20080612CSX05 107.3 6/12/2008

20080612CSX06 6 6/12/2008

20080612CSX07 1.8 6/12/2008

20080612CSX08 23.8 6/12/2008

20080612CSX09 60.2 6/12/2008

20080613CSX01 36.8 6/13/2008

20080613CSX02 29.7 6/13/2008

20080613CSX03 14.2 6/13/2008

20080613CSX04 1.2 6/13/2008

20080613CSX05 48.1 6/13/2008

20080613CSX06 4.2 6/13/2008

20080613CSX07 33.8 6/13/2008

20080613CSX08 46.8 6/13/2008

20080613CSX09 54.9 6/13/2008

20080613CSX10 4.4 6/13/2008

20080616CSX01 2.9 6/16/2008

20080616CSX02 11.4 6/16/2008

20080616CSX03 20.3 6/16/2008

20080616CSX04 40.6 6/16/2008

20080616CSX05 18 6/16/2008

20080616CSX06 19.7 6/16/2008

20080616CSX07 32.9 6/16/2008

20080616CSX08 5.9 6/16/2008

20080616CSX09 28.6 6/16/2008

20080616CSX10 31.4 6/16/2008

20080616CSX11 5.2 6/16/2008

20080616CSX12 1.1 6/16/2008

20080617CSX01 25.6 6/17/2008

20080617CSX02 17.3 6/17/2008

20080617CSX03 11.9 6/17/2008

20080617CSX04 6.5 6/17/2008

20080617CSX05 2.2 6/17/2008

20080617CSX06 16.5 6/17/2008

20080617CSX07 12.2 6/17/2008

20080617CSX08 4.3 6/17/2008

20080617CSX09 11.7 6/17/2008

20080617CSX10 8.1 6/17/2008
B-3

Filename Time 

(min) Day

20080617CSX11 69.3 6/17/2008

20080617CSX12 83.8 6/17/2008

20080617CSX13 63.9 6/17/2008

20080617CSX14 39.5 6/17/2008

20080618CSX01 1.5 6/18/2008

20080618CSX02 1.5 6/18/2008

20080618CSX03 9.4 6/18/2008

20080618CSX04 3.3 6/18/2008

20080618CSX05 3.7 6/18/2008

20080618CSX06 6.2 6/18/2008

20080618CSX08 61.1 6/18/2008

20080618CSX09 40.3 6/18/2008

20080618CSX10 43.5 6/18/2008

20080618CSX11 67.6 6/18/2008
C-1

APPENDIX C Listing of Geometry Exceptions during Testing

File RUN ID MP FT Parameter Value Length Curve Actual Posted Track Latitude Longitude

2008060303004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008060304004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008060305004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008060306004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008060901004

71 137 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 E 0 2 5 39.83218 -77.23531

71 1465 Gage Narrow 55.8 4 T 0 2 5 39.8321 -77.2306

71 1516 L Prof 62 -3.06 6 B 0 2 5 39.8321 -77.23042

71 1590 Gage Narrow 55.85 2 B 0 2 5 39.83211 -77.23016

71 4117 Gage Narrow 55.86 2 T 0 2 5 39.83444 -77.22173

66 2209 Gage Narrow 55.75 7 C 0 2 5 39.85772 -77.1458

66 2275 Gage Narrow 55.69 7 C 0 2 5 39.85775 -77.14557

64 2757 Gage Narrow 55.81 3 T 0 2 5 39.86345 -77.10892

2008060902004 56 9146 Twist 31 2.21 9 B 0 2 5 39.80445 -76.9847

2008060903004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008060904004 47 3673 Gage Narrow 55.78 4 B 0 2 5 39.79926 -76.8614

2008061002004

0 1709 Warp 62 2.3 60 B 1 3 5 39.25947 -76.65261

0 4421 Warp 62 2.53 60 C 1 3 4 39.25522 -76.66036

6 5822 Gage Wide 57.98 7 E 1 3 2 39.2241 -76.7097

17 265 Twist 31 1.35 5 B 2 4 2 39.13467 -76.78461

32 9506 Gage Narrow 55.85 4 E 0 2 5 38.9447 -76.93797

114 2304 L Prof 62 -3.55 16 T 0 2 5 38.87765 -76.99223

114 2307 R Prof 62 -3.91 18 T 0 2 5 38.87765 -76.99223

114 5054 R Prof 62 -3.42 12 T 0 2 5 38.88022 -77.00131

103 9850 Gage Narrow 55.88 2 T 0 4 2 38.79832 -77.13467

76 1021 Gage Narrow 55.87 4 C 0 5 2 38.48413 -77.31474

71 3923 Gage Narrow 55.81 4 C 0 4 2 38.41594 -77.36198

62 2451 Gage Narrow 55.84 8 C 0 4 2 38.32537 -77.45039

62 2577 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 C 0 4 2 38.32503 -77.45042

62 2591 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 C 0 4 2 38.32499 -77.45042

62 2641 Gage Narrow 55.82 20 C 0 4 2 38.32485 -77.45042

62 2667 Gage Narrow 55.85 9 C 0 4 2 38.32478 -77.45042

62 2903 Gage Narrow 55.75 55 C 0 4 2 38.32413 -77.45039

62 3003 Gage Narrow 55.83 8 E 0 4 2 38.32386 -77.45035

62 3029 Gage Narrow 55.76 11 E 0 4 2 38.32378 -77.45033

62 3067 Gage Narrow 55.85 10 E 0 4 2 38.32368 -77.45032

62 3110 Gage Narrow 55.81 9 E 0 4 2 38.32356 -77.45029

62 3144 Gage Narrow 55.8 12 E 0 4 2 38.32347 -77.45028

62 3169 Gage Narrow 55.88 4 E 0 4 2 38.3234 -77.45026
C-2

27 775 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 B 0 4 2 37.92765 -77.45765

27 1153 Gage Narrow 55.84 18 C 0 4 2 37.92715 -77.4588

27 1182 Gage Narrow 55.87 4 C 0 4 2 37.92711 -77.45889

27 1405 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 C 0 4 2 37.92677 -77.45953

16 1104 Gage Narrow 55.8 9 T 0 4 2 37.774 -77.47667

4 4278 Gage Narrow 55.82 6 C 0 2 5 37.59678 -77.48653

4 4376 Gage Narrow 55.8 5 E 0 2 5 37.59654 -77.48637

3 2779 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 5 37.58762 -77.48037

3 4700 Gage Narrow 55.87 4 T 0 2 5 37.5829 -77.47738

3 4867 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 B 0 2 5 37.5825 -77.47709

2008060906004

10 1141 Gage Narrow 55.79 6 T 0 2 5 39.36704 -76.72602

10 3960 Gage Narrow 55.8 4 T 0 2 5 39.36081 -76.7205

10 10073 Gage Narrow 55.69 16 E 0 2 5 39.3519 -76.70399

8 3076 Gage Narrow 55.71 11 T 0 2 5 39.34643 -76.69408

2008061101004

38 356 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 C 0 3 2 37.01917 -77.39307

38 1228 Gage Narrow 55.87 5 C 0 3 2 37.01677 -77.39307

38 1391 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 C 0 3 2 37.01633 -77.3931

38 1400 Gage Narrow 55.86 6 C 0 3 2 37.0163 -77.3931

38 1412 Gage Narrow 55.87 4 C 0 3 2 37.01627 -77.3931

38 2248 Gage Narrow 55.87 8 C 0 3 2 37.01398 -77.39337

81 2227 Gage Narrow 55.82 4 T 0 5 1 36.43055 -77.59432

81 2365 Gage Narrow 55.84 8 T 0 5 1 36.43029 -77.59467

81 2580 Gage Narrow 55.68 13 T 0 5 1 36.42989 -77.5952

83 2041 Gage Narrow 55.86 3 C 0 3 1 36.41931 -77.60525

2008061201004

135 5292 Gage Narrow 55.83 4 T 0 4 1 35.7196 -77.90958

135 5758 Gage Narrow 55.77 9 T 0 4 1 35.71843 -77.91022

177 3863 L Runoff -1.62 31 T 3 5 5 35.40504 -78.52387

207 3115 Gage Narrow 55.77 10 T 0 4 5 35.07755 -78.86089

207 3259 Gage Narrow 55.77 8 T 0 4 5 35.07732 -78.86127

207 3331 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 4 5 35.0772 -78.86147

207 3394 Gage Narrow 55.75 11 T 0 4 5 35.07707 -78.86163

239 4948 Gage Narrow 55.61 15 T 0 5 5 34.69629 -79.17703

281 2244 Gage Narrow 55.85 2 T 0 2 6 34.71085 -79.27431

281 2284 Gage Narrow 55.87 3 T 0 2 6 34.7109 -79.27444

281 2334 Gage Narrow 55.86 1 T 0 2 6 34.71095 -79.27459

281 2491 Gage Narrow 55.76 8 T 0 2 6 34.71112 -79.27507

281 2727 Gage Narrow 55.82 3 T 0 2 6 34.71138 -79.27579

281 2758 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71141 -79.27589

281 3182 Gage Narrow 55.84 3 T 0 2 6 34.71187 -79.27718

281 3344 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71205 -79.27768

281 3418 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71213 -79.27791
C-3

281 3847 Gage Narrow 55.75 9 T 0 2 6 34.7126 -79.27921

281 4225 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 2 6 34.71301 -79.28037

281 4458 Gage Narrow 55.82 5 T 0 2 6 34.71326 -79.28109

280 720 Gage Narrow 55.86 4 T 0 2 6 34.71487 -79.28557

280 2203 Gage Narrow 55.86 2 T 0 2 6 34.71647 -79.29008

280 2628 Gage Narrow 55.85 6 T 0 2 6 34.71694 -79.29138

280 2814 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 2 6 34.71715 -79.29196

280 3127 Gage Narrow 55.74 5 T 0 2 6 34.71748 -79.29291

280 3243 Gage Narrow 55.84 2 T 0 2 6 34.7176 -79.29327

280 3323 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 2 6 34.71767 -79.2935

280 3360 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 2 6 34.7177 -79.29361

280 3400 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 2 6 34.71775 -79.29373

280 3437 Gage Narrow 55.84 4 T 0 2 6 34.71779 -79.29385

280 3509 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 2 6 34.71787 -79.29407

280 3546 Gage Narrow 55.87 3 T 0 2 6 34.71791 -79.29417

280 4195 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71862 -79.29616

280 4309 Gage Narrow 55.87 2 T 0 2 6 34.71874 -79.29651

280 4471 Gage Narrow 55.87 3 T 0 2 6 34.71891 -79.297

280 4508 Gage Narrow 55.82 4 T 0 2 6 34.71895 -79.29712

280 4546 Gage Narrow 55.83 3 T 0 2 6 34.71899 -79.29723

280 4587 Gage Narrow 55.83 5 T 0 2 6 34.71904 -79.29736

280 4625 Gage Narrow 55.81 5 T 0 2 6 34.71909 -79.29747

279 667 Gage Narrow 55.75 7 T 0 4 5 34.72053 -79.30167

272 2838 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 4 5 34.76324 -79.42123

271 4646 Gage Narrow 55.85 4 T 0 4 5 34.771 -79.44283

265 534 Gage Narrow 55.79 10 T 0 4 5 34.80172 -79.52817

263 2046 R Runoff -2.24 31 T 2 4 5 34.81457 -79.56394

2008061301004

268 1588 Gage Narrow 55.85 3 T 0 4 5 34.78166 -79.4724

275 1539 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 4 5 34.74127 -79.35964

278 5056 Gage Narrow 55.84 5 T 0 4 5 34.72054 -79.30164

279 746 Gage Narrow 55.85 3 T 0 2 6 34.71909 -79.29746

279 784 Gage Narrow 55.86 4 T 0 2 6 34.71905 -79.29735

279 824 Gage Narrow 55.85 3 T 0 2 6 34.71901 -79.29723

279 864 Gage Narrow 55.81 5 T 0 2 6 34.71896 -79.2971

279 901 Gage Narrow 55.84 4 T 0 2 6 34.71893 -79.29699

279 1059 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 2 6 34.71875 -79.29651

279 1173 Gage Narrow 55.85 2 T 0 2 6 34.71862 -79.29616

279 1825 Gage Narrow 55.87 5 T 0 2 6 34.71791 -79.29417

279 1900 Gage Narrow 55.88 2 T 0 2 6 34.71783 -79.29394

279 1934 Gage Narrow 55.87 4 T 0 2 6 34.71779 -79.29383

279 2009 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 T 0 2 6 34.71771 -79.2936
C-4

279 2046 Gage Narrow 55.86 2 T 0 2 6 34.71767 -79.29349

279 2125 Gage Narrow 55.85 1 T 0 2 6 34.71759 -79.29325

279 2244 Gage Narrow 55.77 5 T 0 2 6 34.71746 -79.29288

279 2553 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71712 -79.29194

280 793 Gage Narrow 55.85 4 T 0 2 6 34.71323 -79.28107

280 1408 Gage Narrow 55.77 7 T 0 2 6 34.71256 -79.27919

280 2358 Gage Narrow 55.79 5 T 0 2 6 34.71152 -79.27629

280 2763 Gage Narrow 55.8 7 T 0 2 6 34.71108 -79.27505

280 2914 Gage Narrow 55.87 1 T 0 2 6 34.71091 -79.27459

212 6428 Gage Narrow 55.89 2 B 0 3 1 35.04045 -78.89343

212 6441 Gage Narrow 55.88 2 B 0 3 1 35.04047 -78.89341

208 2033 Gage Narrow 55.75 10 T 0 3 1 35.07714 -78.86161

208 2087 Gage Narrow 55.88 2 T 0 3 1 35.07723 -78.86147

208 2167 Gage Narrow 55.74 9 T 0 4 1 35.07736 -78.86125

208 2313 Gage Narrow 55.8 11 T 0 4 1 35.0776 -78.86086

146 699 Gage Narrow 55.86 4 T 0 5 5 35.63267 -78.04066

133 5384 Gage Narrow 55.85 2 T 0 5 2 35.77162 -77.88098

133 5450 Gage Narrow 55.86 4 T 0 5 2 35.77178 -77.88089

133 5888 Gage Narrow 55.84 4 T 0 5 2 35.77288 -77.88028

126 2164 Gage Narrow 55.85 3 T 0 5 2 35.85652 -77.8343

122 2649 Gage Narrow 55.83 10 T 0 3 7 35.91197 -77.80791

2008061601004

83 2933 Gage Narrow 55.61 14 T 0 3 5 36.42989 -77.59518

83 3277 Gage Narrow 55.87 3 T 0 3 5 36.43053 -77.59433

80 2035 Gage Narrow 55.76 8 C 0 4 2 36.45789 -77.55842

39 2966 Gage Narrow 55.87 10 C 0 3 2 37.014 -77.39335

39 3981 Gage Narrow 55.83 5 C 0 3 2 37.01679 -77.39305

39 4850 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 C 0 3 2 37.01918 -77.39305

2008061701004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008061702004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008061703004 No two class drop exceptions found

2008061703004

0 4328 Gage Narrow 55.86 4 T 0 2 3 37.58125 -77.47521

15 4637 Gage Narrow 55.85 7 T 0 4 2 37.77404 -77.47663

60 7471 Gage Narrow 55.83 10 B 0 4 2 38.32347 -77.4503

60 7503 Gage Narrow 55.86 5 B 0 4 2 38.32356 -77.45033

60 7586 Gage Narrow 55.87 7 B 0 4 2 38.32379 -77.45036

60 7757 Gage Narrow 55.79 24 C 0 4 2 38.32425 -77.45042

60 7983 Gage Narrow 55.85 12 C 0 4 2 38.32487 -77.45044

60 8185 Gage Narrow 55.86 2 C 0 4 2 38.32543 -77.4504

98 2419 Gage Narrow 55.88 1 C 0 4 2 38.77099 -77.15977

98 2595 Gage Narrow 55.85 4 C 0 4 2 38.77138 -77.15942

9 830 Gage Wide 57.9 5 C 1 3 2 39.22412 -76.70965
C-5

5 8286 Warp 62 2.45 59 B 1 3 1 39.25536 -76.66015

2008061801004

5 4876 Gage Narrow 55.87 3 B 0 2 5 39.33543 -76.6701

7 2118 Gage Narrow 55.77 13 T 0 2 5 39.34645 -76.69413

8 430 Gage Narrow 55.72 16 B 0 2 5 39.35194 -76.70404

8 6529 Gage Narrow 55.82 4 T 0 2 5 39.36081 -76.72051

8 8677 Gage Narrow 55.86 2 T 0 2 5 39.36572 -76.72444

8 9351 Gage Narrow 55.74 9 T 0 3 5 39.36707 -76.72607

0 1473 Twist 31 2.34 10 E 0 2 5 39.80446 -76.98477

54 2272 Gage Narrow 55.85 9 T 0 2 5 39.80449 -76.9876

70 3870 Gage Narrow 55.82 5 E 0 2 5 39.8321 -77.23064
E-1

APPENDIX D Lis t of IWS Exceptions from Tes ting

Parameter % 

Level Value Length Seconds 

into File

Sync 

CT

Sync 

FT MP Feet Speed Health Safety or 

Maintenance

File name: 2008060910999F01.iex

Trk L/V L 80.4 0.482 15.6' 2228.827 51 14795 20 8714 15.1 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061002004F01.iex

Trk L/V L 81 0.486 42.6' 1181.787 11 958 6 4534 22.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 86.2 0.517 52.3' 1184.207 11 1039 6 4615 22.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 86.7 0.52 55.6' 1185.55 11 1084 6 4660 22.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80 0.48 40.5' 1187.453 11 1147 6 4723 22.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 91.1 0.546 77.4' 1189.867 11 1228 6 4804 22.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.4 0.495 47.5' 1191.617 11 1286 6 4863 22.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.2 0.481 48.3' 1216.777 12 183 6 5759 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 93.6 0.561 188.5' 1219.41 12 278 6 5854 24.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83.9 0.503 34.1' 1241.457 12 1063 6 6639 23.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83 0.498 21.3' 1244.07 12 1155 6 6731 23.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 88.5 0.531 49.1' 1245.493 12 1205 6 6781 24 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 88.8 0.533 16.6' 1246.903 12 1255 6 6831 24.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 84.3 0.506 21.0' 1247.597 12 1280 6 6856 24.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 85.3 0.512 19.3' 1255.98 12 1581 6 7158 24.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.4 0.488 51.1' 1258.62 12 1676 6 7253 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 89.4 0.537 46.6' 1259.007 12 1690 6 7267 24.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 87.8 0.527 41.6' 1263.453 12 1850 6 7426 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 94.4 0.566 151.9' 1270.593 13 108 6 7684 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 87.6 0.526 490.3' 1271.007 13 122 6 7699 24.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.5 0.495 64.2' 1348.517 14 963 6 10540 23.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.7 0.496 36.0' 1350.873 14 1045 6 10622 23.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 87.8 0.527 31.1' 1352.91 14 1115 6 10692 23.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 86.3 0.518 102.6' 1354.77 14 1179 6 10755 23.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 84.7 0.508 81.9' 1359 14 1323 6 10899 22.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.1 0.493 45.6' 1359.71 14 1346 6 10923 22.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 95.7 0.574 61.7' 1361.69 14 1413 6 10989 22.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 87.2 0.523 48.9' 1363.557 14 1477 6 11053 22.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 99 0.594 146.2' 1367.243 14 1602 6 11178 23.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.7 0.49 109.1' 1370.253 14 1705 6 11282 23.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 96.7 0.58 117.2' 1374.49 14 1853 6 11429 23.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 96.7 0.58 145.8' 1379.643 15 35 6 11611 24.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.7 0.49 36.3' 1382.113 15 123 6 11699 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.2 0.487 356.9' 1382.163 15 125 6 11701 24.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 86.1 0.517 108.8' 1386.19 15 271 10 46 24.7 -------- 2
E-2

Trk L/V L 99.1 0.594 196.5' 1383.92 15 188 6 11765 24.5 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061002004F02.iex

Trk L/V L 85.5 0.513 17.1' 1039.95 68 14617 32 4106 20.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.6 0.49 32.4' 1041.86 68 14676 32 4165 20.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.1 0.486 47.9' 1109.523 68 16818 32 6307 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 93.7 0.562 55.0' 1108.64 68 16790 32 6279 21.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.9 0.492 122.2' 1131.703 68 17547 32 7036 22.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 84.5 0.507 13.2' 1134.893 68 17653 32 7143 22.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 82.6 0.496 30.2' 1136.403 68 17703 32 7192 22.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83.6 0.502 27.1' 1140.3 68 17827 32 7316 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.5 0.483 20.6' 1141.333 68 17860 32 7349 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 97 0.582 45.5' 1152.523 68 18223 32 7713 22.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 85.3 0.512 48.6' 1154.41 68 18287 32 7776 22.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 93.3 0.56 159.1' 1157.553 68 18392 32 7881 22.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.6 0.484 45.3' 1160.967 68 18504 32 7993 22.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 88.7 0.532 135.3' 1165.747 68 18657 32 8146 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 84.1 0.505 22.7' 1169.107 68 18761 32 8251 20.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 96.4 0.578 22.4' 1171.227 68 18827 32 8316 20.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 88 0.528 26.7' 1191.073 68 19424 32 8914 20.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.9 0.485 78.2' 1595.82 83 461 119 2333 21.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 109.8 0.659 12.3' 1596.537 83 461 119 2333 21 -------- 1

Trk L/V L 103.7 0.622 5.3' 1597.267 83 461 119 2333 20.9 -------- 1

Trk L/V L 110.5 0.663 8.0' 1597.493 83 461 119 2333 20.9 -------- 1

Trk L/V L 101.1 0.606 6.5' 1605.043 83 461 119 2333 20 -------- 1

Trk L/V R 85.2 0.511 393.1' 1597.017 83 461 119 2333 20.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.3 0.488 208.3' 1617.227 85 319 119 2660 19.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 84.6 0.507 24.8' 1736.643 85 3750 117 3116 17.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.3 0.482 14.9' 3404.237 102 1007 111 3553 13.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.6 0.484 32.0' 3409.743 102 1123 111 3669 14.7 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061002004F03.iex

Trk L/V R 87 0.522 27.3' 155.913 106 1914 109 3197 17.8 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061101004F01.iex

Trk L/V L 82.7 0.496 16.6' 408.1 8 1553 0 575 35.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 83.9 0.504 40.1' 411.94 8 1753 0 776 35.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 84.4 0.506 35.2' 413.477 8 1834 0 856 35.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83.9 0.503 23.9' 492 10 1920 0 4942 39.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 84.2 0.505 23.2' 492.647 10 1958 0 4980 39.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83.2 0.499 13.9' 495.223 11 112 0 5134 40.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.1 0.48 17.2' 495.933 11 155 0 5177 40.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.1 0.486 32.8' 496.797 11 207 0 5229 41.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80 0.48 39.3' 497.4 11 244 0 5266 41.4 -------- 2
E-3

Trk L/V R 88.3 0.53 51.3' 498.327 11 301 0 5323 41.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 84.1 0.504 958.2' 496.273 11 175 0 5198 41 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.9 0.485 13.9' 498.923 11 338 0 5360 41.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81 0.486 44.6' 1058.417 25 753 5 1956 37.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 92.6 0.556 39.7' 2826.827 71 562 21 9787 10 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.2 0.481 46.6' 2858.507 71 1096 21 10321 12.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 89.7 0.538 11.9' 2860.26 71 1129 21 10355 12.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 83.4 0.5 72.0' 2865.083 71 1222 21 10447 13.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 86 0.516 70.6' 2865.067 71 1222 21 10447 13.1 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061101004F02.iex

Trk L/V L 80.7 0.484 26.4' 2247.467 120 1263 42 701 25.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.6 0.484 17.2' 3020.023 144 919 51 790 25.9 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061101004F03.iex

Trk L/V R 83.6 0.501 19.2' 617.55 162 364 57 4524 28.2 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061207999F01.iex

Trk L/V L 92.7 0.556 83.8' 10.07 0 427 0 427 15.1 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061301004F04.iex

Trk L/V R 88.9 0.533 92.1' 42.763 85 1563 285 3401 10.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 83.5 0.501 7.1' 61.86 85 1835 285 3674 8.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80.5 0.483 31.5' 68.653 85 1923 285 3761 8.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.1 0.493 51.4' 69.74 85 1937 285 3775 8.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.3 0.488 11.4' 71.157 85 1954 285 3792 8.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 82.4 0.494 23.3' 71.047 85 1953 285 3791 8.4 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061702004F01.iex

Trk L/V R 81.7 0.49 34.8' 1034.183 20 1573 5 6343 39.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.4 0.488 25.7' 1038.257 20 1815 5 6585 40.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81 0.486 45.8' 1838.013 38 1310 1 127 32.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80 0.48 8.7' 1848.107 38 1792 1 610 32.5 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061703004F05.iex

Trk L/V L 81.6 0.49 35.9' 676.72 285 122 109 358 24.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 88.8 0.533 98.0' 679.077 285 209 109 445 24.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 89.8 0.539 46.9' 680.993 285 279 109 515 24.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 83.2 0.499 45.0' 716.353 285 1600 109 1837 24.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.9 0.498 62.4' 718.163 285 1665 109 1901 24.1 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81 0.486 27.1' 994.037 290 675 111 1708 20.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.3 0.482 21.0' 997.49 290 779 111 1812 20.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 84.2 0.505 30.2' 1002.34 290 926 111 1959 20.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.4 0.488 265.3' 1080.12 291 1420 111 4453 22.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 94.3 0.566 287.5' 1080.693 291 1439 111 4472 22.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 81.9 0.492 18.0' 2086.597 308 937 118 642 25.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.4 0.482 297.6' 2085.89 308 910 118 615 25.7 -------- 2
E-4

Filename: 2008061703004F07.iex

Trk L/V R 84.6 0.508 75.7' 358.343 377 1847 9 385 24.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.1 0.481 221.6' 376.423 378 534 9 1072 27.2 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 81.1 0.487 24.4' 461.283 380 51 9 4590 27 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 96.9 0.581 128.4' 475.88 380 607 9 5145 24.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.6 0.484 22.6' 498.19 380 1463 8 770 26.7 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 90.1 0.541 56.0' 499.17 380 1502 8 809 26.8 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 91.4 0.548 58.3' 502.743 380 1643 8 951 26.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.2 0.493 14.0' 503.3 380 1666 8 973 26.9 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 80.9 0.485 62.3' 505.05 380 1735 8 1043 27 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061801004F01.iex

Trk L/V R 90.9 0.546 13.7' 582.547 3 1530 0 6279 8 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 86.9 0.522 20.7' 1738.593 16 1303 3 4808 13.5 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061801004F02.iex

Trk L/V L 85.4 0.512 30.9' 147.39 27 6669 8 4550 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.6 0.495 16.5' 148.443 27 6702 8 4583 21.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 89.2 0.535 16.8' 150.253 27 6760 8 4641 21.4 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 86.6 0.519 29.2' 151.497 27 6799 8 4680 21.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.1 0.493 11.5' 162.963 27 7172 8 5053 22.5 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 85.8 0.515 10.9' 1742.42 58 487 19 2393 22.3 -------- 2

Trk L/V L 82.2 0.493 23.1' 1822.617 59 1188 19 5093 21.6 -------- 2

Trk L/V R 80 0.48 15.8' 1849.237 60 62 19 5967 22.6 -------- 2

Filename: 2008061801004F03.iex

Trk L/V R 80.6 0.484 10.9' 2117.757 105 2833 37 3817 21.6 -------- 2
E-5