. American engineer and railroad journal . and the trackmen may work withmore freedom and use their time to better advantage thanwhere the top-contact third rail is used. The cost of main-tenance should be considerably less than for the top-contacttype, since the contact surface is protected from snow or sleet,and the rail is less liable to corrosion: the board protectionhas a continuous support and is less apt to crack and warp;there is less strain on the insulators, as the pressure of theshoe acts against instead of with gravity. There is also amuch greater space between the lower part of th
. American engineer and railroad journal . and the trackmen may work withmore freedom and use their time to better advantage thanwhere the top-contact third rail is used. The cost of main-tenance should be considerably less than for the top-contacttype, since the contact surface is protected from snow or sleet,and the rail is less liable to corrosion: the board protectionhas a continuous support and is less apt to crack and warp;there is less strain on the insulators, as the pressure of theshoe acts against instead of with gravity. There is also amuch greater space between the lower part of the rail and thecross-tie, and therefore less liability of leakage of current, dueto the accumulation of snow, ice and ballast. The under-contact type requires only 7,600 parts per mile, as against24,500 for the top-contact type, and this should reduce thecost of maintenance of the former. The under-contact typecosts $4,100 per mile, as compared to $4,325 per mile for thetop-contact type, or a saving of $225 per mile in favor of COMPARISON OF CLEARANCES OF Tor-lONTAl | AND I XDER-IllMAIT THIRD-RAIL INSTALLATIONS.
Size: 2709px × 923px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, booksubjectrailroadengineering
