MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W586314892

Tubular track offers continuous rail support at a competitive price

2005· article· en· W586314892 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
B Le Roux

Bibliographic record

VenueRailway gazette international · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRailway Engineering and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBallastTrack (disk drive)SubgradeEngineeringPrecast concreteStructural engineeringStiffnessBogieRailway lineGeotechnical engineeringCivil engineeringMechanical engineeringElectrical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tubular Track is a ballastless trackform consisting of twin reinforced concrete beams laid on a specially designed formation and held in place with galvanised steel gauge spars. The problems associated with the progressive degradation of conventional track under repeated dynamic loading lead to loss of geometric stability, loss of resilience and pumping of the subgrade. Constant lifting of the track during ballast tamping operations result in very deep ballast profiles. Tubular Track was first installed at the President Brand Mine in South Africa. Since then it has been successfully installed on routes in freight lines in South Africa, the USA and Canada. Development work in 2002 resulted in the use of precast tubular modules replacing the in situ pumping of early applications. Proper foundations and drainage are critical factors. The continuous nature of Tubular Track and its higher inherent stiffness compared with conventional track allow localised soft spots to be bridged. Maintenance costs are reduced and rail stresses are lower than those in conventional track. Trials were conducted with Tubular Track at Spoornet's Track Testing Centre in Johannesburg.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRailway gazette internationalSame topicRailway Engineering and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207