Philadelphia Paper - Discussion on Steel Rails. Philadelphia Meeting

The old plan was to increase every part of a rail much in the same proportion. But each part should be in proportion to what it ha.; to do. The head should be deep in proportion to tile amount. of traffic and the lowness of the rate of interest on its cost. The body need only he strong enough to carry the head after it is well worn down, and that deperlds on the weight of the machinery, and in the case of steel has little to do with the volume of traffic, except SO far as that affects weight of machinery. Ad on most railroad systems, the same niacliinery is used on main lines with heavy traffic, and bra11ct:es with light, I suggested in 1874 that each systern adopt the same body of rail for both, and make the head deeper on the main lines, shallower on the branches. This plan was adopted on the Pennsylvania Railroad. Bandberg seems to recognize this in his patterns of 1878. E. W. HUNT, TRoy, N. Y.: Again Dr. Dudley preaents to our cousideration a series of most carefully conductetl experiments, and ~llile I fully appreciate the labor and thought this work has cost him, I must still hesitate to accept his deductiono. This paper dilliirs from the previous one in that it denls esclrieively with the wearing qualitiei. of steel rails. Dr. Dudley gives his reason for this change in the following statement: " With the improvement in maintenance of way which has characterized the Pennsylvania Railroad during the last five or six yearn, the remova1 of rails from the track from the first two of these causes (i. e., broken and crushel), has, if I am right, quite notably diminished. This certainly is true with regard to broken rails. And if, as time advances, the number of crushed rails shall diminish, both because of the continued improvement in maintenance of way before referred to, and because, owing to improved and better methods at the steel works, there are fewer crushed rails caused by physical defects in the steel, the question of the wearing capacity of steel rails obviously becomes the allimportant one." Certainly the condition of the roadhd has much to do with mils brealring, crushing, and wearing. If the Pennsylvania and other railroads have done and are doing their part, Dr. Dudley oourteously admits that the steel works have performed part of theirs. But as far as I am informed, the formulas which they have used have been and are still quite wide of the one he continues to recommend. The rails which are not breaking or crushing to so great an extent as formerly, contain higher percentages of both carbon and manganese.