Combined Final Reports Updated

M
MMMM
Curve Lubrication
Final Report 2014
Rail Curve Lubrication
Document:
Title: Curve Lubrication Final Report 2013
CRC for Rail Innovation
Old Central Station
Authors: Professor Gopinath Chattopadhyay, Mr. Md. Gyas
290 Ann St
Uddin, Mr. Alex Howie
Brisbane Qld 4000
Project No.: R3.110

GPO Box 1422
Brisbane Qld 4001
Project Name: Curve Lubrication
Tel: +61 7 3221 2536

Fax: +61 7 3235 2987
www.railcrc.net.au
Synopsis:
This is the final report for the R3.110 Curve Lubrication project.
The report presents key results from the field trials along with a collection of useful information
detailing existing standards and practices
Established and supported under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres
Programme
Copyright 2014
CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 2

Executive Summary
This project commenced at the beginning of 2009 with the main purpose of completing research
that can be used to inform and improve existing industry practices of wheel rail friction
modification. Specific aims of the research included:
research that leads to ranking applicators in order of effectiveness

comparison of lubricants
investigation of grease suitability for various lubricators
evaluating the economics of hi-rail applicators versus fixed curve lubricators.
The project also had the objective of contributing to performance-based standards for the
placement of lubricators on curves.
As the project progressed, the experimental program was limited to wayside lubricators and trials
were conducted on three pump types, two applicator types and five grease types.
Pump Types: Hydraulic, Electric X, Electric Y

Applicators: Short Bar, Long Bar
Greases: Types A, B, C, D and E
Details of products are included in Appendix 4.
Key results included:
The long bars usually performed better than short bars. However, the second best result was
achieved with short bars and markedly different results with long bars achieved with different
pumps. A firm conclusion in favour of long bars is therefore premature. The best short bar result was
2.87 km and the best long bar result was 4.62 km. The results were also found to be dependent on
applicator pump type.
A particular Grease type identified as Grease C, when tested with all application equipment kept
constant, gave much better results than the others for greases tested with a carry distance of 4.6
km.
Uncertainties that may exist in these results arising from limited scope of the experimental program
are also discussed.

Project Milestones were completed as per Table 1. The research team failed to produce a useful
result for Milestone 7.
Table 1 Project Milestones
Milestone Description Date %

Literature review and Annual Report (submission of
1 30-12-2010 100
literature review and Annual report)
Collate knowledge, Research on ranking applicators
2 in order of effectiveness (submission of report on 31-12-2010 100
ranking applicators)
Development of lubricator placement model, data
collection and evaluation for placement model
3 (submission of report outlining the lubricator 30-06-2011 100
placement model including data collected and
evaluation)
4 Annual Report (submission of Annual report) 30-06-2011 100
Evaluation of the sustainability of the optimal
placement of lubricators on curves (submission of
5 31-12-2011 100
report giving evaluation of the sustainability of the
optimal placement of lubricator on curves)
Investigate grease suitability and experimental work,
31-12-2011
6 selection chart for lubricants (submission of report 100
on grease and lubricants)
Evaluation of the economics of wayside lubricator
bars located on the high rail in the spiral of a curve
versus lubricator bars located in the tangent,
7 31-03-2012 25
economic model. (submission or report on the
evaluation of the economics of wayside lubricator
bars)
Final Report (submission of externally reviewed
8 05-12-2012 100
report)

Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1
2. Methodology................................................................................................................................... 2
2.1. Literature review......................................................................................................................... 2
2.2. Field Trials of Lubricants and Application Equipment ................................................................ 2
3. Key Results ...................................................................................................................................... 3
4. Discussion of results........................................................................................................................ 8
5. Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................... 9
References ............................................................................................................................................ 10
Appendices............................................................................................................................................ 11

List of Figures and Tables

Figure 1 Comparative results of performance of different greases in carry distance and curve
distance with the same type of application equipment (Electric pump and long applicator bars)........ 5
Figure 2 Improvement factors using Grease A as a datum for the five different greases in curve
distance with the same type of application equipment (Electric pump and long applicator bars)........ 5
Figure 3 Track Curvatures at test Site ..................................................................................................... 7
Table 1 Project Milestones..................................................................................................................... iv

Table 2 Target Values of Coefficient of Friction .................................................................................. 2
Table 3 Temperatures and Rainfall ...................................................................................................... 3
Table 4 Carry Distance showing differences due to Application Equipment ...................................... 3
Table 5 Properties of Greases used in Field Tests ............................................................................... 4
Table 6 Carry Distance showing differences due to Grease Type ....................................................... 4
Table 7 Curve and Track Details of Lubrication Tests with different applicator suppliers and with
different greases ..................................................................................................................................... 6

1. Introduction
Rail and wheel are capital intensive assets for any railway and the adoption of proper maintenance
strategies will impact on the life and maintenance cost of these assets. The investment in rail
maintenance has a large impact on the reliability, availability, maintainability and safety (RAMS) of
rail operations. Increased axle load and longer train length bring challenges in the maintenance of
rails and wheels due to increased track deterioration and wear. Consistently maintaining the friction
coefficient at required level can help to reduce the wear, the development of Rolling Contact Fatigue
(RCF), the development of short wave corrugation in curves and noise levels. It can also help to
improve the steering performance of vehicle and relative energy savings. The required friction
coefficient can be achieved by proper lubrication of the rail/wheel interface. Wayside lubrication is
one of the most widely used methods of rail curve lubrication. Such lubrication practice involves
various factors including:
Application method
Lubricants
Frequency of application
Rate of application (dose)
Lubricator components (pump, container, nozzle and hose system)
Grease consumption based on various axle loads (Tonnes)
In addition, the configuration of a lubrication system may vary for the following reasons:
Proportion of tangent and curved track

Traffic
Maintenance requirements
Considering all these variables field trials are difficult but essential to understand the empirical
nature of the operating conditions and the development of suitable lubrication management
(involving correct equipment selection, maintenance and grease type). This report gives some useful
results from the survey of literature and practices and from the field trials conducted.
The report is arranged to briefly give the key results and information, with detail in Appendices

2. Methodology
2.1. Literature review
A literature and practice review was completed. This review is included in Appendix 1. Key
information from the review included target values of Coefficient of Friction.
Table 2 Target Values of Coefficient of Friction
Source Gauge Face Top of Rail

AREMA < 0.2 0.35 0.5
Canadian Pacific Railway(Sroba) 0.30 to 0.35
0.25
(< 0.1 variation across rail head)
ARTC (RC2411) 0.3 > 0.3
0.25 (Preferred) > 0.4 (Preferred)
(<0.15 difference between high and
low rails)
IHHA (2001) <0.3 0.25 to 0.45
0.25 (Preferred) 0.35 (Preferred)
(< 0.15 variation across rail head)
A collection of standards, practices and information is also included in Appendix 3.
2.2. Field Trials of Lubricants and Application Equipment
Details of the field trials are given in Appendix 2. Several different applicators and grease types were
evaluated.

3. Key Results
Results from the field trials were as follows (see also Appendix 2).
3.1 Testing Environment
Tests were completed in a heavy haul environment with track subject to traffic of approximately 50
GMT/year. The climatic conditions were sub-tropical and testing took place during the period of 26
April 10 June 2010. Temperature and rainfall details are given in Table 3.
Table 3 Temperatures and Rainfall
April May June
Maximum Temperatures (C) 28 26 24
Minimum Temperatures (C) 21 15 13
Rainfall (mm) 70 20 15
The test program was mainly carried out in May 2010 so indicative weather conditions for the test
program were: Temperatures - 15 to 26 degrees C and fairly dry, 20mm of rain for the month.
3.1 Application Equipment
The long bars usually performed better than short bars. Variation due to the combination of
pumping and application equipment is shown in Table 4. The best short bar result was 2.87 km and
the best long bar result was 4.62 km. The worst long bar result was however 1.55 km.
Table 4 Carry Distance showing differences due to Application Equipment
Grease A Trial Grease C Trial
Hydraulic Electric Electric Hydraulic Hydraulic Electric Electric

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier
X X X Y Y X Y
2SB-HR 1 LB-ER 2 LB-ER 2 SB-HR, 2 SH-HR 2 LB-ER 2 LB - ER
Grease A Grease A Grease A Grease C Grease C Grease C Grease C
0.34 km 1.39 km 0.33 km 0.72 km 2.87 km 4.62 km 1.55 km
3.2 Grease Type
Properties of Greases are noted as follows in Table 5. The table is incomplete in many places
because of the difficulty of obtaining specification data. More details including product names and
MSDS are included in Appendix 4.

Table 5 Properties of Greases used in Field Tests
Grease Grease Grease Grease Grease

A B C D E
NLGI 1-2 2 2 1 2
Colour Black Black Dark Grey Black Black
Solid Additives Graphite Graphite
Thickener Lithium Lithium Lithium Microgel Lithium
(6% by wt)
Drop Point, C 190 190 385 260 >200

Kinematic Visc, mm2/s, 40 C 150 150 220 680
100 C 15
Density kg/m3 900 912 900
Operating Temp, C -10 to +150 -10 to +150 -28 to +177 -35 to +80
Range
Flash Point, C >200 185 >180
Auto Ignition, C >320
Molybdenum disulfide Yes 3.0% 3.0%
EP additives Friction Special Graphite Special
modifiers additives additives additives
A particular Grease type identified as Grease C, when tested with all application equipment kept
constant, gave much better results than the others for greases tested with a carry distance of 4.6km,
as noted in Table 6 and Figure 1.
Table 6 Carry Distance showing differences due to Grease Type
Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier
Applicator Type
X X X X X
2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB-ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER
Grease Type Grease A Grease B Grease C Grease D Grease E
Carry Distance (km) From

1.39 km 2.96 km 4.62 km 1.4 km 1.28 km
Lubricator
Curve Distance (km) Covered 0.27 km 1.59 km 3.37 km 1.19 km 1.19 km

5
4.5
4
Distance (km) 3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Grease A Grease B Grease C Grease D Grease E
Grease Type
Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator Curve Distance (km) Covered
Figure 1 Comparative results of performance of different greases in carry distance and curve
distance with the same type of application equipment (Electric pump and long applicator bars)
4.5
4.0
3.5
Improvement Factor
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
Grease B Grease C Grease D Grease E
Grease Type
Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator Curve Distance (km) Covered
Figure 2 Improvement factors using Grease A as a datum for the five different greases in curve
distance with the same type of application equipment (Electric pump and long applicator bars)

Table 7 Curve and Track Details of Lubrication Tests with different applicator suppliers and with
different greases
Curve Details Lubricator Details
Hydraulic Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric
Curve Radius (m)

Lubricator (km)
Distance from
Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier
Lubricator
X X X X X X
2SB-HR 2 LB-ER 2 LB-ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER
Track Grease A Grease A Grease C Grease D Grease B Grease E
Survey
KM Fig 15 Fig 16 Fig 17 Fig 18 Fig 19 Fig 20
Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator located

at 554.0km 0.34 1.39 4.623 1.4 2.96 1.28
Improvement factor (from datum) 1.0 13.6 4.1 8.7 3.8
Curve Distance (km) Covered 0.265 0.830 3.368 1.186 1.586 1.186
Improvement factor (from datum) 1.0 12.7 4.5 6.0 4.5
Track Distance -> 553.66 553.67 549.377 552.6 551.04 552.72
553.664 0.336 600 0.265 2
553.175 0.825 596 0.313 3
552.72 1.28 403 0.261 4
552.613 1.387 388 0.106 5
552.5 1.5 474 0.113 6
552.35 1.65 415 0.128 7
551.46 2.54 415 0.400 8
551.032 2.968 415 0.450 9
550.165 3.835 590 0.684 12
549.377 4.623 1005 0.648 14
546.72 7.28 543 0.507 18
545.386 805 0.539 19
Total Lubrication Effectiveness
374 529 1646 503 638 202
Index (LEI)

Track Curvatures at Test Site
Direction of Travel 4.6 km Carry Distance
3000 0.003
2500 0.001
2000 -0.001
Curve Radius (m)
Curvature (1/m)
1500 -0.003
1000 -0.005
500 -0.007
0 -0.009
-500 -0.011
-1000 -0.013
554 553 552 551 550 549 548 547 546
Track Kilometridge (km)
Radius (m) Curvture (1/m)
Figure 3 Track Curvatures at test Site

4. Discussion of results
The results as summarised in this final report illustrate some useful directions for optimisation, but
the limitations of the results must also be considered. The difficulty with test programs of this type
is the control of variables and the number and diversity of trials. The methodology controlled only
three things: the type of pump, the type of applicator and the type of grease. In most cases, due to
limitations of time and difficulties posed by the field tests, there is only one set of comparative data.
There is also no scope for seasonal or traffic variations. Fortunately, as the traffic could be assumed
to be fairly consistent (coal unit train operations) and the sub-tropical zone enjoys fairly moderate
temperatures, these two variables can be assumed to be fairly consistent across the program.
Additional information was added regarding temperature and rainfall by noting test dates in the
data archives and adding data from weather archives, Table 3 and Appendix 5. As temperatures fall
within the range 15 to 26 degrees Celsius, the results will be useful to many sites within Australia.
In firstly considering the effect of pumping and applicator equipment, Table 4, it can be seen that
applicator carry distance is usually better for long bars. However, the second best result was
achieved with short bars and markedly different results with long bars achieved with different
pumps. A firm conclusion in favour of long bars is therefore premature.
The results for the grease comparison are better, with Grease C achieving significantly better carry
distance than all other greases (Table 6, Figure 1). However, an inconsistency was noted in the trial
for Grease A, values 0.33, 0.34 and 1.39 km. The best value is included. As the difference is 1.06 km,
it could be argued that the repeatability of determining carry distance may not be any better than
this. Imposing this possibility on the best results of 4.62 km could give a range of 3.56 to 4.62 km.
Comparing this with the next best result, Grease B of 2.96 km (1.90 to 4.02km) opens the possibility
that Grease B might give results comparable to Grease C, (i.e. 4.02km versus 3.56 km). While having
both measurements incorrect by the extreme estimated uncertainty at the same time is unlikely, the
discussion does show that caution is advised in interpreting the real margin of improvement offered
by Grease C. Furthermore, as Table 4 shows, the pumping equipment can have a significant effect.
The issue of pumping equipment was not investigated in the project, but it would be expected that
the flow rate achieved must be different for pump units X and Y, Table 4.
Track survey information was checked and the curves were documented - the difference in carry
distance and in curve coverage distance was also calculated to give Figures 1 and 2. The more
complete information is included in Table 7 and Figure 3. It will be noted that, by using either track
carry distance or curve lengths covered, the improvements are similar, Figure 2.

5. Conclusions
Not enough information was obtained to understand or make conclusions about pumping
characteristics, although different pumping systems gave significantly different results.
Long bar applicators gave better results than short bars, although positioning practice also differed.
The long bar performance was also affected by pumping unit types. More study is needed to really
compare application equipment packages (pumps and applicator types) by properly comparing all
equipment combinations and in-track positioning options of both types. A new result and conclusion
may be possible.
Differences in Grease characteristics can give remarkably different results. Grease C gave much
better results than the other four greases tested. If a very poor estimate of repeatability is assumed,
the performance for Grease C can still be considered as giving the best carry distance; however,
margins between this grease and Grease B could be much smaller than results indicate.
The findings are that the poor estimate of repeatability suggested in this report be accepted until
more trials are completed. This means that Grease B should be considered as a good second choice
grease.
All results must be understood and used having regard to the operating context, 15 to 26 degrees
Celsius. The tests were carried out in sub-tropical and temperate zones near the Tropic of Capricorn.
Very different results regarding grease type could emerge from tests where sub-zero temperatures
occur (snow areas) and/or extreme heat (+45C) as in the Australian Pilbara.
Results obtained should be useful for application on rail systems in most areas on the east coast of
Australia (Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria).

References
ARTC 2006, Guidelines for Trackside Lubrication, RC 2411 Issue A, Revision 0, March.
IHHA 2001, Guidelines to Best Practices for Heavy Haul Railroad Operations: Wheel and Rail Interface
Issues, May.
Sroba, P, Rooney, M, Dashko, R & Magel, E 2001, Canadian Pacific Railway's 100% effective
lubrication initiative, AREMA 2001 Conference & Exhibition, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Appendices
Appendix 1: CRC Project Report (R3.110)

Literature and Practice Review

Lubricator Installation, Operation Factors and Field Tests (2013)

A Summary of Practices and Standards for Curve Lubrication (2013)

Lubricator and Grease Product Information (2013)

Environmental Conditions for the Rail Curve Lubrication Test Program

Literature and Practice
Review
R3.110 Appendix 1
Appendix I Literature and Product Review
DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET
Document:
Title: Appendix I Literature and Practice Review
Old Central Station, 290 Ann St
Brisbane Qld 4000
Project Leader: Professor Gopinath Chattopadhyay
GPO Box 1422
Authors: Professor Gopinath Chattopadhyay, Mr. Md. Gyas Uddin, Mr.
Brisbane Qld 4001
Alex Howie
Tel: +61 7 3221 2536
Project No.: R3-110
Fax: +61 7 3235 2987
Project Name: Rail Curve Lubrication
www.railcrc.net.au
Synopsis:
The wayside lubrication method is widely used in the rail industry for reducing rail-wheel wear. Several
approaches have been attempted in the past for selecting the correct lubricant, lubricator and developing
placement model. This report aims to review current practices in curve lubrication and assess their
effectiveness based on lubricators, lubricants and placement for developing best practice for heavy haul lines.
REVISION/CHECKING HISTORY
REVISION DATE ACADEMIC REVIEW INDUSTRY REVIEW APPROVAL

NUMBER (PROGRAM LEADER) (PROJECT CHAIR) (RESEARCH DIRECTOR)
0 08/04/2011 Professor Gopinath Mr. Alex Howie
Chattopadhyay
1 30/03/2012 Professor Gopinath
Chattopadhyay
2 29/04/2014 Colin Cole Steering Committee Chris Gourlay
DISTRIBUTION
REVISION
DESTINATION
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Industry x X X
Participant for
Review
Established and supported under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres Program
Copyright 2013 CRC for Rail Innovation
This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any
process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of CRC for Rail Innovation.
CRC for Rail Innovation 8 April 2011 Page i

Appendix I Literature and Practice Review
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
1. Lubrication and Facts
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Overview 1
2. Wayside Lubricator Placement Model 2
2.1 Introduction 2
2.2 Established Rail Curve Lubrication Regime 2
2.3 Evaluation of Lubrication Technology 4
2.4 Evaluation of Applicator Bars 6
2.5 Location and Position of Applicator Bars 7
2.6 Evaluation of Grease Performance 9
3. Data Analysis and Calculations 17
3.1 Introduction 17
3.2 Data Analysis and Results 17
4. Economic Model 26
4.1 Introduction 26
4.2 Cost Analysis for Lubrication Decisions 26
4.3 Economic Model and Lubrication Effectiveness 27
4.4 Lubricant and Rate of Application 28
4.5 Degree of Maintenance 28
4.6 Cost Modelling 28
References 32
CRC for Rail Innovation 08 April 2011 Page 1

Appendix I Literature and Practice Review
Abbreviations and Acronyms
AC Alternating Current
AAR Association of American Railroads
AREMA American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association
COF Coefficient of Friction
CPR Canadian Pacific Railway
kPa Kilopascal
kph Kilometres per hour
MGT Millions of Gross Tonnes
RAMS Reliability, availability, maintainability and safety
RCF Rolling Contact Fatigue
TOR Top of Rail

Appendix I Literature and Product Review Chapter 1 - Introduction
1. Introduction
Rail is a significant capital investment for all railways and maintenance strategies have an impact on the life
cycle cost of the asset. The investment in rail maintenance has a large impact on the reliability, availability,
maintainability and safety (RAMS) of rail operations. Increases in axle loads in heavy haul lines present
challenges in the maintenance of rails and wheels due to track deterioration, wear, change of track geometry
and potential derailments which can result in the loss of assets, lives and revenue. Rail and wheel wear can
be reduced dramatically by proper lubrication. In addition, lubrication can help in saving energy and reducing
noise. There are three lubrication methods in use by railways around the world: wayside, on-board and hi-
rail lubrication. Wayside lubrication is one of the most widely used methods. This research reviews the
following important factors: the lubricator equipment technology, the installation location, the grease, the
climatic conditions, and the setup of the grease dispensing rate for the train traffic and the placement of
successive wayside units along the track.
Wear is a result of friction between the wheels and rails. Gauge side wear on the high rails of sharper curves
is a common problem (Turner 2008). Wear affects the life and performance of rails and wheels. The
influential wear factors are: axle loads, lateral forces, longitudinal force, creepage, curve radius, gradient of
the track, cant/superelevation, track gauge, surface conditions of the wheels and the rails, train speed, train
length, frequency and type of trains, rolling stock performance, and operational and environmental issues.
The American Association of Railroads (AAR) has estimated that the wear and friction occurring at the
wheel/rail interface due to ineffective lubrication costs American Railways in excess of US $ 2 billion each
year (Sid & Wolf 2002). Daniels (2008) reported that more than US $10 billion was spent in 2004 in the USA
on rail transit system maintenance.

Appendix I Literature and Product Review Wayside Lubrication
2. Wayside Lubrication
2.1 Introduction
The rail lubrication environment is an open environment. As illustrated in Figure 2.1, the parameters range
from diverse environmental climatic conditions, which are beyond anyones control in most cases, to possibly
controlled human intervention through track and vehicle maintenance and management. Therefore,
compared to closed systems, rail curve lubrication, lubrication effectiveness and its sustainability are highly
challenging.
Equipment,
Technology
and Grease
Track and Rail Environmental

Traffic and climatic
Parameters Lubrication Conditions
Track
Maintenance
and
Management
Regime
Figure 2.1: Rail Curve Lubrication and Concerns
Selection criteria for rail curve grease vary significantly from the closed system application. As the rail curve
grease is heavily exposed to extreme loads and intermittent extreme temperature, barrier-less rail/wheel
interface (grease may travel towards the rail head or downwards from the rail wheel gauge face contact
zone), environmental factors such as rain, weather conditions including dry conditions and high temperature,
snow, contamination from commodities, dust and vegetation, it is necessary to give careful consideration to
the selection of rail curve grease.
To develop a Placement Model for any track location it is necessary to ensure that good track coverage is
achieved. Measurements must be made using quantitative performance measures and the benefits to be
monitored with respect to reduced rail and wheel wear.
2.2 Established Rail Curve Lubrication Regime
In practice the rail curve lubrication regime has not been clearly defined. According to friction management
guidelines, the coefficient of friction (CoF) at the gauge face should have friction values that are within the
boundary and Elastohydrodynamic lubrication regime. In boundary lubrication, the solids are not separated
by the lubricant, and fluid film effects are negligible - thus there is a considerable asperity contact and in the
partial lubrication regime some contact will take place between the asperities (Hamrock 1991). Considering
the lubrication regimes in the Stribeck curve (Figure 2.2), it would be desirable for the gauge face lubrication
regime to be around the transition of boundary and Elastohydrodynamic lubrication. If the lubrication regime
is at the end of the boundary lubrication or unlubricated where the film thickness/roughness value is zero,
the high rail gauge corner/face and wheel flange will be in direct surface-to-surface contact. This causes

severe wear. At the other extreme, if the lubrication regime is in the hydrodynamic zone, there are issues
with traction and braking. For proper friction management, the friction value should be between 0.2 and 0.4,
which is at the top of the boundary lubrication in the Stribeck curve. Field tests and laboratory tests are
essential to understand this critical issue in the context of wheel and rail.
Figure 2.2: Lubrication regimes and wear coefficient in sliding of metals, as a function of (Maru & Tanaka
2007)
Friction management guidelines

The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance-of-Way Association (AREMA) recommends (IHHA 2001)
as follows (refer to Figure 2.3):
gauge face friction values should be < 0.20
gauge corner friction value should be < 0.20, which is under review
top of rail (TOR) friction value should be 0.35 +/-0.05
left to right rail friction value differential on the running surface should be < 0.1.
The Canadian Pacific Railway recommends (Sroba et al. 2001) as follows:

maintain top of rail friction coefficient differential, left to right < 0.1
top of rail friction coefficient should be 0.3 0.35
gauge face of high rail coefficient of friction 0.25.
Figure 2.3: Friction management targets used by North American Railways (Sroba et al. 2001)

For the purpose of this study, the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) specification was used as the reference
level.
2.3 Evaluation of Lubricator Technology
The technology of wayside gauge face lubrication has changed dramatically over the last decades. Wayside
lubrication equipment is now electronic and is replacing ageing mechanical and hydraulic equipment,
although the latter is still very common.
Mechanical lubricators are simple in their mechanical designs with high maintenance requirements and low
reliability. Frequent breakdowns due to the wear of mechanical components can occur, and they require the
replacement of parts and cleaning of the bars to ensure proper dispensing of the lubricant. Also, the lack of
control of grease dispensing volumes can produce substantial waste of grease to the surrounding track.
Hydraulic lubricators are very simple in construction, easy to install and maintain. However, from experience,
they too require a lot of maintenance. They deliver grease by every passing wheel without precise control,
which can cause huge grease wastage and severe top of rail contamination.
Electronic lubricators are the latest generation of lubricators that have precise electronic control of grease
application rates based on the wheel count passing the site and the pump delivery cycle time. The
equipment consists of a grease reservoir, power supply unit (either AC or solar panel powering a re-
chargeable battery), electronic controller unit, pump, distribution hoses and applicator bars (Figure 2.4). The
tanks hold up to 400 kg of grease which, depending on traffic levels, may only need to be filled twice per
year. Filling lubricators is time consuming for the lubricator maintainer and this feature allows the maintainer
to spend more time performing lubricator maintenance.
Figure 2.4: Electronic Lubricator with major components

Electronic lubricators have advantages over hydraulic and mechanical lubricators. These are:
They are highly reliable and efficient.
They have inbuilt sensors, and an intelligent system.
They provide precise grease application, less grease wastage and less contamination.
Fewer units are required compared to mechanical and hydraulic units.
They require very low maintenance compared to hydraulic and mechanical units.
They have Remote Performance Monitoring system capability which can dramatically reduce the down
time of remote units, therefore increasing the reliability of lubrication. This feature can generate statistical
data, reports, graphical presentation, alarms and warnings with hourly updates for each Individual lubricator.
Continuous solar power with a rechargeable battery increases reliability.
Recent investigations on some Australian heavy haul rail networks have determined that grease dispensed
from hydraulic or mechanical units was being dispensed to the wheel. However, it did not carry down the
track to protect the rail gauge face. A major portion of the grease can be wasted or leaked from the bars and
assemblies of mechanical and hydraulic devices. The grease carry distance ends up within short distances
from the lubricator and the rest of the track remains unprotected. Table 2.1 shows the tribometer readings
on two hydraulic lubricator unit sites where grease ran out within a few metres and the gauge face was dry.
Table 2.1: Average Coefficient of Friction (COF), data within first 2 curves from currently operating
Hydraulic Lubricator site
It is important to select the latest technology for higher reliability, lower cost and improved lubrication
effectiveness.
2.4 Evaluation of Applicator Bars
Application bars are mounted on the lower part of the rail head to deliver lubricant to the wheels for transfer
to the gauge face and gauge corner of the high rail of the curves. The grease guides of the brush maximise
pick-up by the wheels and minimise wastage. There are short bars (600mm in length) and long bars (1400mm
in length). Two short bars are generally placed in the spiral of the curve whereas either two or four long bars
are placed in the tangent track before the curves.
Long bars in the tangent track have advantages over short bars in the spiral of curves, such as:
Long bars do not need to be removed during the curve grinding cycle which reduces the
work requirement for the lubricator maintainer.
For example: The Queensland Rail Network (QR Network) has a preventive rail grinding programme on its
heavy haul coal lines which requires a curve grinding cycle approximately every 9 MGT. This programme uses
one grinding pass at grinding speeds of between 9 and 15 kph to manage the rail profile and control the

initiation of rolling contact fatigue (RCF). Each day the grinder maintains a track with sharp curves.
Lubricators in the spiral of the curves must be removed before grinding to allow the rail to be ground. This
results in the rail remaining dry for a few days under train traffic while the lubricator maintainer removes and
reinstalls the units. In the field test location, QR Network coal lines are running approximately 8000 wheels
per day on double track. This results in severe rail wear during each grinding cycle. Sometimes the lubricator
cannot be removed due to other work commitments and therefore the lubricator is not removed and the rail
is not ground for several metres surrounding the lubricator. The rail curve for high rail remains unground for
significant tonnage until the next grinding cycle. Severe RCF develops in the track due to this limitation:
Long bars deliver grease to a greater area of the wheel circumference and therefore have been measured
to lubricate a greater track length when compared to short bars.
Long bars use less grease compared to short bars.
As long bars are installed on both rails in the tangent track, both left hand curves and right hand curves
are lubricated by one unit. Therefore the number of units required to lubricate the track is reduced by half
compared to short bars.
Long bars are placed in the tangent track before mild curves to supply grease around the throat area of the
wheels to ensure more effective lubrication in sharper curves along the track (Figure 2.5). Long bars with
grease distribution mechanisms in the form of foam or brushes in the trough area next to the grease ports
spread grease around the wheel flange for distribution on both rails and therefore on the left and right hand
curves.
Figure 2.5: Long bars application and grease on the wheel of a train that has stopped just past a long bar
lubricator site
Short bars (Figure 2.6) rely on their placement in the transition of mild left and right hand curves. Two short
bars are used in each transition and their placement is just at the point when the wheel throat starts to
contact the gauge corner. Mild curves distribute the grease around the throat area of the wheels to ensure
more effective lubrication in sharper curves along the track.

Figure 2.6: Short Applicator Bars
Field studies showed that long bars had a longer carry distance compared to short bars using less grease for
covering a greater length of track. Table 2.2 shows the achieved carry distance in the field test.
Table 2.2: Comparative results of different bars combination (Long bars and short bars) in carry distance
with same grease
2.5 Location and Position of Applicator Bars
Wheel flange and its contact with the rail help in lubricant transport (Thelen & Lovette 1996).
For the short bars, the selection of the installation location is based on the following criteria:
located in a mild curve where the wheels steer through the curve purely by rolling radius difference, that
is, with minimal flanging on the high rail. For QR Network coal lines this is considered to be in a curve equal
to or shallower than 500 metres radius
placed in the transition area of the curve at the point where the wheel flange just starts to touch the high
rail gauge corner
track gauge is within +/- 3mm of the specified gauge
rail wear is not excessive and relatively new rail is selected if possible.
For the long bars the installation location is selected based on the following criteria:
located in tangent track before a mild curve of 500 metres or greater
no obvious signs of train hunting which would bias the wheels towards one rail rather than the other
track gauge is within +/- 3mm of specified gauge
After selection of the proper location of the bars, the bar height is adjusted to ensure that the grease is
effectively picked up by the wheels. The bar height from top of rail is adjusted by using the worn wheel
gauge (Figure 2.7).

Figure 2.7: A typical control box in an electronic lubricator
The process for the selection of the control box settings is through the splash test.
Figure 2.8: A typical splash test location.
The splash test (Figure 2.8) is a trial and error process that starts with the recommended manufacturers
settings and allows trains to pass to determine if the grease is being splashed and therefore wasted and/ or
is contaminating the top of the rail.
Once the optimal setting is observed for the lubricator and the type of grease, then tests can be performed
to evaluate performance under the specific traffic condition.
2.6 Evaluation of Grease Performance
Greases effectively result in a reduction in wear, noise and energy consumption and ultimately enhance rail-
wheel life (Hamrock 1991). Grease is defined as a solid to semi-solid product with a thickening agent in a
lubricant with other ingredients to provide special properties. In petroleum oil, metallic soap thickeners
(hydroxides of lithium, calcium, molybdenum, sodium, barium and aluminium) are added, which are
responsible for retentivity under heat, water and extreme load resistance. Rail curve greases have calcium
and lithium thickeners and graphite and molybdenum as the additives.
Rail curve grease needs the following properties:
suitable temperature range for pumpability
high retentivity or breakdown period
longer carry distance
low pour point

suitable temperature as a dropping point
excellent extreme pressure (EP additives) and anti-wear resistance
outstanding lubricity
good adhesion and required friction
water washout resistance
suitable for different applicator technology
chemical stability and no oil separation
better performance against clogging
biodegradability, non-toxicity
There are no standards or guidelines for the selection of the best grease for heavy haul application. The field
study covered the testing of several greases from the Australian industry and from North America to
determine their performance in the Australian heavy haul environment.
Tests were conducted using the long bars with the same control box settings. Surrounding lubricators were
turned off so as to avoid interference with grease from other units. The track was allowed to dry down for 3
days (approximately 30,000 wheel passes) and measurements were taken with the Tribometer (Figure 2.9).
The test grease was then added to the long bar unit and run up to 60,000 wheel passes. The Tribometer was
run from the lubricator test site to the location where the COF was measured to be > 0.25 on the gauge
corner at 70 degrees.
Figure 2.9: Effectiveness of Lubrication measurement with Tribometer
The study showed that different greases from different suppliers have different carry distances. The
following Table 2.3 shows the performance of grease from different suppliers.

Table 2.3: Comparative results of performance of different greases in carry distances with the same
applicator bars combination
Grease is not simply viscous lubricating oil (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005). It is a mixture of lubricating oils
and thickeners and contains special additive packages based on their application. The type of thickener
added determines the characteristics of the grease (Hamrock 1991). Thickeners are dispersed in lubricating
oils in order to produce a stable colloidal structure or gel so that oil is constrained and becomes unable to
flow (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005). Grease needs to meet the same requirements as lubricating oils but it
should remain as a semi-solid mass at high service temperatures. If it fails, then the likelihood of the
lubrication failure increases. The life time of grease in service is often determined by the eventual loss of the
semi-solid consistency to become either a liquid or a hard deposit.
2.7 Composition of Grease
Base Oils
Mineral oils are used as a base oil in more than 99% of grease. Synthetic oils are used for grease which is
expected to operate in extreme conditions. Base oil contributes slightly along with thickener in establishing
grease consistency.
Thickeners
The characteristics of grease depend on the type of thickener. Thickener in the soap based grease forms an
interlocking matrix of particles which trap the base oils. If the thickener can withstand heat, the grease will
be suitable for high temperature applications; if the thickener is water resistant the grease will also be water
resistant. There are two fundamental types of thickener that can be used in grease such as soap and non-
soap based.
The most commonly used types are calcium, lithium, aluminium, and sodium. Non-soap type greases (silica
or bentonite clay) are very high temperature resistant as this grease has no melting point. They are usually
considered as multipurpose and provide superior performance compared to soap based grease.

Figure 2.10: Fibrous structure of a soap based grease (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005)
Additives
Special packages of additives are used in grease to improve and sustain performance for various purposes
such as anti-oxidant, rust preventer, tackiness, anti-wear and extreme pressure (EP) additives. As grease may
stay in storage for an extended period of time and also in the lubricator tank in the field, it must be able to
sustain its properties and conditions. Therefore, there should be anti-oxidant in rail curve grease. It protects
the grease during storage and extends the service life, especially at high temperatures. Rail curve application
is totally exposed to climatic conditions where rain, humidity, temperature and other drastic conditions may
affect the performance of grease and may not provide adequate support to protect rail and wheel from wear
and tear. Rust and corrosion inhibitors help to protect assets from wet and corrosive conditions. Tackiness
additives are added to impart a stringy texture and to increase the cohesion and adhesion of the grease to
the surface. There is a strong tendency in many types of grease to travel towards the top of the rail head or
quickly travel downwards from the gauge corner and face. Both of these issues are critical for rail curve
application. Anti-wear and EP additives improve the load carrying capacity of rail curve grease. EP additives
react with the surface to form protective films which prevent metal to metal contact and the consequent
scoring or localised welding of the surfaces. The additives most commonly used as anti-seize and anti-
scuffing compounds are graphite and molybdenum disulphide.
Lubrication mechanism
The lubrication transport mechanism in rail curve applications can quantitatively be optimized under
laboratory conditions but in the field many trade-offs must be made between ideal set ups and what is
practically achievable (Thelen & Lovette 1996). Human factors issues have as much impact on the transport
of lubricant to the rail as any technical issue. It appears that the thickeners, as well as base oil, take part in
the lubrication process and the grease as a whole is an effective lubricant (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005).
An effective lubrication program should include direct measurement and management of the coefficient of
friction for each line and curve. Technical solutions need to be applied to improve the lubrication transport
mechanism.

Influential factors of the transport mechanism are directly influenced by many factors such as:
rail/wheel profile
rail geometry
dynamic characteristics of the truck
surface conditions of the wheel and rail
the viscosity and lubricity of the grease
operating temperatures of the wheel and rail
the environmental climatic conditions such as rain, temperature humidity and precipitation
operating characteristics of the lubricators
train action
wheel slip and creep
environmental contamination
human factors.
Lubrication of the gauge corner at the rail is a direct lubrication method but still heavily influenced by a
number of parameters that can inhibit the maximum effect of lubrication like the frequency of trains and
lubrication passes and the amount of lubricant applied. In North American railroads, the majority of savings
were possible only with the development of improved methods and technology.
In North American railroads, premium rails are commonly used in curves with radii over 5 and in turnouts
and switches but wear still shows without lubrication.
In wayside rail curve lubrication, grease is intermittently applied to the rail/wheel contact area so that the
grease presence is always replenished. Every time when the wheel passes through a specific track segment, a
controlled optimised amount of fresh grease needs to be distributed to the interface.

Grease characteristics
They should be designed based on the application purpose. The preliminary stage of grease selection needs
to consider the following characteristics:
Consistency of Grease
Consistency or solidity is a measure of the hardness or shear strength of grease. It is defined in terms of
grease penetration depth by a standard cone under prescribed conditions of time and temperature (ASTM D-
217, ASTM D-1403). The consistency or hardness of the grease must be sufficient so that it will remain as a
solid lump adjacent to the sliding or rolling contact. If the grease is too hard, channelling may occur where
the rolling or sliding elements cut a path through the grease and cause lubricant starvation (Stachowiak &
Batchelor 2005). For rail curve grease it could be a serious problem if it is too hard since it may cause a
serious issue for clogging in the grease tank-pump inlet, pump outlet, pipe and hose joints, applicator ports
and grease pathway inside the applicator bars. If the grease is not hard enough for the application it may
cause rail curve grease to travel away from the contact interface. It is necessary to conduct field tests and
laboratory tests to take informed decisions on grease consistency for different environments and operating
conditions. Excessively hard grease is also difficult to pump. Figure 3.2 from field tests shows grease coverage
on the gauge face with different grease and applicator bar configurations.
Consistency of grease is also referred to as the roughness or smoothness of grease. If the grease is too
smooth, stable lumps of grease will never form on the rail/wheel surface and high operating temperatures
and lower grease life will result.
Grease consistency-temperature relationship: The grease consistency/temperature relationship (refer to

Figure 2.11) describes the changes in the grease consistency with temperature. Small temperature changes
cause a significant variation in viscosity but relatively small changes in grease consistency until it reaches its
dropping point. At this temperature the grease structure breaks down and the grease becomes liquid. It has
also been found that if grease is heated above the drop point and then cooled it does not regain its
consistency and its performance is unsatisfactory.
Figure 2.11: Variation in grease consistency, expressed in terms of penetration, with temperature for
sodium soap grease (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005)
Real life heavy haul wheel temperature data shows that wheel temperatures can rise beyond the drop point
of the grease and hence may cause consistency loss and reduced effectiveness.

Mechanical stability
Mechanical aspects damage the soap fibres. Greases differ significantly in the level of damage they will incur
due to mechanical working. The change in the grease consistency depends on the stability of the grease
structure. It was found that grease was softened by mechanical working to some extent but when calcium
tallow soap was the thickening agent little damage resulted. Lithium hydroxystearate and sodium tallow
stearate can do significant damage initially and later can be at a stable level. Lithium stearate and aluminium
stearate show a continuous progression of damage.
Drop point
Drop point is the temperature at which grease shows a change from semi-solid to a liquid phase under
prescribed conditions. It is the maximum useful operating temperature of grease. Not only drop point but
also speed, load and evaporation loss determine the useful temperature range of grease. Investigation shows
that many rail curve greases have a dropping point lower than the operating temperature.
Oxidation stability
This is the ability to resist oxidation. It is used to evaluate grease stability during storage. It can be measured
in a test apparatus in which five grease dishes 4 gms each are placed in an atmosphere of oxygen at a
pressure of 758 kPa at 99C and the pressure drop is monitored. The pressure drop indicated how much
oxygen had been used during the oxidation reaction of grease.
Thermal stability
Grease cannot be heated above a certain temperature without starting to decompose. The temperature-life
limits for typical greases are shown in Figure 2.12.
Figure 2.12: Temperature-Life limits for typical greases (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005)

Evaporation loss
Weight losses in greases due to evaporation can be quite significant. Volatile compounds and products of
thermal degradation contribute to loss, causing thickening of the lubricant, higher shear resistance and
higher temperature. The evaporation loss may be a significant issue in rail curve lubrication for larger
capacity tanks (like 380 kg tank). If the grease is left for a long time in the lubricator tank, evaporation loss,
thermal degradation, and consistency may be affected significantly. Field investigation shows that oil
separation and hardening in grease can take place over the period of maintenance and servicing which cause
clogging and pumping issues. If the grease settles down in the pathway towards the application port, the
whole lubrication system may block and thorough cleaning of the lubrication equipment is needed.
Grease viscosity
Viscosity of grease is the dynamic viscosity measured at the desired temperature and shear rate. It is
measured in the temperature range between -50C and 150C in pressure viscometers. Dynamic viscosity is
defined as the ratio of shear stress to shear rate, which is useful to measure grease performance at a specific
temperature. It depends on the type of base oil and the amount of thickener used in the grease (Stachowiak
& Batchelor 2005).
Classification of grease
Classification of grease is established by the National Lubricating Grease Institute (NLGI). There are nine
grades of grease based on penetration depth, from the softest to the hardest. Grades are 000, 00, 0, 1, 2, 3,
4, 5, and 6 (refer to Table 2.4). In practice, the most commonly used grease is Multipurpose grease which is
grease No. 2 according to the NLGI Classification, with aluminium or lithium soap thickeners.
Table 2.4: NLGI Classification of Grease (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005)
The selection of grease for a specific application mainly depends on the temperature at which the grease is
expected to operate. For low temperature application, the important factor is the low-temperature limit of
the specific grease (refer to Table 2.5), which is determined by the viscosity or pour point of the base oil.
Environmental factors are also considered in grease selection.

Table 2.5: Low temperature limits for some Selected Greases (Stachowiak & Batchelor 2005)
The maximum operating temperature for grease is limited by the drop point, oxidation and thermal stability
of the base oil and the other components.
Grease Grease Grease Grease Grease

A B C D E
NLGI 1-2 2 2 1 2
Colour Black Black Dark Grey Black Black
Solid Additives Graphite Graphite
Lithium
Thickener Lithium Lithium Microgel Lithium
(6% by wt)
Drop Point, C 190 190 385 260 >200

Kinematic Visc, mm2/s, 40 C 150 150 220 680
100 C 15
Density kg/m3 900 912 900
Operating Temp, C
-10 to +150 -10 to +150 -28 to +177 -35 to +80
Range
Flash Point, C >200 185 >180
Auto Ignition, C >320
Molybdenum disulfide Yes 3.0% 3.0%
Friction Special Graphite Special
EP additives
modifiers additives additives additives
Table 2.6: Typical properties of greases used in field test on QR North Coast Line
Wayside lubrication is a proven technology in heavy haul railways. Savings are substantial if implemented in
line with best practice guidelines. Field trials have been carried out to develop techniques of measuring
lubrication effectiveness in a quantitative way and the effectiveness of different types of lubricants (refer to
Table 2.6) and applicator bars. This research presents some recent field study data and develops a
framework for measuring lubrication effectiveness in Australian heavy haul lines. The authors are working on
this project and further results will be published in the future as a best practice manual.

References
Daniels, LE 2008, Track maintenance costs on rail transit properties, Transit Co-operative Research Program,
Transport Research Board, Fair Oaks, CA.
Hamrock, BJ 1991, Fundamentals of Fluid Film Lubrication, NASA reference publication 1255, USA.
Himark Consulting Group Pty Ltd August 2005, Review of maintenance costs and derailment costs associated with
Central Queensland Coal System for Network Access Group, Queensland Rail.
IHHA 2001, Guidelines to best practices for heavy haul railway operations: wheel and rail interface issues,
International Heavy Haul Association, Virginia, USA.
Maru, MM & Tanaka, DK 2007, Consideration of Stribeck Diagram Parameters in the Investigation on Wear and
Friction Behavior in Lubricated Sliding, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering,
Vol. 29(1), pp.55-66.
QR Standard STD/0077/TEC, Version 2.0, Issue date, 24 June 2002, Effective date 05 August 2002, Review date 05
August 2007.
Reiff, R 2006, Best practices update for friction control including implementing Top-of-Rail friction control,
AREMA Conference, Pueblo, Colorado, USA, Transportation Technology Centre, Inc. (TTCI).
Sid, D &, Wolf, E 2002, Transportation FOR THE 21ST CENTURY, Trac Glide Top-of-Rail Lubrication System, Report
from Department of Energy, USA.
Sroba, P, Roney, M, Dashko, R & Magel, E 2001, Canadian pacific railway's 100% effective lubrication initiative,
AREMA 2001 Conference & Exhibition, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Stachowiak, GW & Batchelor, AW 2005, Engineering Tribology, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington,

USA.
Thelen, G, Lovette, M 1996, A parametric study of the lubrication transport mechanism at the rail-wheel
interface, WEAR, Vol. 191(1-2), pp.113-120.
Turner, M 2008, Rail Grinding - The QR Journey, Conference on Railway Engineering, Perth, pp. 281-293.
Uddin, GM, Chattopadhyay, G, Sroba, P, Rasul, M & Howie, A 2010, Wayside Lubricator Placement Model for
Heavy Haul Lines in Australia, Conference on Railway Engineering, 12- 14 September, Wellington, New Zealand.
Uddin, GM, Chattopadhyay, G 2009, Development of an Economic Model for Analyzing Lubrication Effectiveness
Based on Below Rail and Above Rail Assets, Proceedings of ASOR 2009, Sept 27- 30, Gold Coast, Australia.
Lubricator Installation,
Operation Factors and
Field Tests
R3.110 Appendix 2
CRC for Rail Innovation December 2013 Page 0

Lubricator Installation, Operation Factors and Field Tests
CRC for Rail Innovation Document:

Old Central Station, 290 Ann St Title: Lubricator Installation, Operation Factors and Field Tests
Brisbane Qld 4000
Project Leader: Professor Gopinath Chattopadhyay
GPO Box 1422
Brisbane Qld 4001 Authors: Md. Gyas Uddin and revised by Prof. Colin Cole,
Project No: R3-110
Tel: +61 7 3221 2536 Project Name: Rail Curve Lubrication
Fax: +61 7 3235 2987
www.railcrc.net.au
Synopsis: The wayside lubrication method is widely used in the rail industry for reducing rail-wheel wear.
Several approaches have been attempted in the past for selecting the correct lubricants and lubricators, and for
developing suitable placement models. However, research gaps in the understanding of gauge face lubrication
in the Australian rail network still exist. Thus a CRC project was developed on best practice rail curve
lubrication for the Australian rail industry. As a part of this research project, an updated lubricator placement
model with respect to various factors including applicators, lubricators and lubricants was proposed.
Correspondingly, the factors proposed were trialled in the field, the data were analysed the data and
conclusions drawn. This report aims to briefly introduce the lubricator placement model and validate the
manufacturers recommendations.
1 15-04-2013 Dhamodharan Raman
2 15-08-2013 Dhamodharan Raman
3 20-09-2013 D Raman & C Cole
4 20-10-2013 D Raman & C Cole
5 10-11-2013 D Raman & C Cole
6 40/04/14 Colin Cole Steering Committee Chris Gourlay
DISTRIBUTION
REVISION
DESTINATION 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Industry Participant x X X X X X X
for Review

Established and supported under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres Programme

This work is copyright. Apart from any use permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced
by any process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of CRC for Rail Innovation.

Table of Contents
ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................... - 4 -
1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................. 5
2. LUBRICATOR PLACEMENT MODELS ............................................................................................................................... 6
3. EVALUATION OF LUBRICATOR TECHNOLOGY............................................................................................................... 10
4. EVALUATION OF APPLICATOR BARS ............................................................................................................................ 14
5. LOCATION AND POSITION OF APPLICATOR BARS ........................................................................................................ 16
6. EVALUATION OF GREASE PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................... 19
6.1 DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS .................................................................................................................................... 20
7. DISCUSSION ................................................................................................................................................................. 32
8. CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 34
9. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................................ 36

Cof Co-efficient of Friction
LEI Lubrication Effectiveness Index
RAMS Reliability, availability, maintainability and safety
RPM Remote Performance Monitoring

1. Introduction
Rail and wheel are capital intensive assets for any railway and the adoption of proper maintenance strategies will
impact on the life and maintenance cost of these assets. The investment in rail maintenance has a large impact on
the reliability, availability, maintainability and safety (RAMS) of rail operations. Increased axle load and longer
train length bring challenges in the maintenance of rails and wheels due to increased track deterioration and
wear. Consistently maintaining the friction coefficient at the required level can help to reduce the wear, the
development of RCF short wave corrugation in curves and noise levels. It can also help to improve the steering
performance of the vehicle and relative energy savings. The required friction coefficient can be achieved by
proper lubrication of the rail/wheel interface. Wayside lubrication is one of the most widely used methods of rail
curve lubrication. Such lubrication practice involves various factors including:
application method
lubricants
frequency of application
rate of application (dose)
lubricator components (pump, container, nozzle and hose system)
grease consumption based on various axle loads (Tonnes).
In addition, the configuration of a lubrication system may vary for the following reasons:
proportion of tangent and curved track

constraint introduced by track availability, which determines the lubrication requirement
maintenance requirements.
Considering all these variables/factors, a suitable model is required to make lubricator placement decisions.

2. Lubricator Placement Models
Since wayside lubrication placement practice is a complex issue, lubricators are currently placed predominantly
on assumption, experience, visual inspection and trial and error. To overcome this subjectivity, researchers have
presented various lubricator placement models. In 1994, De Koker proposed an initial model considering track
related factors and traffic related factors (Table 1 and Equation 1). This model was then extended by Sroba et al.
(2001) by also considering the bogie factor in the model (Equation 2).
De Kokers final formula

(+)
, =
[1]

Sroba et al.s final formula
(+)
, =
[2]
Table 1: Different factors considered under current lubricator placement model
TRACK RELATED FACTORS TRAFFIC RELATED FACTORS
De Koker Sroba et al. De Koker Sroba et al.

(1994) (2001) (1994) (2001)
C+S C+S T T
P P A A
G G L L
R R V V
M M
BR BR
BG
Legend:
Factor Description Value Range

C C = the length of the curve, including spirals Any, (m)
S = the fraction of the length of adjacent tangent sections
S
5% of the tangent track between curves Any, (m)
Applicator Factor, proportional to carry distance. Highest carry
P distance will get a value of one and others less than one. The 0.0 to 1.0
same factor is used for both long and short bars.
G Grease Factor, G proportional to carry distance. Highest carry 0.0 to 1.0

distance will get a value of one and others less than one
Radius Factor, incorporates the impact of curves radius in
R lubrication requirement. Average degree of curvature of the Degrees per 30.48m
curve is used
Traffic Factor, (T =2 for bi-directional track and 1 for uni-
T 1 or 2
directional)
Axle Load Factor, gives a measure of mixed traffic the axle load
factor is based on the fraction of traffic share the same track
A S Standard Axle Load; A m - Maximum axle load n = 0.0 to 1.0
A
n Fraction of vehicle having axle load less than standard axle
load A =1.0 to 2.0
A = 1 + (A S * n)/A m
Locomotive Factor, Incorporates the impact of the wheelbases of
Typically 1.0
L different locomotives. Larger L for longer wheelbase. The most
0.5 1.5
common one in a network is used as the base value of unity
Velocity Factor, To accommodate varying traffic velocity.
The Velocity factor is calculated as a ratio of traffic velocity to the
V standard velocity at particular section of the network. (i.e. 0.0 to 1.0
V actual /V section ). The lower the speed more the distance between
lubricator placements. The common velocity is set as base value of unity
Misalignment Factor, To consider misaligned bogies which cause
flanging on tangent tracks. De Koken recommends a maximum Typically 1.25
M value of 1.25. The value implies that up to a 25% improvement in 1.0 to 2.0
lubrication effectiveness, in terms of coefficient of friction, is
possible by eliminating misaligned bogies (poor steering)
Braking Factor, To incorporate the effect of train braking. The range for
this parameter depends on the particular rail network. A value of unity
BR 1.0 to 2.0
is used for level track without severe braking. A maximum value of 2 is
used if there is severe downgrade and braking
Bogie Factor, To account for self steered bogies
(= 1.0 for tangent and curve less than 2 degree
BG 1.0 to 2.0
= 1.5 for curves between 2 and 5 degree
= 2.0 for curves greater 5 degree)
However, some shortcomings have been identified in the existing models. The following factors are rarely
considered:
evaluation or ranking of lubricator technology
ranking of grease based on performance in field study or lab test
ranking of applicator bars based on performance in grease distribution and carry distance
impact of mixed traffic like heavy haul, freight and passenger traffic has not been discussed
cost-benefit analysis
comparison of lubricator and applicator bars in terms of performance and economy.
To overcome these shortcomings, the current research has further extended the model by introducing two new
factors and also modifying a few existing factors (Equation 3).

Table 2: Extended lubricator placement model
Introducing New Factors Modified Factors

Lubricator Performance Factor, L perf Axle Load Factor, A 2
(Measured in terms of Reliability, (Due to mixed traffic the axle load factor is
Maintainability and Availability) based on the fraction of traffic sharing the
same track)
Rail/Wheel Profile Factor, P profile
(based on whether it is two-point, single-
point or conformal contact)
Legend:
Factor Description Value Range

Lubricator Performance Factor, measured in terms
L perf of Reliability, Maintainability and Availability. 0.03.. 1.0
Electric Lubricator: 1 Hydraulic Lubricator: 0.03
Rail/Wheel Profile Factor,
based on whether it is two-point, single-point or
P profile conformal contact. 0.25 1.0
Conformal Contact: 1, Two Point Contact: 0.5,
One Point Contact: 0.25
Axle Load Factor, A 2
(To accommodate different axle loads in Australian Ap np Af nf
network) A2 = 1 + +
Am Am
A2
A p & A f Axle Load p & f
n Fraction of vehicle having axle load p & f
A m - Maximum axle load
(+)
, = [3]
2
In this project work, field tests were conducted with respect to three of the above factors: Lubricator, Applicator
and Grease/Lubricant. This is because the focus of the study is on wayside lubrication and there was limited
access to or control over other factors such as Traffic and Axle load.
As a result of the validation field study, a conclusion regarding these three factors has been prepared. Details of
the other lubricator placement factors are not discussed in this report.
These placement models show similar relationships that seek to collect the various factors and combine them.
Application of the Lubrication Effectiveness Index (LEI) follows the same process for each equation and they
cannot be used without first determining the empirical nature of the application from field trials. The steps in
using the placement model are as follows:
1. Set up field trials for the lubricants and equipment options in service.

2. After a suitable test program, calculate the LEI for each type. This is completed by the summation of the
lubrication conditions along the track until the coefficient of friction falls below a minimum value (eg.
0.25). Factors G and P are set to be equal to 1 and these allow later scaling of the index for changes to
the applicator or the grease type. The calculation is one of :
(+)
( ) =

(+)
(, ) =
( + )
( , ) =
2
3. Having calculated the placement index, the index can be used to place lubricators at distances and
combinations of curves on that tally to this same value. As the objective is to place lubricators to ensure a
given selected quality of lubrication (e.g. coefficient of friction <0.25), the placement distance is
determined by the same summation until :
Distance between lubricators Placement Index.
4. As the desired result is to equal the carry distance of the coefficient of friction 0.25, the factors G and P
are set to 1.0 for the calculation of distance between lubricators. The formulae become:
(+)
( ) =
(+)
(, ) =
( + )
( , ) =
2

3. Evaluation of Lubricator Technology
The technology available for wayside gauge face lubrication has changed dramatically over the last decades. The
most recent wayside lubrication equipment is electronically controlled and is replacing the ageing mechanical and
hydraulic equipment, although the latter is still very common.
Hydraulic lubricators are the predominant type of lubricator used in Australian rail networks. The main features of
hydraulic lubricators are the grease tank, pump, and hydraulic plunger/actuator assembly on the gauge side of
the rail, a hydraulic hose connected to a pump externally mounted beside the grease tank, two applicator bars
and grease delivery hoses. Figure 1 shows a typical hydraulic lubricator.
Figure 1: Hydraulic Lubricator
Failure in hydraulic lubricator components is common which causes serious interruption in grease application. It
causes whole system failure and rails can become poorly lubricated or dry. The overall results of failure analysis
and reliability calculation are presented in Table 4 and discussed below.
A mechanical lubricator consists of a plunger and pump and when wheels make contact with the plunger, the
pump starts its operation by distributing the lubricant from a reservoir to the distribution unit. The lubricant is
then picked up by the wheel flange and distributed along the rail.
An electronic lubricator has a sensor which detects the approach of a train and activates an electric pump to
deliver the lubricants.
Mechanical and hydraulic lubricators are simple in construction, easy to install and have a lower initial cost.
However, the failure analysis and reliability calculations showed that hydraulic and mechanical lubricators have a
probability of failure of 93% whereas, the electric lubricator has a failure value of less than 35%. Frequent
breakdowns due to the wear of mechanical components occur. Field investigation and trials show that failure
modes are dominated by cavitation at the grease pump inlet, damage of applicator bars, clogging of ports,
breakdown of the grease delivery hose in joints and manifolds. They also require the cleaning of the bars to
ensure proper dispensing of the lubricant. Another characteristic is the poor control of grease dispensing volumes
and substantial waste of grease to the surrounding track and formation contamination.

Both the mechanical and hydraulic lubricators deliver grease triggered by every passing wheel without precise
control adjustment, which can cause huge grease wastage and severe top of rail contamination. The Canadian
Pacific Railways (CPR) has confirmed that these lubricators need high maintenance and do not work effectively at
low train speeds (Sroba et al. 2001). This is because mechanical and hydraulic lubricators work effectively only if
the train speeds are above the prescribed speed level. In curves, particularly on grades, trains can be operating
below normal speed or curve speed. Some typical curve speeds obtained from an industry partner of this CRC
project are shown in Table 3.
Table 3: Examples of Curve Radius and Train Speed Limits
Radius 201 302 503 500 801 1000 1487

Train Speed 25 60 70 70 60 60 40
(km/hr)
A prescribed list of failure modes of electric units can be detected and communicated if the unit has a Remote
Performance Monitoring (RPM) system installed. This improvement detectability increases the maintainability
which eventually increases the availability of electric lubricators compared to hydraulic ones. The RPM feature
can generate statistical data, reports, graphical presentations, alarms and warnings with hourly updates for each
Individual lubricator.
Table 4: Reliability values for the components of hydraulic lubricators

Table 5: Reliability evaluation of components and whole system for Electric lubricators
The key objectives of lubrication are to achieve the required gauge face co-efficient of friction with a minimum
number of lubricators, less consumption of lubricants and low maintenance. The National Research Council of
Canada has demonstrated from field tests that the electronic lubricators dispense nearly 48% less lubricant than
the hydraulic lubricator to lubricate the same track distance. In a field trial Canadian Pacific Rail (CPR) replaced 16
hydraulic lubricators with eight electronic units and seven of these electronic units were solar powered. Though
there were some initial operation problems related to the solar units, CPR successfully completed the trials.
Consequently, they implemented the system in their network and found it has significantly improved the
efficiency and reliability of their lubrication program (Sroba et al. 2001).

Figure 2: Electronic Lubricator with major components
The recent field investigations on an Australian heavy haul rail network (26 Ton axle load) have determined that
grease dispensed from hydraulic or mechanical units was being successfully dispensed to the wheel. However, it
did not carry far down the track to protect the rail gauge face. A major portion of the grease can be wasted or
leaked from the bars and assemblies of mechanical and hydraulic devices. The grease carry distance ends within
short distances from the lubricator and the rest of the track remains unprotected. Table 6 shows the tribometer
readings on two hydraulic lubricator unit sites where grease ran out within the first two curves and the gauge face
was dry.
Table 6: Average Coefficient of Friction (COF), data within first 2 curves from currently operating Hydraulic
Lubricator site.

4. Evaluation of Applicator Bars
It is a challenge to transfer grease from rail to wheel maintaining the correct target location on the rail profile and
achieving the needed carry distance. It depends on the type of bars and the appropriate location of placement.
Application bars are generally mounted to the lower part of the rail head to deliver lubricant to the wheels for
transfer to the gauge face and gauge corner of the high rail of curves. Grease guides of the bars provide a means
for pick up by the wheels. There are short bars (600mm in length) and long bars (1400mm in length). Our survey
on current lubrication practice in the Australian network suggested that two short bars are generally placed in the
spiral of the curve.
However, the literature review suggests that long bars in the tangent track have advantages over short bars in the
spiral of curves. The National Research Council of Canadas test on CPR has suggested that the longer bars
consumed 36% less lubricant than shorter bars to effectively lubricate the same distance. Long bars deliver grease
to a greater area of the wheel circumference and therefore have been measured to lubricate a greater track
length when compared to short bars. Similarly, Reiff and Gage (1999) reported that implementation of longer
bars in the Norfork Southern Railway recorded a 67% reduction in consumption and 107 % improvement in
carrying distance. These reductions in consumption and wastage have eventually led them to reduce the number
of lubricators from 49 to two in one of their mountainous networks. As long bars are installed on both rails in
tangent track, only one lubricator unit is required to lubricate both left hand curves and right hand curves. In the
case of short bars two units are needed to lubricate each curve. On the other hand, long bars do not need to be
removed during the curve grinding cycle which reduces the work requirement for the lubricator maintainer.
For this CRC project, the Goonyella line was the selected test site and long bars were placed in tangent track
before mild curves (1000m 600m) to supply the grease around the throat area of the wheels to ensure more
effective lubrication in sharper curves along the track (Figure 3). Long bars with grease distribution mechanisms
in the form of brushes in the trough area were used. This installation spread grease around the wheel flange for
distribution on both rails and therefore on left and right hand curves.
Figure 3: Long bar application and grease on the wheel of a train that has stopped just past a long bar lubricator
site
In the same Goonyella line, short bars were also installed (Figure 4) in the transition of mild left and right hand
curves. Two short bars were used in each transition and their placement is just at the point when the wheel
throat starts to contact the gauge corner. This helps the wheel throat to pick-up more grease and lubricate along
the track.

Figure 4: Short Applicator Bars
The different bars gave different results in carry distance. The field trials have established that longer bars have
achieved 1.6 times longer carry distance than short bars even with less grease. Figure 5 shows the performance
(in carry distance) of electric lubricators with long bars positioned in tangent near curves and with short bars
positioned on the spiral of curves and the same grease, grease C. Both positioning practices were in accordance
with the CPR.
Achieved Grease Carry Distance

5
4.5
3.5
3
Distance in km
2.5
1.5
0.5
0
Achieved Carry Achieved Carry Achieved Carry Achieved Carry
Distance (2 SB-HR, Distance (2 LB-ER, Distance (2 SB-HR, Distance (2 LB-ER,
Supplier X, Grease C) Supplier X, Grease C) Supplier Y, Grease C) Supplier Y, Grease C)
km km km km
Figure 5: Achieved carry distance with different bars and same grease in field trials

5. Location and Position of Applicator Bars
The wheel flange and its contact with the rail are used as the lubricant transport mechanism. The success of an
effective lubrication strategy depends on this transport mechanism (Thelen & Lovette 1996). It was shown by
field experiments that to optimise this mechanism it is essential to identify a right location for the bars in a track
and vertical positioning of the bars relative to the rail head.
For the short bars, the installation location was selected based on the following criteria:
located in a mild curve where the wheels steer through the curve purely by rolling radius difference, that
is, with minimal flanging on the high rail. For QR Network coal lines this is considered to be in a curve with
radius greater than or equal to 500 meters
placed in the transition area of the curve at the point where the wheel flange just starts to touch the high
rail gauge corner
For the long bars, the installation location was selected based on the following criteria:
located in tangent track before a mild curve of 500 metres radius or greater
no obvious signs of any potential train hunting (if hunting takes place at long bar location the wheels
might move towards one rail and hence the wheels on the other side wont be able to pick-up the grease)
Having selected a proper location for the bars, the bar height was adjusted to ensure that the grease was
effectively picked up by the wheels. The bar height from the top of the rail was adjusted by using the wheel
profile gauge (Figure 6) .
Figure 6: A typical control box in an electronic lubricator
Figure 7: A typical splash test location

The application rate and interval of grease were controlled by the electronic control box. The optimal setting of
the grease application rate was achieved by the Splash test which is a trial and error process (Figure 7). The
process was started with the recommended manufacturers settings which were then checked by measuring the
amount of splash and head contamination. Once the optimal setting was achieved, a waiting period of around a
week (depends on traffic density) was observed to allow the system to reach a steady state of grease
film/distribution in the gauge face and level co-efficient of friction. A tribometer test was then conducted to
determine the friction level and evaluate the performance of the applicator bars. Within optimal settings for long
bars it was observed that for more than 50000 wheels at each test segment only a very little amount of grease
had been scattered away from rail gauge side. The recommended pump-settings achieved for the various
applicator bars and greases are provided in Table 7.
Table 7: Optimal grease application rate/ pump for different bars and type of grease, achieved by splash test
Suggested theories which provide justification towards the above conclusions are as follows:
For short bar units, the angle of attack of the wheelset will significantly affect the bar function. This yaw angle of
the wheelset causes the grease to be scattered away from the longitudinal axis of the rail. Another issue is when
the wheel travels faster, the wheel will flange and squeeze the grease bead out and waste the grease around the
short bars. Figure 8 clearly demonstrates the direction of grease when the wheels strike the grease beads. The
direction of grease shows that there is no tendency for grease to travel towards the gauge corner; instead, it
travels towards the centre of the track and even reaches the low-rail side of the track.

Figure 8: Short bars unit site on the spiral of curve, the direction of grease movement while wheels strike on
grease beads and bead shape
Proper site selection and positioning can significantly reduce grease wastage and improve the amount of grease
being transferred and transported from a long bar site. In comparison to Figure 14 for short bars on the spiral of
the curve, Figure 9 shows that the wheel direction was parallel to the rail tangential axis and the least amount of
grease wastage was recorded.
Figure 9: Long bar unit site on tangent track, the direction of grease movement while wheels strike on
grease beads and bead shape
If a significant portion of grease is lost at the pick-up site then this could adversely affect the amount of grease
that remains for friction control. Grease losses may vary based on the grease bead size, quality and properties.
Short bars have a bigger bead size than long bars. Combining these factors, short bars will cause more wastage of
grease compare to long bar units.

6. Evaluation of Grease Performance
Grease is a mixture of lubricating oils and thickeners and may contain special additives based on their purpose
(Stachowiak & Batchelor 2011). The type of thickener added to grease determines the characteristics. Thickeners
are dispersed in lubricating oils in order to produce a stable colloidal structure or gel so that oil is constrained and
becomes unable to flow (Hamrock 1991). It is used to reduce friction i.e. reduction of wear, noise and energy
consumption and ultimately enhance the life of mating parts (Hamrock 1991). It has to meet the same
requirements as lubricating oils but it must remain as a semi-solid mass despite high service temperatures
(Stachowiak & Batchelor 2011). If grease liquefies and moves away from the contact area, then the likelihood of
lubrication failure rapidly increases. The life time of grease in service is often determined by the eventual loss of
the semi-solid consistency to become either a liquid or a hard deposit. Metallic soap thickeners are responsible
for retentivity, heat, water and extreme load resistance. Most of the rail curve greases have calcium and lithium
thickeners and graphite and molybdenum are the most common additives.
From our survey for this CRC project R3.110 it was realised that there are no standards or guidelines for the
selection of the best grease for heavy haul application.
A laboratory test can provide information on grease rheology, flow characteristics and behaviours. However, to
find out the best performance and trade-offs, field tests are inevitably necessary.
The field study included the testing of several greases from Australia and North America to investigate and
analyse potential parameters for effective heavy haul lubrication. Various greases and their properties are listed
in Table 8. Tests were conducted using the long applicator bars and short applicator bars. Surrounding lubricators
were turned off to avoid contamination of the site with grease from other units. The track was allowed to dry
down for 3 days (approximately 30,000 wheel passes) and measurements were made with the Tribometer to
confirm the test curve was dry. The test grease was then added to the grease tank and the units run for
approximately 40,000 to 60,000 wheels. Tribometer measurements were taken from the lubricator test start
point up to the location where the coefficient of friction (CoF) was greater than 0.25 on the hi-rail gauge corner at
70 degrees. Similarly, gauge face coverage with different types of greases, oil separation and strength of grease
with tackiness were observed and recorded.
Table 8: Typical properties of greases have been used in field test on QR North Coast Line

Figure 10 shows the method of effective lubrication measurement, long applicator bars on tangent track,
Tribometer run at the gauge corner and finger test on the gauge side of hi-rails in curves.
Figure 10: Methods of Lubrication Effectiveness Measurement
6.1 Data Analysis and Results

Gauge face coverage with different types of grease is shown in Figures 11 and 12. Following field inspection and
measurements, the following observations were made:
Different grease shows different coverage at the gauge face and different carry distance.
Most of grease Ds presence was observed in the bottom of the gauge face and there was no grease
on the top of the rail contact area in most of the curves.
Grease A showed the worst coverage based on gauge face presence and carry distance.
Grease C showed the best coverage based on gauge face existence and carry distance.
5
4.5
4
3.5
Distance (km)
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Grease A Grease B Grease C Grease D Grease E
Grease Type
Figure 11: Comparative results of performance of different greases in carry distance with the same
applicator bars

2+2 Long Bars and Grease A
b. 2+2 Long bars and Grease B
c. 2+2 Long bars and Grease C
d. 2+2 Long bars and Grease D

e. 2+2 Long bars and Grease E
Figure 12: Gauge face coverage with different grease in field test (a, b, c, d, and e)
Oil Separation and Grease Tackiness:
Oil separation causes the loss of greases lubricity which will affect the continuous existence of grease in the
gauge corner. Throughout the field trial, the levels of oil separation were observed for different greases. Different
greases bled in different volumes within the same period. The following figures represent a comparative study of
oil separation and tackiness in grease A and grease C. Grease C has very negligible oil separation compared to
grease A.
Figure 13: A bulk of Oil Separation (After 7 months in store) in Grease A and very little tackiness
and structural strength of Grease A
Figure 14: Very little oil separation in Grease C (after 7 months in store) and a high tackiness
and structural strength of Grease C

Tribometer data (Coefficient of friction measurements) Analysis:

The following figures show the COF distribution along the curves from the lubricator site in the direction
of traffic.
The data were collected for up to 9 km from the lubricator site and plotted to represent the pattern that
COF follows along the track in the direction of traffic.
This 6 km covers 20 curves (both right hand and left hand curves) from the lubricator site.
The distance between the curves is not uniform and the curve distance data is provided in Table 9.
Effective lubrication should enable the lubrication up until the last curve.
If the COF falls within the required limit for more measurements, then it is an indication that the grease
has performed consistently for a longer distance i.e. the grease has more carrying distance.
The COF between the wheel and the rail varies in the track between a minimum of almost 0 and a
maximum of up to 0.8 (the steel to steel COF static is 0.8 for the dry condition and 0.16 for the lubricated
condition).
COF values between 0.1 and 0.25 have been considered as the effective gauge face lubrication.
COF value above 0.35 has been considered as the effective TOR lubrication in Australia. However, the
literature suggests that maintaining a value between 0.3 and 0.35 is considered ideal (Sroba et al. 2001).
Figure 15: Wet tribometer data for short bars on high rail and grease A
The tribometer data in Figure 15 for grease A with short bars show:
The coefficient of friction at the gauge face rises above the target value of 0.25 within a very few
measurements and ends up within the first curve after the lubricator site (Figure 11 and Table 9).
There is a similar trend between the gauge face data and the top of hi-rail data. When the gauge face
COF goes up, the top of rail data also goes up.
The top hi-rail data were mostly below 0.35 which is below the expected level of friction.
A very short carry distance was observed.

Figure 16: Wet tribometer data for long bars on each rail for grease A
The tribometer data in Figure 16 for grease A with long bars shows:
Except for the first curve, all the data are above the target value of 0.25, which means lubrication was not
effective (Figure 11 and Table 9).
No specific trend between gauge face hi-rail data and TOR-hi and TOR-low was observed.
Carry distance was very short (0.33 km) i.e. only one curve.

Figure 17: Wet Tribometer data for long bars for grease C
The wet tribometer data in Figure 17 for grease C with long bars shows:
Coefficient of friction data was below the target value 0.25 for a considerable distance, which means
effective lubrication was observed up to a long way (4.623 km) from the lubricator site (Figure 11 and
Table 9).
There is a very similar trend in gauge face COF data which means the lubrication status was quite stable
within an appropriate level.
As gauge face COF values increase slowly, the TOR-hi rail COF values decrease slowly.
The values were within the target value for TOR. Except some TOR-Low value, most of the TOR values were under
control. The cause of the trend of gauge face-hi and TOR-hi needs to be further analysed. The field test of grease
C shows that due to structural strength and tackiness with EP additives, it stays at the gauge face contact area for
the longest carry distance.

Figure 18: Wet Tribometer data for long bars for grease D
The tribometer data in Figure 18 for grease D with long bars shows that:
The gauge face-hi COF has a good trace within the target up to a few curves and TOR-hi values were also
within the target values.
There was no dramatic change in gauge face-hi COF up to certain curves from the lubricator site.
The carry distance was 1.65 km only which was not close enough tp grease C (Figure 11 and Table 9).
Figure 19: Wet Tribometer data for long bars for grease B

The tribometer data in Figure 19 for grease B with long bars shows that the gauge face-hi COF values were below
the target values for up to curve 9, which is an indication of relatively longer carry distance of 2.96 km (Figure 11
and Table 9). However, it is still less than grease Cs carry distance of 4.623 km.
Figure 20: Wet Tribometer data for long bars for grease E
The tribometer data in Figure 20 show that grease E with long bars maintained the COF value for only up to two
curves, which is a clear indication of the shorter carry distance (1.28 km) (Table 9).
Table 9 shows average flange COF performance of electric lubricators with long bars in the tangent track and
short bars in the spiral of curves and different types of greases. It shows that the long bars unit from Supplier X
has the longest carry distance with grease C compared to the short bars unit from supplier X with the same
grease.

Table 9: Average flange COF performance of lubricator units from different suppliers and with different greases
Hydraulic Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric Hydraulic Hydraulic
Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier
X X X X X X X Y Y Y
Curve No from Lubricator

2SB-HR 1 LB-ER 2 LB-ER 2 LB-ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB - ER 2 SH-HR 2 SB-HR,
Curve Direction
Grease A Grease A Grease A Grease C Grease D Grease B Grease E Grease C Grease C Grease C
Fig 15 Fig 16 Fig 17 Fig 18 Fig 19 Fig 20
Carry Distance in km, the Lubricator was located at 554.00 km
Track 0.34 1.39 0.33 4.623 1.4 2.96 1.28 1.55 2.87 0.72
Survey
Average Flange Coefficient of Friction
KM
553.664 R 2 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.2 0.24 0.17 0.2 0.24 0.2 0.22
553.175 L 3 0.26 0.21 0.31 0.16 0.2 0.2 0.22 0.16 0.23
552.72 R 4 0.23 0.34 0.19 0.17 0.2 0.33 0.26 0.25
552.613 R 5 0.26 0.25 0.28 0.24 0.32 0.2
552.5 R 6 0.34
552.35 R 7 0.24 0.27
551.46 L 8 0.33 0.3 0.33 0.22 0.24 0.25
551.032 R 9 0.28 0.23 0.41 0.23 0.2 0.3
550.165 R 12 0.26 0.34
549.377 R 14 0.24
546.72 R 18 0.35 0.35
545.386 R 19 0.38 0.29

The following Figure 21 shows that the Average Coefficient of friction GF-Hi (2+2 Long Bars, Supplier X with
Grease C) has the best consistency with the longest carry distance. This combination has the very low rate
of change of gauge face COF, , compared to other combinations.
Figure 21: Change in Average Gauge Face COF, with respect to Curve Numbers from Lubricator Unit
Calculation of LEI,
Using the Sroba formula (2)
( + )
, =

And values:
Factor Description Value Used
C C = the length of the curve, including spirals Any, (m)
S = the fraction of the length of adjacent tangent sections
S Any, (m)
5% of the tangent track between curves
P Applicator Factor 1.0
G Grease Factor 1.0
R Radius Factor, curve deg Degrees
T Traffic Factor 1
A Axle Load Factor 1.0
L Locomotive Factor 1.0
V Velocity Factor 1.0

M Misalignment Factor 1.25

BR Braking Factor 1.0
BG Bogie Factor 1.5
The Sroba formula (2) reduces to
( + ) 1.0 1.0
, =
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.5
, = 0.5333 ( + )

Table 10 Sample Calculations of Lubrication Effectiveness Index (LEI) for applicators from different suppliers and with different greases
Hydraulic Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric
Distance from Lubricator (km)

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier
Curve No from Lubricator

X X X X X X
Curve Radius (m)

2SB-HR 2 LB-ER 2 LB-ER 2 LB - ER 2 LB ER 2 LB - ER
Grease A Grease A Grease C Grease D Grease B Grease E
Fig 15 Fig 16 Fig 17 Fig 18 Fig 19 Fig 20
Carry Distance (km)

Track 0.34 0.33 4.623 1.4 2.96 1.28
Survey
Calculated Lubrication Effectiveness Index (LEI) for each Curve
KM
553.664 0.336 600 2 91 91 68 73 73 101
553.175 0.825 596 3 91 120 121 103 101
552.72 1.28 403 4 199 109 203 185
552.613 1.387 388 5 192 119 108
552.5 1.5 474 6
552.35 1.65 415 7 119
551.46 2.54 415 8 1254
551.032 2.968 415 9 278
550.165 3.835 590 12
549.377 4.623 1005 14 94
546.72 7.28 543 18
545.386 805 19
Total Lubrication Effectiveness
374 529 1646 503 638 202
Index (LEI)

7. Discussion
Identifying and implementing an effective lubrication system involves various decision factors and
performance requirements. In general, these decision factors are categorized into track related factors and
traffic related factors. Researchers have developed a lubricator placement model with respect to these
decision factors. In this research, existing models have been extended by adding new factors (lubricator
performance factors and the rail/wheel profile factor) and modifying a few existing factors (applicator
factor, grease factor, traffic factor and axle load factor). Field tests have been conducted on lubricator
technology, applicator bars, and the location and position of these bars and greases. This is because the
focus of the study is on wayside lubrication and there is limited control over other factors such as Traffic
and Axle load.
Lubricator Technology:
Our review suggested that hydraulic lubricators are the prominent type of lubricator used in Australian rail
networks. The other kind of lubricator used extensively was the mechanical lubricator. The field visits and
industry survey revealed that reliability of the components was the major issue with hydraulic lubricator
technology. It eventually leads to very ineffective lubrication and wastage of grease.
It was recognized from the literature study that electric lubricators are the latest technology and have been
successfully implemented in the North American and Canadian rail networks. Consequently, a desktop
based reliability evaluation of hydraulic and electric lubricators was conducted. This study suggested that
the probability of failure for a hydraulic unit is 93% whereas for an electric unit it is less than 35%. If a
remote performance monitoring system is included, this failure value decreases by increasing the
maintainability and availability. Based on this, electric units were installed for the field study. Two electric
units (X and Y) from two suppliers were installed and studied. Of these, one unit gave better carry distance
than the other despite comparison of the same length and type of distributor bars (Long bars) and the
same grease(grease C). Note the carry distance difference was substantial - 4.623 km versus 1.55km (Table
9). These differences must be due to the pumping characteristics (application rate and overall rate).
Applicator Bars:
There were two types of bars tested: short bars (600mm in length) and long bars (1400 mm in length). In
accordance with current practice, the two short bars were placed in the spiral of the curve whereas either
two or four long bars were placed in the tangent track before the curve. Our literature review suggested
that 2+2 long bars have several advantages over shorter bars in terms of performance, operation and
maintenance. Trials by Canadian Rail had shown that the longer bars consume 36% less lubricant to
effectively lubricate the same distance. Accordingly, we conducted field trials to compare the lubricator
bars with the same grease type. These tests showed that the longer bars achieved up to 1.6 times longer
carry distance compared to short bars (Table 9). The combination of supplier X with Grease C and 2 Long
Bars on each rail maintained the COF until 4.623 km, whereas the 2 short bars combination managed to
maintain only up to 2.87 km. A similar trial was conducted with supplier Y. Once again the combination
with 2 long bars maintained the COF for a higher distance than 2 short bars (1.55 km vs. 0.72km).

It can thus be concluded that long bars placed in tangent track before curves help to supply the grease
around the throat area of the wheel and ensure more effective lubrication along the track.
Location and Position of Applicator Bars:

In order to optimise the lubrication mechanism, the other important parameter is location and position of
the applicator bars. This involves the location of the bar in the track, placement of the bar with respect to
the vertical height of the rail, application rate and application interval. Initially the guidelines for positioning
the short and long bars were reviewed and listed. The vertical placement i.e. the bar height from the top of
the rail, was achieved through adjustments with respect to worn wheel gauge. Consequently, the control
box settings, which are required to determine the application rate and frequency, were achieved through a
trial and error method the splash test. After several trials, suggestions were made for control box settings
for different grease types and bars (Table 7).
Evaluation of Grease Performance:

As grease is the key component of the lubrication mechanism, selection of the most suitable grease is very
important. However, the literature review suggests that there are no standards or guidelines for the
selection of greases for rail lubrication. Accordingly, five greases from different suppliers were obtained for
our study. Comparative field tests were carried out with different greases in the same operating
environment and by using the same lubrication mechanism (see columns 2 to 7, Table 9). That is, they were
used in the Supplier X lubricator and two long bars were used in each rail. A tribometer was used to
measure the friction coefficient at the gauge corner and the finger test was used on the gauge side of the
high rails to determine the effectiveness of lubrication. Our comparative study on the performance in carry
distance of different greases with the same applicator bars shows that: different greases can show very
different coverage at the gauge face and give very different carry distances.
Grease A showed the worst coverage based on gauge face presence and carry distance of 0.34 Km
(Figure 15).
Grease B showed that the gauge face-hi COF value was below the target values for a relatively
higher carry distance of 2.96 km, Figure 19.
Grease C showed the best coverage based on gauge face existence and carry distance of 4.6 km,
Figure 17. In addition, the greases were qualitatively evaluated in terms of oil separation and
grease strength. Again, grease C demonstrated negligible oil separation compared to grease A.
The tribometer data also affirmed that with grease C the co-efficient of friction data were
consistently below the target value 0.25 for up to 4.5 km, which is an indication of effective
lubrication. Due to grease Cs structural strength and tackiness with EP additives, it stays at the
gauge face contact area after multiple loaded trains pass through the line. The grease firmly settles
down at the gauge face area and delivers a little trace of grease towards the TOR-hi and reduces
the COF at TOR-Hi rail to some extent.
Grease D: The bulk of grease D was observed in the bottom of the gauge face and there was no
grease on the top of the rail contact area in most of the curves (Figure 12). The carry distance was
observed as 1.4km, Figure 18.
Grease E: This grease gave similar performance but poorer performance to that of grease B, only
maintaining suitable COF for two curves.

An overall comparison is shown in Figure 21. Grease C appears to be quite superior to the other greases.
The other greases have ceased to be effective at shorter carry distances and show CoF increasing more
quickly than for grease C. In addition, in rail curve lubrication, it is important to have consistent values of
the coefficient of friction within the target range. Our results confirmed that the Average Coefficient of
friction GF-Hi (2+2 Long Bars, Supplier X with Grease C) has the best consistency with the longest carry
distance. This combination has the very low rate of change of gauge face COF, , compared to other
combinations.
Some example calculations of Lubrication Effectiveness Index are included in Table 10. Following the
definitions it will be realized that the results will just reflect the carry distance results; however, it was
considered important to illustrate the state of lubricator placement theory. It will be seen that the process
is highly empirical. No useful placement calculations can be made without first calibrating the equations. To
get a good calibration, the test section should include the variety of curves expected in track and a new test
is needed for each type of pump applicator and grease. In addition, all curves need to be measured. In the
case of Table 10, not all curves are physically measured, and so in most cases the LEI values are less than
correct values, noting that missed curves will be evaluated as tangent sections.
The research team proposed a new Lubrication Effectiveness Index. The new index includes some
additional factors: Lubricator Performance Factor ( L perf ), Rail/Wheel Profile Factor (P profile ), and Axle Load
Factor (A 2 ). These new factors make intuitive sense and build on the previous Sroba formula. The test
program, however, did not allow verification of the usefulness of the new model. As the additional
parameters add complexity, they will also increase the complexity and the number of field trials needed to
calibrate them. Consequently, a much more detailed test program would be needed to verify the new
model.
Considering the worked example of LEI and the results in Table 10, it would seem that the existing Sroba
equation already has many more parameters than can be adjusted in a simple test. It may well be argued
that a simple equation, for example K (C+S)*R, be used where K is the Condition Adjustment factor and
may be more practical. Results seem to indicate that a field test is needed anyway, and so such a simple
equation, once calibrated, could be used for all like conditions on a given train-track route.
8. Conclusions
Not enough information was obtained to understand or make conclusions about pumping characteristics,
although different pumping systems gave significantly different results.
Long Bar applicators gave better results than short bars, although positioning practices also differed. The
Long bar performance was also affected by pumping unit types. More study is needed to really compare
application equipment packages (pumps and applicator types) by properly comparing all equipment
combinations and in-track positioning options of both types. A new result and conclusion may be possible.
Differences in grease characteristics can give remarkably different results. Grease C gave much better
results than the other four greases tested. If a very poor estimate of repeatability is assumed, the

performance for grease C can still be considered as giving the best carry distance; however, margins
between this grease and grease B could be much smaller than results indicate.
It is considered that the poor estimate of repeatability suggested in this report be accepted until more trials
are completed. This means that grease B should be considered as a good second choice grease.
All results must be understood and used taking into account the operating context. The tests were carried
out in sub-tropical and temperate zones near the Tropic of Capricorn. This area has an absence of extreme
temperatures ranging from mild winters (+8C) to moderately hot summers (+35C). Very different results
regarding grease type could emerge from tests where sub zero temperatures occur (snow areas) and/or
extreme heat (+45C) such as in the Australian Pilbara.
Results obtained should be useful for application on rail systems in most areas in the east coast mainland
States of Australia (Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria).
The test program was not extensive enough to provide useful reference values for the Lubrication
Effectiveness Index. The data presented are therefore only illustrative of the method.
Although a new and more comprehensive Effectiveness Index was proposed, its usefulness could not be
evaluated from the limited test program achieved.

9. References
De Koker, J 1994, Rail and Wheel Flange Lubrication, Journal and Report of Proceedings - permanent way
institution, London, Vol. 112, No. 2, pp. 119-126.
Hamrock, BJ 1991, Fundamentals of Fluid Film Lubrication, NASA reference publication 1255, USA
Reiff, R & Gage, S 1999, Evaluation of Three Top of Rail Lubrication Systems, TTCI Report No. R-936.
Sroba, P, Rooney, M, Dashko, R & Magel, E 2001, Canadian Pacific Railway's 100% effective lubrication
initiative, AREMA 2001 Conference & Exhibition, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Stachowiak, GW & Batchelor, AW 2011, Engineering Tribology, Third Edition, Elsevier Butterworth-
Heinemann, Burlington, USA.
Thelen, G & Lovette, M 1996, A parametric study of the lubrication transport mechanism at the rail-wheel
interface, Wear, Vol 191(1), pp.113-120.

A Summary of Guidelines
and Specifications for Rail
Curve Lubrication
R3.110 Appendix 3
A Summary of Practices and Standards
Document:
Title: A Summary of Practices and Standards for Rail Curve Lubrication
Old Central Station
290 Ann St
Project Leader: Prof Gopinath Chattopadhyay
Brisbane Qld 4000
Author: Dhamodharan Raman
GPO Box 1422
Brisbane Qld 4001
Project No.: R3.110
Tel: +61 7 3221 2536
Project Name: Rail Curve Lubrication
Fax: +61 7 3235 2987
Synopsis:
Implementation of an effective wayside lubrication system is a highly complicated issue. This is due to the fact
that numerous decision factors, which include lubricator technology, lubricants, applicator bars, track side
placement, positioning of the bars, setting of the grease dispensing rate and its maintenance, significantly
affect lubrication performance. To manage these decision factors and thus the lubrication practice, several
standards/guidelines been established by the rail operators and researchers. These standards and guidelines are
reviewed and referenced in this report. The guidelines reflect both Australian and international practices and are
derived from the Australian Rail Track Corporation (ARTC), the CRC for Rail Innovations project R3.110, and Aurizon
Operations (previously QRNational ) for the Australian experience, as well as the International Heavy Haul Association
and Indian Railways to include overseas experiences.

1 30/11/2013 D Raman
3 30/04/14 Colin Cole Project Steering Chris Gourlay
Committee
DISTRIBUTION
REVISION
DESTINATION
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Industry x X X
Participant for
Review
Established and supported under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres Program
process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of CRC for Rail Innovation.
CRC for Rail Innovation 2013 Pagei

Table of Contents
Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. ii
1. Introduction................................................................................................................................................................1
2. Factors to be considered for effective gauge face lubrication...................................................................................2
2.1. Selection of Lubricator .......................................................................................................................................2
2.2. Selection of lubricant .........................................................................................................................................3
2.3. Selection of applicator bar .................................................................................................................................4
2.4. Placement of lubrication system ........................................................................................................................5
2.4.1. Need for the lubrication .............................................................................................................................5
2.4.2. Location of the lubrication system .............................................................................................................5
2.4.3. Spacing of lubrication system.....................................................................................................................5
2.5. Selection of application bar settings ..................................................................................................................6
2.6. Operation of lubrication system.........................................................................................................................8
2.6.1. Performance measurement .......................................................................................................................8
2.6.2. Maintenance of the lubrication system .....................................................................................................9
References ........................................................................................................................................................................11
Attachment Links to Guidelines and Specifications ......................................................................................................12
CRC for Rail Innovation 2013 Pagei

ARTC Australian Rail Track Corporation
CoF Coefficient of Friction
IHHA International Heavy Haul Association
LEI Lubrication Efficiency Index
MGT Millions of Gross Tonnes
RCF Rolling Contact Fatigue
TTCI Transportation Technology Centre Inc
CRC for Rail Innovation 2013 Pageii

1. Introduction
Railway operations are characterized by continual deterioration of wheels and rails due to wear, with rates
increasing with higher axle loads and traffic volumes. Wear is a result of friction between the wheels and
rails. Gauge side wear on the high rails of sharper curves is a common problem (Turner 2008).
Consistently maintaining the friction coefficient at the required level can help to reduce wear, the
development of Rolling Contact Fatigue (RCF), short wave corrugation in curves and noise levels. It can also
help to improve the steering performance of the vehicle and achieve relative energy savings (INNOTRACK
2006). The required friction coefficient can be achieved by proper lubrication of the rail/wheel interface.
There are two friction zones on rail to be managed the gauge face and the top of the rail. These have
different friction requirements. However, the friction is predominantly managed through applying lubricants
between the rail gauge corner (side-of-rail) and the wheel flange using wayside lubricators. Train resistance,
especially in curves, can be reduced by proper lubrication of the wheel-rail interface.
For effective lubrication, the key parameters to consider are: the latest technology, proper track side
placement, effective positioning of the lubricator bars, optimal settings of the grease dispensing rate,
effective grease with the desired properties for traffic, and temperatures during the year. Excess application
of lubricants reduces the friction below the required level and causes safety issues (e.g. reduced brake
control).
Hence it is evident that wayside lubrication placement practice is a highly complicated issue. Lubricator
placement based on assumption and visual inspection is a common practice and there is little guidance for
what is the right location. In Australia, decisions regarding wayside lubricator placement are mostly based
on experience and trial and error by railway staff. .
The CRC project on Rail Curve lubrication (R3.110) has enabled guidelines and specifications to be collected
and summarised in this report. The Attachment provides the relevant links or where the documents can be
obtained.
CRC for Rail Innovation 2013 Page1

2. Factors to be considered for effective gauge face lubrication

An effective gauge face lubrication system is expected to provide required coverage on the gauge
face of a curve. In order to achieve these objectives, three lubrication issues have to be addressed:
selection, placement , and operation of the lubrication system.
The selection of the lubrication system involves:

selection of the lubricator
selection of the lubricant
selection of the applicator type (e.g. bar type, bar length etc).
The placement of the lubrication system involves:

selection of the lubricator location
selection of the application bar settings.
The operation of the lubrication system involves:

inspection and performance measurement
maintenance of the lubrication system.
2.1. Selection of Lubricator
In general, three types of lubricators are available in the market: mechanical, hydraulic and electric
units. The selection of a lubricator for a railway network is considered with respect to:
ease of installation and simplicity of operation
reliability of performance and ease of maintenance
availability of spare parts
availability of lubricant to be used
financial considerations (IHHA 2001; Sroba et al. 2001).
Mechanical and hydraulic units were originally installed in most of the rail networks. Currently the
trend is towards electric units which are reputed to give more reliable performance. A significant
advantage of the electric units is that they can be equipped with a remote performance monitoring
device to log and transmit the operational state of the unit. Power is provided from solar panels in
areas without access to mains power. The National Research Council of Canada has determined
from their field trials that electric units on average dispense 48% less lubricant per year than
hydraulic units to cover the same curve distance (Sroba et al. 2001).
Having realised the benefits of electric units, Aurizon and the Australian Rail Track Corporation
(ARTC) (see Attachment for references) have started implementing them in their networks.
The CRC project on rail curve lubrication (R3.110) has confirmed that hydraulic and mechanical
lubricators have a higher probability of failure (93%) than electric lubricators (<35). In this study, two
electric units (X and Y) from two suppliers were installed and studied. Of these two units one unit
gave better carry distance than the other despite comparison of the same length and type of
distributor bars and the same grease. The reason for this difference was not clear from the test
program data, but it serves to emphasize the need to test the actual performance of equipment
before placement decisions are finalized.

The Indian Railways have also observed from their trials that electric lubricators had better control
over dispensing the lubricant which resulted in less wastage of lubricant. They also suggest that the
hydraulic units preferable only on non-electrified sections having lesser MGT.
2.2. Selection of lubricant
CRC project R3.110 found that there are currently no standards or guidelines for the selection of the
best grease for heavy haul application. Each rail agency selects the lubricants from their field trials.
The three key characteristics of lubricants that determine performance are lubricity, retentivity and
pumpability (IHHA 2001).
Lubricity: This determines a lubricants capacity to reduce friction. The commercially
available rail lubricants are able to provide the required flange face friction value of less
than 0.25. The lubricity alone cannot be considered to select lubricants.
Retentivity: This determines the operational load and lateral creepage limit to which a
lubricant can maintain its lubricity.
Pumpability: This determines the lubricants condition to be delivered continuously within

the required operating temperature.
In practice, the carry distance along the track and the corresponding gauge face friction value are
used to determine the lubricants performance. In addition, migration of grease to the top of the rail
must be limited so that traction and braking are not compromised.
Specific brands of grease for given applications are often not published, but it was found that the
Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) has selected Shell Cadura Plus (or equivalent), which they reported
had higher retentivity, good gauge face lubricity and good performance in both summer and winter.
Similarly, the ARTC has a list of approved lubricants to be used for different situations. The ARTC
suggests using a standard lubricant, Caltex 904, for regional areas. The high performance lubricants
(Rocol Rail Curve Grease) are preferred only when there are severe grade braking locations (more
than about 1:50), for the metropolitan area or wherever it can be economically justified. A
biodegradable lubricant (FUCHS 234GOWX) was suggested for special environmental areas.
The Transportation Technology Centre Inc. (TTCI) has conducted experiments with eco-friendly Soya
Bean oil based gauge face lubricants and concluded that they meet rail lubrication requirements.
It is also typical for railways to specify coefficients of friction (CoF) and sometimes carry distance.
The target co-efficient of friction value and carry distance as suggested in IHHA are:
CoF : between 0.1 and 0.25 for gauge face of the rail
CoF: between 0.30 and 0.35 for top of the rail
carry distance should be 1.5 to 5.0 kms.
Similarly, the Indian Railways requirement for gauge face lubrication was :
lubricity should enable a friction value of 0.25 or less

carry distance should be minimum 2.0 kms.

In addition, the Indian Railways specify that the lubrication system should work under:
ambient temperature of 0 50 degrees Celsius

rail temperature -10 to +7 degrees Celsius
humidity 40 100%
rainfall fairly heavy
atmospheric condition very dusty, heavy fog.
A laboratory test can provide information on grease rheology, flow characteristics and behaviours.
However, to find out the best performance and trade-offs, field tests are inevitably necessary.
Hence, the CRC project on rail curve lubrication (R3.110) conducted a field study which included the
testing of several greases from Australia and North America to investigate and analyse potential
parameters for effective rail lubrication. Various greases and their properties are listed, de-
identified, in Table 1. Tests were conducted using long applicator bars and short applicator bars.
Table 1: Lubricants considered for field trial
Each of these lubricants was tested in the field with same operating environment and lubrication
mechanism. The lubricants were studied and compared in terms of carry distance, gauge face
coverage, oil separation and tackiness and co-efficient of frication measurements from the
tribometer. In all three aspects, the lubricant C was found to outperform other lubricants.
2.3. Selection of applicator bar
It is a challenge to transfer grease from the rail to the wheel while maintaining the correct target
location on the rail profile and achieving the needed carry distance. Application bars play a
significant role in achieving this. Application bars are generally mounted on the lower part of the rail
head to deliver the lubricant to the wheels for transfer to the gauge face and gauge corner of the
high rail of curves. Grease guides of the bars provide a means for pick up by the wheels. The
application bars vary in length from 610mm (short bars) to 1400mm (long bars). These bars have
multi-ports (18 ports for short bars and 48 ports for long bars) to distribute the lubricant equally
along the length of the bar (IHHA 2001).
An industry survey conducted for the CRC project on rail curve lubrication (R3.110) suggested that
the Australian rail network owners use the short bars and they are generally placed in the spiral of
the curve. However, none of the publicly available lubrication guidelines and standards used by rail

network owners in Australia, and other parts of the world have included information about
application bar selection.
The National Research Council of Canadas test on CPR has suggested that the longer bars consumed
36% less lubricant than the shorter bars to effectively lubricate the same distance (Sroba et al.
2001). Long bars deliver grease to a greater area of the wheel circumference. Reiff and Gage (2006)
reported that the implementation of longer bars in Norfork Southern Railway recorded a 67%
reduction in consumption and 107 % improvement in carrying distance. These reductions in
consumption and wastage have eventually led them to reduce the number of lubricators from 49 to
two in one of their mountainous networks (IHHA 2001).
Similarly, the field trials from the CRC project (R3.110) also confirmed that the long bars achieved a
carry distance of 4.6 km. Overall the field tests showed that the longer bars can achieve up to 1.6
times longer carry distance compared to the short bars (IHHA 2009).
2.4. Placement of lubrication system
In order to optimise the lubrication mechanism, the other important parameter is its location and
position. This involves the location of the bar in the track, placement of the bar with respect to the
vertical height of the rail, application rate and application interval.
2.4.1. Need for the lubrication
In broad terms, lubrication is required wherever there is significant rail wear. The more specific
determinant of the lubrication requirement is track curvature. The ARTC, Aurizon, IHHA and the
Indian Railways have suggested that curves above 600m radius do not need lubrication. This is
because 600m is the radius below which wheel flangeing causes significant rail wear due to lateral
flange forces. Aurizon (2012) suggests that curves curve above 600m should still be considered for
lubrication on a case-by-case basis. The other factor that determines lubrication is the traffic
tonnage and Aurizon (2012) recommends having lubrication where the curves are 600m or less and
freight exceeds 1 MGT per year.
2.4.2. Location of the lubrication system
The IHHA (2001) suggests that it is more effective to select the sectors of curves of different
curvatures that can be protected as a group by a single lubricator with effective carrying of the
lubricant. In addition, the IHHA guide (2001) gives more information about selection of the
lubrication location. Similarly, the ARTC (2006) suggests that lubricators need to be located in
moderate radius feeder curves ahead of the sharper curves which are the main target. Accordingly
the ARTC has provided various position alternatives. Aurizon insists on safe and easy access to the
lubricator units for inspection and maintenance while selecting the lubrication location.
2.4.3. Spacing of lubrication system
In the past, the CPR used a placement model which added the product of curvature times to the
curve length (the curve length includes half the transition length) (Sroba et al. 2001). Transnet,
(previously known as Spoornet) is a South African rail transport organisation which developed a
comprehensive model (Equation 1) for spacing the lubricators. In their model, the length of track to
be lubricated is adjusted by various track related factors. This adjusted length is then divided by
traffic related factors. The track and traffic related factors influence the carry distance of the
lubricant and are discussed in Appendix 2 of the R3.110 Final Report. Later, the CPR also adopted a
comprehensive model with minor updates (Equation 2) (Sroba et al. 2001). The CRC project (R3.110)
suggested further improvements to the equation by introducing a lubricator performance factor and
a rail/wheel profile factor and updating the axle load factor (Equation 3). Note, however, that these
were not verified by the test program. A much larger test program would be required to achieve
this.
De Kochers final formula

(+)
, =
Eqn. 1

Sroba et al.s final formula developed for CPR

(+)
, =
...Eqn. 2
Updated formula from the CRC project

(+)
, = Eqn.3
2
The legends of the traffic and track related factors and a worked example are provided in Appendix
2 of the Final Report for R3.110.
Basically, the track and traffic related factors are used to calculate the LEI value for each tangent and
curve. The LEI value doesnt represent the distance along the track as measured from the lubricator.
To determine the space required between the lubricators, the gauge face coefficient of friction value
of the high-rails is measured starting at the first curve and continuing until the friction value
increases to above 0.25. Then the LEI value is calculated for each curve and tangent between the
lubricator and the curve where the coefficient of friction value reached 0.25. These individual values
are then aggregated to quantify the total LEI between the two lubricators. This means the lubricator
placement will be at intervals defined by where the flange face coefficient of friction increases to
0.25 so maintaining the same aggregate LEI value between them.
Using this approach (Equation 2), the CPR has changed the spacing between lubricators from the
original 4.5 km to 7.2 km (Sroba et al. 2001), which is a significant improvement in terms of the total
number of lubricators required for the network. Similarly, the Spoornet has determined lubricator
spacings of up to 6km on their bi-directional lines.
The ARTC has suggested general spacing distance guidelines for different track features (timber
sleepers, concrete sleepers and grading). Their spacing distance is based on about 40-50% of the
track being serviced by the lubricator. However, the ARTC concludes that the actual spacing distance
depends on the particular track features and type and mix of traffic. Hence there is a need for field
verification before and after implementation.
2.5. Selection of application bar settings
This setting includes placement of the bar with respect to the vertical height of the rail, application
rate and application interval.

The IHHA (2001) makes the following suggestions :
The ideal condition is that the lubricators are adjusted vertically to ensure that 1/20th of the
lubricants are on the top of the rail and the remaining 95% are on the gauge face. This is the
recommendation in the absence of top of the rail friction control.
Applicator settings should ensure that an adequate quantity of lubricant is delivered to

maintain the required friction level up to the end of the zone (1.5 5 km in their conditions)
on either direction.
Excessive lubrication should also be avoided to control fling-off from a lubricator site and to
allow gauge corner and gauge face wearing into a conformal contact shape that matches the
average worn wheel throat and flange.
For their electric lubricator, the suggested optimal settings are:

o second of motor operation for every 16 wheels for longer bars
o second of motor operation for every 32 wheel on ruling grades
Lubricator tank should be maintained to a minimum of 2/3 full to avoid cavitations while
pumping.
The general recommendations from the ARTC (2006) are:
The plunger height above the running surface of the rails in summer is 3.2mm (1/8 inch) -
when the lubricant is less viscous.
The plunger height above the running surface of the rails in winter is 4.4mm (3/16 inch) -
when the lubricant is more viscous.
However, it is essential to visually check the fling-off as well.
The CRC project on rail curve lubrication (R3.110) obtained optimal settings for the operation of
application bars from the splash test, which is a trial and error method. The desirable settings for
the various applicator bars and greases are provided in Table 2.

Table 2: Applicator bar settings from the CRC project (R3.110)
2.6. Operation of lubrication system
In order to achieve the maximum benefit from a gauge face lubrication strategy, its performance has
to be effectively monitored and the system maintained.
2.6.1. Performance measurement
The performance of the lubrication system can be analysed using observations (visual inspection,
rail temperature) and tribometer data.
A visual inspection based on finger or smear test is the most commonly used method which
helps to understand lubricant distribution.
Observation of the rail head temperature increase can be used used to assess the
effectiveness of lubrication. This method is preferred for the heavy haul network where the
rise in temperature is significant. The mean temperature rise and corresponding lubrication
condition are depicted in Table 3 (Tew & Mutton 1991).
A tribometer is found to be more effective than the other two methods and it helps to have
a co-efficient friction for both gauge face and top of the rail. It is also the only way to assess
lubrication carry distance.
The target co-efficient of friction values suggested by the IHHA are:

between 0.1 and 0.25 for the gauge face of the rail
between 0.30 and 0.35 for the top of the rail.

Table 3: Mean temperature rise vs lubrication condition

Condition of Lubrication Mean Temperature Rise (Degree Celsius)
Fully Lubricated 0 0.5 Degree Celsius
Dry 2 3 Degree Celsius
Not Lubricated 5 Degree Celsius
Similarly, the ARTC (2006) has suggested performance requirements as follows:
co-efficient of friction on gauge of high rails less than 0.30 (0.25 is preferred for
metropolitan trains)
co-efficient of friction on top of the rail - greater than 0.35 and on grades steeper than 1:50
should be greater than 0.40
desirable difference in running surface friction between the high and low rails should be no
more than 0.15.
Their suggested method is the tribomoter which should cover at least 100m in each track section to
be assessed. In addition, a visual examination of the gauge face and the top of the rail are suggested
for any signs of wear debris.
The IHHA has suggested an Expert Eyeball Chart as an alternative to the tribometer measurement
and hence to reduce labour cost and time (Table 4).
Table 4: Expert Eyeball Chart

Observed Conditions of Rail Gauge Face Surface Evaluation of the
Coefficient of Friction
Rough with gouging marks of material seizure About 0.6
Chewed up rough 0.45 to 0.6
Smooth with shiny unlubricated surface 0.35 to 0.45
Smooth with lubricant covering 10% 40 % of the surface 0.30 to 0.35
Smooth with lubricant covering 40% - 60 % of the surface 0.25 to 0.30
Smooth with lubricant covering 60% - 90% of the surface 0.20 to 0.25
Thin film of lubricant covered 100% of the surface 0.15 to 0.20
100% of surface covered by thick, black film of lubricant <0.15
2.6.2. Maintenance of the lubrication system
The rail network agencies need a maintenance strategy and schedule for lubricators with respect to
their failure history. In addition:
Lubricators have to be removed for track maintenance and re-installed immediately after.
Adjustments need to be made with respect to seasonal and traffic changes.
The ARTC (2006) suggested that the lubricators should be inspected along with other track
inspection parameters. Severe wear in the form of wear debris is an indication of failure of the
lubricators and such incidents should be reported. The ARTC guide recommends a basic servicing

interval for the lubricators is 2-4 MGT.
The IHHA (2001) suggests the best practice to maintain the lubricators is to outsource servicing and
maintenance to the manufacturers who have a better understanding of their equipment. The Indian
Railways also suggests this outsourcing approach.

References
ARTC 2006, Guidelines for Trackside Lubrication, Australian Rail Track Corporation Ltd.
Aurizon 2012, Rail Gauge Face Lubrication Design.
IHHA 2001, Guidelines to Best Practices for Heavy Haul Railroad Operations: Wheel and Rail Interface Issues,
International Heavy Haul Association.
Indian Ministry of Railways 2012, Technical specifications for track based lubricators, Research, Design and
Standards Organisation, Lucknow.
INNOTRACK 2006, D4.5.4 Friction Management Methods.
Reiff, R 2006, 'Quantifying the benefits of Top of Rail friction control', Interface - The Journal of Wheel/ Rail
interaction.
Sroba, P, Roney, M, Dashko, R & Magel, E 2001, 'Canadian Pacific Railway's 100% effective lubrication
initiative', AREMA 2001 Conference, Chicago, Illinois.
Tew, GP & Mutton, PJ 1991, Prediction, Assessment and Management of Rail/Wheel Lubrication Practices.,
Monash University.
Turner, M 2008, 'Rail Grinding - the QR Journey', Conference on Railway Engineering, Perth, Western
Australia.

Attachment Links to Guidelines and Specifications
ARTC: Guidelines for Trackside Lubrication 2006

http://extranet.artc.com.au/docs/eng/track-civil/guidelines/rail/RC2411.pdf
International Heavy Haul Association 2001, Guidelines to Best Practices for Heavy Haul
Railroad Operations: Wheel and Rail Interface Issues, International Heavy Haul
Conference
http://www.ihha.net/resources/buy-ihha-publications
International Heavy Haul Association 2009, Guidelines to Best Practices for Heavy Haul
Railroad Operations: Construction and infrastructure Issues, International Heavy Haul
Conference
http://www.ihha.net/resources
Indian Railways 2013, Technical specifications for track based lubricators,

Research, Design and Standards Organisation - Ministry of Railways, India.
http://www.rdso.indianrailways.gov.in/works/uploads/File/Final%20draft%20technical%20specifications%2
0for%20track%20based%20lubricators%20pdf.pdf

Lubricator and Grease Product Information (2013)
RAIL CURVE GREASE
Rail Curve & Wheel Flange Lubricant
Description
Rail Curve Grease is a superior grease lubricant designed to prevent wear on both track and wheel flanges when
curved track sections are encountered.
Rail Curve Grease contains lubricious solid graphite dispersed in highly refined mineral oil, providing very low friction
and high load carrying capacity. It has a working temperature range from 10 to 150C.
Areas of application
The wheel flange/rail gauge face contact area on tangent or curved track
Features
Extends the life of rail tracks

Extends the life of wheel flanges
Reduces rolling friction between tracks and wheels reduces fuel consumption
Reduces hunting as the contact time is reduced
Reduces maintenance as wear of tracks and wheel flanges are reduced
Reduces noise in tight curves
The information contained in this Technical Bulletin is as up to date and correct as possible as at the time of issue. The data provided should be
used as a guide only as the performance of the product will vary depending on differing operating conditions and application methods.
The sale of any product described in this Technical Bulletin will be in accordance with ITW Polymers & Fluids Conditions Of Sale, a copy of which is
available on request. To the extent permitted by law, ITW Polymers & Fluids excludes all other warranties in relation to this product.
Last Modified January 2011

Page 2 of 2
Technical data
Test Method
Appearance ....................................... Greyish black grease
Lubricating Solids...Graphite
Thickener ........................................... Lithium
NLGI Classification............................. 1
Base Oil ............................................. Mineral Oil (Solvent refined)
Base Oil Viscosity at 40C (cst) .......... 150 ASTM D445
Specific Gravity .................................. 0.9
Drop Point (C) .................................. 190 ASTM D-566 (IP132)
'4 Ball'
Weld Load (kg)........................... 550 ASTM D2596 (IP239)
Flash Point ......................................... >200C ASTM 92
Flammability....................................... Non Flammable
Consistency ....................................... 310 340 mm-1 ASTM D217
Temperature Range (continuous) ....... -10C to 150C
Directions for use
Rail Curve Grease is designed to be applied by most common trackside lubricators.
Storage and Shelf Life
Store in dry conditions between 10C and 30C, away from sources of heat and naked flames. Protect from frost.
When stored in original sealed containers, the minimum shelf life is two years.
Packaging
Rail Curve Grease is available in 16, 55, 180 Kg Steel Drums, 20 Kg Plastic Pails lined or unlined.
Ordering Information:
20 kg Plastic Pail Unlined #RY410189

20 Kg Plastic Pail Lined #RY410191
16 Kg Steel Drum #RY410186
Health & Safety Information
The product is NOT hazardous according to Worksafe Australia criteria. A Material Safety Data Sheet is available
from the ITW Polymers & Fluids Technical Department upon request or available on our website www.rocol.com.au .
AUSTRALIA NEW ZEALAND

ITW Polymers & Fluids ITW Polymers & Fluids
100 Hassall Street Unit 2 / 38 Trugood Drive
Wetherill Park NSW 2164 East Tamaki 2013, Auckland
Phone (02) 9757 8800 Fax (02) 9757 3855 Phone (09) 272 1945 Fax (09) 273 6489
ROCOL RAIL CURVE GREASE S
Chemwatch Independent Material Safety Data Sheet
Issue Date: 4-Dec-2008 CHEMWATCH 18-4468
XC9317SC Version No:2.0
CD 2009/2 Page 1 of 5
Section 1 - CHEMICAL PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
PRODUCT NAME
SYNONYMS
"Part No: RY420291"
PRODUCT USE
Lubricant for rail track curves.
SUPPLIER
Company: ITW Polymers & Fluids Company: ITW Polymers & Fluids (NZ)
Address: Address:
100 Hassall St UNIT 2 / 38 Truegood Drive
Wetherill Park NSW 2164 East Tamaki, 2013
Australia AUCKLAND
Telephone: (02) 9757 8800 NEW ZEALAND
Emergency Tel: (02) 9757 8800 Telephone: (09) 272 1945
Fax: (02) 9757 3855 Emergency Tel: (09) 272 1945
Fax: (09) 273 6489
Section 2 - HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
STATEMENT OF HAZARDOUS NATURE

NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS. According to the Criteria of NOHSC, and the ADG Code.
POISONS SCHEDULE
None
RISK
None under normal operating conditions.
Section 3 - COMPOSITION / INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

NAME CAS RN %
mineral oil Not avail. >60
(solvent refined)
graphite 7782-42-5 <10
antimony tris(dialkyldithiocarbamate) <1
performance additives 1-10
NOTE: Manufacturer has supplied full ingredient
information to allow CHEMWATCH assessment.
Section 4 - FIRST AID MEASURES
SWALLOWED
If swallowed do NOT induce vomiting.
If vomiting occurs, lean patient forward or place on left side (head-down position, if possible) to maintain open airway and prevent aspiration.
EYE
If this product comes in contact with eyes:
Wash out immediately with water.
If irritation continues, seek medical attention.
SKIN
If skin contact occurs:
continued...
CD 2009/2 Page 2 of 5
Section 4 - FIRST AID MEASURES
Immediately remove all contaminated clothing, including footwear.

Flush skin and hair with running water (and soap if available).
If failure/misuse of high pressure/hydraulic equipment results in injection of grease/oil through the skin seek urgent medical attention. Treat as
surgical emergency.
INHALED
If fumes or combustion products are inhaled remove from contaminated area.
Other measures are usually unnecessary.
NOTES TO PHYSICIAN
Treat symptomatically.
Heavy and persistent skin contamination over many years may lead to dysplastic changes. Pre-existing skin disorders may be aggravated by exposure
to this product.
In general, emesis induction is unnecessary with high viscosity, low volatility products, i.e. most oils and greases.
Section 5 - FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES
EXTINGUISHING MEDIA
Foam.
Dry chemical powder.
FIRE FIGHTING
Alert Fire Brigade and tell them location and nature of hazard.
Wear breathing apparatus plus protective gloves.
FIRE/EXPLOSION HAZARD
Combustible.
Slight fire hazard when exposed to heat or flame.
Combustion products include: carbon dioxide (CO2), metal oxides, other pyrolysis products typical of burning organic material.
FIRE INCOMPATIBILITY
Avoid contamination with oxidising agents i.e. nitrates, oxidising acids, chlorine bleaches, pool chlorine etc. as ignition may result.
HAZCHEM: None
PERSONAL PROTECTION
Glasses:
Chemical goggles.
Gloves:
PVC chemical resistant type.
Respirator:
Particulate
Section 6 - ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES
MINOR SPILLS
Slippery when spilt.
Clean up all spills immediately.
Avoid contact with skin and eyes.
MAJOR SPILLS
Slippery when spilt.
Minor hazard.
Clear area of personnel.
Alert Fire Brigade and tell them location and nature of hazard.
Personal Protective Equipment advice is contained in Section 8 of the MSDS.
Section 7 - HANDLING AND STORAGE
PROCEDURE FOR HANDLING

Remove all ignition sources.
Limit all unnecessary personal contact.
Wear protective clothing when risk of exposure occurs.
SUITABLE CONTAINER
Metal can or drum
Packaging as recommended by manufacturer.
STORAGE INCOMPATIBILITY
CARE: Water in contact with heated material may cause foaming or a steam explosion with possible severe burns from wide scattering of hot material.
continued...
CD 2009/2 Page 3 of 5
Section 7 - HANDLING AND STORAGE
Resultant overflow of containers may result in fire.

Avoid reaction with oxidising agents.
STORAGE REQUIREMENTS
Store in original containers.
Keep containers securely sealed.
Section 8 - EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION
EXPOSURE CONTROLS
Source Material TWA mg/m
___________ ___________ _______
Australia Exposure Standards mineral oil (Oil mist, refined mineral) 5
Australia Exposure Standards graphite (Graphite (all forms except 3
fibres) (respirable dust)(g)(natural &
synthetic))
PERSONAL PROTECTION
RESPIRATOR
Particulate
EYE
Safety glasses with side shields
Chemical goggles.
HANDS/FEET
Wear chemical protective gloves, eg. PVC.
Wear safety footwear or safety gumboots, eg. Rubber.
OTHER
Overalls.
P.V.C. apron.
ENGINEERING CONTROLS
General exhaust is adequate under normal operating conditions. If risk of overexposure exists, wear SAA approved respirator.
Section 9 - PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
APPEARANCE
Black grease; does not mix with water.
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
Liquid.
Does not mix with water.
Molecular Weight: Not applicable. Boiling Range (C): >316

Melting Range (C): Not available. Specific Gravity (water=1): Not available
Solubility in water (g/L): Immiscible pH (as supplied): Not applicable
pH (1% solution): Not applicable Vapour Pressure (kPa): Negligible.
Volatile Component (%vol): Not applicable Evaporation Rate: Not applicable
Relative Vapour Density (air=1): >1 Flash Point (C): >200
Lower Explosive Limit (%): Not applicable Upper Explosive Limit (%): Not applicable
Autoignition Temp (C): Not available. Decomposition Temp (C): Not available.
State: Non slump paste Viscosity: Not Available
Section 10 - CHEMICAL STABILITY AND REACTIVITY INFORMATION
CONDITIONS CONTRIBUTING TO INSTABILITY

Presence of incompatible materials.
Product is considered stable.
For incompatible materials - refer to Section 7 - Handling and Storage.
continued...
CD 2009/2 Page 4 of 5
Section 11 - TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION
POTENTIAL HEALTH EFFECTS

ACUTE HEALTH CHRONIC HEALTH EFFECTS
EFFECTS
Not applicable. Not applicable.
TOXICITY AND IRRITATION

Not available. Refer to individual constituents.
CARCINOGEN
mineral oil International Agency Group 1
for Research on Cancer
(IARC) Carcinogens
Section 12 - ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

No data
Ecotoxicity
Ingredient Persistence: Persistence: Bioaccumulat Mobility
Water/Soil Air ion
Rocol Rail Curve Grease S No data
mineral oil No data
graphite No data
Section 13 - DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Containers may still present a chemical hazard/ danger when empty.
Return to supplier for reuse/ recycling if possible.
Section 14 - TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION

HAZCHEM: None (ADG6)
NOT REGULATED FOR TRANSPORT OF DANGEROUS GOODS: UN, IATA, IMDG
Section 15 - REGULATORY INFORMATION
POISONS SCHEDULE: None
REGULATIONS
Rocol Rail Curve Grease S (CAS: None):
No regulations applicable
Regulations for ingredients

mineral oil (CAS:Not avail):
No regulations applicable
graphite (CAS: 7782-42-5) is found on the following regulatory lists;

Australia Exposure Standards
Australia Hazardous Substances
Australia High Volume Industrial Chemical List (HVICL)
Australia Inventory of Chemical Substances (AICS)
Australia Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons (SUSDP) - Schedule 2
No data available for mineral oil as CAS: Not avail.
continued...
CD 2009/2 Page 5 of 5
Section 16 - OTHER INFORMATION

Classification of the preparation and its individual components has drawn on official and authoritative sources as well as independent review by
the Chemwatch Classification committee using available literature references.
A list of reference resources used to assist the committee may be found at:
www.chemwatch.net/references.
The (M)SDS is a Hazard Communication tool and should be used to assist in the Risk Assessment. Many factors determine whether the reported Hazards
are Risks in the workplace or other settings.
This document is copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of private study, research, review or
criticism, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part may be reproduced by any process without written
permission from CHEMWATCH. TEL (+61 3) 9572 4700.
Issue Date: 4-Dec-2008

Print Date: 21-Sep-2009
This is the end of the MSDS.

BP Energrease RCG
Rail Curve Grease
Product Data
Description
BP Energrease RCG is a lithium based grease designed to protect rails and wheel flanges against wear on
curved and tangent railway tracks. BP Energrease RCG is a smooth black, NLGI 2 grease that is fortified
with molybdenum disulphide and friction modifiers that provide wear protection and noise reduction.
Built in polymers provide effective adhesion to the rail and provide resistance to water wash off. The
carefully selected base oil combination of synthetic ester and mineral oil provides optimum spreadability and
pumpability, particularly at low operating temperatures.
Applications
BP Energrease RCG may be used in wayside and on board lubricators and is ideally suited for wayside
lubricators that apply grease directly to the rail and allow wheel flanges to spread the grease along the track
for several kilometers. It should be applied at curved or tangent track where it is desirable to reduce
excessive rail and flange wear, improve energy efficiency and fuel consumption, or reduce noise.
Over greasing should be avoided as this will result in excessive creep of grease to the top of rail and
consequential loss of traction.
Benefits
Superior friction reducing properties provide protection against wear and excessive noise.
High degree of spreadability ensures protective lubricant film typically covers 800 metres of curve in
4000 metres of track.
Combination of lithium soap and synthetic ester provides good pumpability.
Excellent adhesion properties ensure grease is not washed off in adverse weather conditions and
reduces grease creep to the top of the rail.
Storage
All packages should be stored under cover. Where outside storage is unavoidable drums should be laid horizontally to
avoid the possible ingress of water and the obliteration of drum markings. Products should not be stored above 60C,
exposed to hot sun or freezing conditions.
Health & Safety Recommendations

Health, safety and environmental information is provided for this product in the Materials Safety Data Sheet. This
gives details of potential hazards, precautions and First Aid measures, together with environmental effects and
disposal of used products. BP Australia will not accept liability if the product is used other than in the manner or with
the precautions or for the purpose/s specified. Before the product is used other than as directed, advice should be
obtained from the local BP office or the BP Lubricants and Fuels Technical Help Line Ph: 1300 139 700.
Typical characteristics
Test Method Units
Appearance Visual Smooth black grease
Soap type Lithium
NLGI Grade 2
Penetration, worked ASTM D217 mm/10 265-295

0
Dropping Point ASTM D5661 C 180
SRV friction coefficient, 200N, 50Hz ASTM D5707 0.08
4 Ball Weld Load IP 239 kg 260
4 Ball M.W.S.D (1hr @40kg) IP 239 mm 0.60
The above figures are typical of those obtained with normal production tolerance and do not constitute a specification.
EnergreseRCG_200801
BP Energrease RCG, BP Energrease range and the BP logo are trademarks of BP plc.
All reasonable care has been taken to ensure that the information contained in this publication is accurate as of the date of printing. However, such
information may, nevertheless, be affected by changes in the blend formulation occurring subsequent to the date of printing. No warranty or representation,
expressed or implied, is made as to the accuracy or completeness of the data and information contained in this publication. It is the User's obligation to
evaluate and use products safely and within the scope advised in the data sheet and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. No statement made
in this publication shall be construed as a permission, recommendation or authorisation given or implied to practice any patented invention without a valid
licence. The Seller shall not be responsible for any loss or damage resulting from any hazards or risks identified in the data sheet and which are associated
with petroleum products concerned (provided that this disclaimer shall not affect any statutory rights of the Buyer of the petroleum products concerned).
BP Australia Pty Ltd

ABN 53 004 085 616
Lubes & Fuels Tech Helpline: 1300 139 700
Fax (Australia): 03 9268 4394
www.bp.com
Material Safety Data Sheet
1 . Identification of the material and supplier

Product name Energrease RCG
SDS no. 460435
Product use Grease
For specific application advice see appropriate Technical Data Sheet or consult our company
representative.
Supplier BP Australia Pty Ltd (ABN 53 004 085 616)
Melbourne Central,
360 Elizabeth Street,
Melbourne,
Victoria 3000,
Australia
Tel: +61 (03) 9268 4111
Fax: +61 (03) 9268 3321
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE 1800 638 556
NUMBER
Product code 460435-AU07
2 . Hazards identification
Statement of NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS.
hazardous/dangerous nature
3 . Composition/information on ingredients
Highly refined base oil and additives
This product does not contain any hazardous ingredients at or above regulated thresholds.
4 . First-aid measures
Eye contact In case of contact, immediately flush eyes with plenty of water for at least 15 minutes. Get medical
attention if irritation occurs.
Skin contact In case of contact, immediately flush skin with plenty of water. Remove contaminated clothing and
shoes. Wash clothing before reuse. Clean shoes thoroughly before reuse. Get medical attention if
irritation develops.
Inhalation If inhaled, remove to fresh air. Get medical attention if symptoms appear.
Ingestion Do not induce vomiting unless directed to do so by medical personnel. Never give anything by mouth
to an unconscious person. If potentially dangerous quantities of this material have been swallowed,
call a physician immediately.
Advice to doctor Note: High Pressure Applications
Injections through the skin resulting from contact with the product at high pressure constitute a major
medical emergency. Injuries may not appear serious at first but within a few hours tissue becomes
swollen, discoloured and extremely painful with extensive subcutaneous necrosis.
Surgical exploration should be undertaken without delay. Thorough and extensive debridement of the
wound and underlying tissue is necessary to minimise tissue loss and prevent or limit permanent
damage. Note that high pressure may force the product considerable distances along tissue planes.
5 . Fire-fighting measures
Extinguishing media
Suitable In case of fire, use water spray (fog), foam, dry chemical or CO2.
Not suitable Do not use water jet.
Hazardous decomposition Decomposition products may include the following materials:
products carbon dioxide
carbon monoxide
sulfur oxides
phosphorus oxides
metal oxide/oxides
Product name Energrease RCG Product code 460435-AU07 Page: 1/4

Version 1.01 Date of issue 9 September 2008 Format Australia Language ENGLISH
(Australia) (ENGLISH)
Unusual fire/explosion This material is not explosive as defined by established regulatory criteria.
hazards
Special fire-fighting None identified.
procedures
Protection of fire-fighters Fire-fighters should wear positive pressure self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and full turnout
gear.
6 . Accidental release measures

Personal precautions No action shall be taken involving any personal risk or without suitable training. Evacuate surrounding
areas. Keep unnecessary and unprotected personnel from entering. Do not touch or walk through
spilt material. Put on appropriate personal protective equipment (see section 8).
Environmental precautions Avoid dispersal of spilt material and runoff and contact with soil, waterways, drains and sewers. Inform
the relevant authorities if the product has caused environmental pollution (sewers, waterways, soil or
air).
Large spill Move containers from spill area. Prevent entry into sewers, water courses, basements or confined
areas. Vacuum or sweep up material and place in a designated, labelled waste container. Dispose of
via a licensed waste disposal contractor. Note: see section 1 for emergency contact information and
section 13 for waste disposal.
Small spill Move containers from spill area. Vacuum or sweep up material and place in a designated, labelled
waste container. Dispose of via a licensed waste disposal contractor.
7 . Handling and storage

Handling Wash thoroughly after handling. Avoid strong oxidisers.
Storage Keep container tightly closed. Keep container in a cool, well-ventilated area.
8 . Exposure controls/personal protection

Ingredient name Occupational exposure limits
Base oil - unspecified NOHSC (Australia).
TWA: 5 mg/m 8 hour(s). Form: Oil mist, mineral
molybdenum sulphide NOHSC (Australia).
TWA: 10 mg/m, (as Mo) 8 hour(s). Form: Insoluble
Whilst specific OELs for certain components are included in this SDS, it should be noted that other components of the preparation will be
present in any mist, vapour or dust produced. For this reason, the specific OELs may not be applicable to the product and are provided
for guidance purposes.
Biological Limit Values No biological limit allocated.
Exposure controls
Occupational exposure Provide exhaust ventilation or other engineering controls to keep the airborne concentrations of
controls vapours below their respective occupational exposure limits.
Hygiene measures Wash hands, forearms and face thoroughly after handling chemical products, before eating, smoking
and using the lavatory and at the end of the working period.
Personal protective equipment
Respiratory protection Avoid breathing of vapours, mists or spray. Select and use respirators in accordance with AS/NZS
1715/1716. When mists or vapours exceed the exposure standards then the use of the following is
recommended: Approved respirator with organic vapour and dust/mist (Type P1) filters. Filter
capacity and respirator type depends on exposure level.
Skin and body None required; however, use of protective clothing is good industrial practice.
Hand protection Wear protective gloves if prolonged or repeated contact is likely. Chemical-resistant gloves.
Recommended: Nitrile gloves. The correct choice of protective gloves depends upon the chemicals
being handled, the conditions of work and use, and the condition of the gloves (even the best
chemically resistant glove will break down after repeated chemical exposures). Most gloves provide
only a short time of protection before they must be discarded and replaced. Because specific work
environments and material handling practices vary, safety procedures should be developed for each
intended application. Gloves should therefore be chosen in consultation with the supplier/manufacturer
and with a full assessment of the working conditions.
Eye protection Safety glasses with side shields.
9 . Physical and chemical properties

Physical state Grease
Colour Black.
Odour Not available.
Flash point 160 C (Closed cup) Pensky-Martens.
Vapour pressure Not available.
Vapour density Not available.

pH Not available.
Boiling point / range Not available.
Melting point / range Not available.
Relative density/Specific Not available.
gravity
Density 900 kg/m3 (0.9 g/cm3) at 15C
Solubility insoluble in water.
10 . Stability and reactivity

Stability The product is stable.
Conditions to avoid Avoid extreme temperatures, strong oxidizers, fire.
Incompatibility with various Reactive or incompatible with the following materials: oxidizing materials.
substances/Hazardous
Reactions
Hazardous decomposition Decomposition products may include the following materials:
products carbon dioxide
carbon monoxide
sulfur oxides
phosphorus oxides
metal oxide/oxides
11 . Toxicological information
Effects and symptoms
Eyes No significant health hazards identified.
Skin No significant health hazards identified.
Inhalation No significant health hazards identified.
Ingestion No significant health hazards identified.
Chronic toxicity
Carcinogenic effects No component of this product at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as a carcinogen by
ACGIH, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the European Commission (EC), or
the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (Australia).
Mutagenic effects No known significant effects or critical hazards.
12 . Ecological information
Ecotoxicity Not classified as environmentally hazardous in accordance with the Approved Criteria for Classifying
Hazardous Substances [NOHSC (1008)/2004 as amended and adapted].
Biodegradability
Persistence/degradability The biodegradability of this material has not been determined.
13 . Disposal considerations
Disposal considerations / The generation of waste should be avoided or minimised wherever possible. Empty containers or
Waste information liners may retain some product residues. This material and its container must be disposed of in a safe
way. Dispose of surplus and non-recyclable products via a licensed waste disposal contractor.
Disposal of this product, solutions and any by-products should at all times comply with the
requirements of environmental protection and waste disposal legislation and any regional local
authority requirements. Avoid dispersal of spilt material and runoff and contact with soil, waterways,
drains and sewers.
Special Precautions for No additional special precautions identified.
Landfill or Incineration
14 . Transport information
International transport regulations
Not classified as dangerous for transport (ADG, IMDG, ICAO/IATA).
Special precautions for user No known special precautions required. See Section: "Handling and storage" for additional
information.

15 . Regulatory information
Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons
Not regulated.
Control of Scheduled Carcinogenic Substances
Ingredient name Schedule
No Listed Substance
Other regulations
Europe inventory All components are listed or exempted.
United States inventory All components are listed or exempted.
(TSCA 8b)
Australia inventory (AICS) All components are listed or exempted.
Canada inventory All components are listed or exempted.
China inventory (IECSC) All components are listed or exempted.
Japan inventory (ENCS) All components are listed or exempted.
Korea inventory (KECI) All components are listed or exempted.
Philippines inventory All components are listed or exempted.
(PICCS)
16 . Other information
Key to abbreviations AMP = Acceptable Maximum Peak
ACGIH = American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, an agency that promulgates
exposure standards.
ADG = Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail
ADG Code = Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail
CAS Number = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number
HAZCHEM Code = Emergency action code of numbers and letters which gives information to
emergency services. Its use is required by the ADG Code for Dangerous Goods in bulk.
ICAO = International Civil Aviation Organization.
IATA = International Air Transport Association, the organization promulgating rules governing
shipment of goods by air.
IMDG = International Maritime Organization Rules, rules governing shipment of goods by water.
IP 346 = A chemical screening assay for dermal toxicity. The European Commission has
recommended that Method IP 346 be used as the basis for labelling certain lubricant oil base stocks
for carcinogenicity. The EU Commission has stipulated that the classification as a carcinogen need
not apply if it can be shown that the substance contains less than 3% DMSO extract as measured by
IP 346. (See Note L, European Commission Directive 67/548/EEC as amended and adapted.) DMSO
is a solvent.
NOHSC = National Occupational Health & Safety Commission, Australia
TWA = Time weighted average
STEL = Short term exposure limit
UN Number = United Nations Number, a four digit number assigned by the United Nations Committee
of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.
History
Date of issue 09/09/2008.
Date of previous issue 08/09/2008.
Prepared by Product Stewardship
Notice to reader
All reasonably practicable steps have been taken to ensure this data sheet and the health, safety and environmental information
contained in it is accurate as of the date specified below. No warranty or representation, express or implied is made as to the accuracy or
completeness of the data and information in this data sheet.
The data and advice given apply when the product is sold for the stated application or applications. You should not use the product other
than for the stated application or applications without seeking advice from us.
It is the users obligation to evaluate and use this product safely and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. The BP Group
shall not be responsible for any damage or injury resulting from use, other than the stated product use of the material, from any failure to
adhere to recommendations, or from any hazards inherent in the nature of the material. Purchasers of the product for supply to a third
party for use at work, have a duty to take all necessary steps to ensure that any person handling or using the product is provided with the
information in this sheet. Employers have a duty to tell employees and others who may be affected of any hazards described in this sheet
and of any precautions that should be taken.

SHELL ALVANIA GREASES WFX
Wheel-flange railroad greases
Product Description
Shell Alvania Greases WFX 0, 1 and 2 are lithium soap greases fortified with a specifically formulated multipurpose
additive package for use as railroad track lubricants. These greases may also find applications in construction, mining
and agricultural equipment.
Application
The frictional forces developed by steel train wheels on the rail combined with the steering forces exerted by the rail
rubbing against the wheel increases energy consumption and accelerates the wear of both wheel (tread and flange) and
rail. This can be a serious problem, particularly for railway systems operating heavily loaded unit trains or those having
numerous curves.
Shell Alvania Greases WFX are specially formulated to meet the pumpability, adhesion, and load carrying
requirements of a track lubricant. Additionally, Shell Alvania Greases WFX are formulated to perform well when
used on any equipment subjected to conditions of high loads and temperature extremes and provide excellent
resistance to rust and corrosion. Shell Alvania Grease WFX 0 is especially suited for severe cold weather
operations.
Features
Shell Alvania Greases WFX are lithium soap thickened greases made with highly refined base oils, a special EP
additive package and 3% molybdenum disulfide. The molybdenum disulfide acts to enhance anti-wear and load
carrying properties, which are critical for the transport of railcars over the track. A highly shear stable tackifier
improves grease adhesion to track surfaces and helps prevent oil bleeding. These greases also offer good resistance to
the mechanical shear associated with trackside lubricator operation. Shell Alvania Grease WFX 1 has shown to be
very pumpable and to carry especially well on the track in cold weather. It is suitable for cold weather (winter)
applications. Shell Alvania Grease WFX 2 has been designed to improve the lubricity and durability of the grease
under the conditions imposed by hot weather. It is suitable for warm weather (summer) applications. Shell Alvania
Grease WFX 0 was designed for maximum pumpability and ease of handling under extreme cold conditions.
Benefits
enhanced wear protection of wheels and track
excellent heavy and shock load protection
excellent adherence to track even under adverse weather conditions
suitability for a variety of track and wheel lubricator systems
special formulation to reduce product loss at the application site
Approvals and Recommendations

Shell Alvania Greases WFX 0, 1 and 2 are suitable for conventional railroad trackside and/or wheel/flange
lubrication systems designed to handle greases, including lubricators made by KLF Lubriquip (formerly Madison-
Kipp), Bijur, Portec and Moore and Steele. Though all three greases can be used for winter and summer applications,
Shell Alvania Grease WFX 1 is recommended for use in cold weather because of its excellent pumpability. Shell
Alvania Grease WFX 0 is recommended for extreme cold weather applications. It has been formulated for
maximum pumpability and ease of handling under such conditions. Shell Alvania Grease WFX 2 is best suited for
warm weather applications.
November, 2005
Product Maintenance
Trackside and wheel lubricators require routine maintenance for proper long-term operation. Seals must be kept in
good condition to prevent leakage and lubricator nozzles should be kept clear so that they apply the correct spray
pattern.
Typical Properties of Shell Alvania Greases WFX

Test Method 0 1 2
Code No. 71207 71040 71041
NLGI Grade 0 1 2
Appearance Dark Gray Dark Gray Dark Gray, Tacky
Lithium Soap, wt% 4.0 6.0 6.0
Molybdenum Disulfide, wt% 3.0 3.0 3.0
Base Oil Viscosity
@40C, cSt D 445 68 168 220
@100C, cSt D 445 7.9 15.6 15.0
Penetration, dmm D 217
Unworked 375 330 270
Worked, 60X 370 325 270
Dropping Point, F Mettler 385 385 385
Rust Protection D 1743 Pass Pass Pass
Copper Corrosion D 4048 1b 1b 1b
Timken, OK Load, lbs D 2509 30 30 30
Four-Ball EP D 2596
Load Wear Index, kgf 46 46 46
Weld Point, kgf 250 250 250
Four-Ball Wear, mm D 2266 0.4 0.4 0.4
1 hr, 75C, 1200 rpm, 40 kgf
Guide to Usable Temperatures
Min, F -40 -30 -20
Continuous Service, Max, F 250 250 250
Short Exposure, Max, F 350 350 350
Safety & Handling Information

Shell Alvania Greases WFX 0, 1 and 2 are considered to be practically non-toxic by either ingestion or dermal
contact. No special precautions are required beyond good personal hygiene practices. Repeated or prolonged contact
should be avoided. For information on the safe handling and use of these products, refer to their Material Safety Data
Sheets at http://www.shell-lubricants.com/msds/. If you are a Shell Distributor, please call 1+800-468-6457 for
all of your service needs. All other customers, please call 1+800-840-5737 for all of your service needs. Information
is also available on the World Wide Web: http://www.shell-lubricants.com/.
November, 2005
Alvania Grease WFX 2
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
Effective Date 07/07/2008
According to OSHA Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR
Material Safety Data Sheet 1910.1200
1. MATERIAL AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
Material Name : Alvania Grease WFX 2
Manufacturer/Supplier : SOPUS Products

PO Box 4427
Houston, TX 77210-4427
USA
MSDS Request : 877-276-7285
Emergency Telephone Number

Spill Information : 877-242-7400
Health Information : 877-504-9351
2. COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
Chemical Identity CAS No. Concentration

Molybdenum disulphide 1317-33-5 1.00 - 5.00 %
A lubricating grease consisting of highly-refined mineral oil and additives.

The highly refined mineral oil contains <3% (w/w) DMSO-extract, according to IP346.
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
Emergency Overview
Appearance and Odour : Clear. Semi-solid at room temperature. Slight hydrocarbon.
Health Hazards : High-pressure injection under the skin may cause serious
damage including local necrosis.
Safety Hazards : Not classified as flammable but will burn.
Environmental Hazards : Not classified as dangerous for the environment.
Health Hazards : Not expected to be a health hazard when used under normal
conditions.
Health Hazards
Inhalation : Under normal conditions of use, this is not expected to be a
primary route of exposure.
Skin Contact : Prolonged or repeated skin contact without proper cleaning can
clog the pores of the skin resulting in disorders such as oil
acne/folliculitis.
Eye Contact : May cause slight irritation to eyes.
Ingestion : Low toxicity if swallowed.
Other Information : High-pressure injection under the skin may cause serious
damage including local necrosis. Used grease may contain
harmful impurities.
Signs and Symptoms : Local necrosis is evidenced by delayed onset of pain and tissue
damage a few hours following injection. Oil acne/folliculitis signs
and symptoms may include formation of black pustules and
spots on the skin of exposed areas. Ingestion may result in
1/9
Print Date 07/14/2008 MSDS_US
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
nausea, vomiting and/or diarrhoea.

Aggravated Medical : Pre-existing medical conditions of the following organ(s) or
Condition organ system(s) may be aggravated by exposure to this
material: Skin.
Environmental Hazards : Not classified as dangerous for the environment.
Additional Information : Under normal conditions of use or in a foreseeable emergency,
this product does not meet the definition of a hazardous
chemical when evaluated according to the OSHA Hazard
Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200.
4. FIRST AID MEASURES
General Information : Not expected to be a health hazard when used under normal
conditions.
Inhalation : No treatment necessary under normal conditions of use. If
symptoms persist, obtain medical advice.
Skin Contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Flush exposed area with water
and follow by washing with soap if available. If persistent
irritation occurs, obtain medical attention. When using high
pressure equipment, injection of product under the skin can
occur. If high pressure injuries occur, the casualty should be
sent immediately to a hospital. Do not wait for symptoms to
develop. Obtain medical attention even in the absence of
apparent wounds.
Eye Contact : Flush eye with copious quantities of water. If persistent
irritation occurs, obtain medical attention.
Ingestion : In general no treatment is necessary unless large quantities
are swallowed, however, get medical advice.
Advice to Physician : Treat symptomatically. High pressure injection injuries require
prompt surgical intervention and possibly steroid therapy, to
minimise tissue damage and loss of function. Because entry
wounds are small and do not reflect the seriousness of the
underlying damage, surgical exploration to determine the
extent of involvement may be necessary. Local anaesthetics or
hot soaks should be avoided because they can contribute to
swelling, vasospasm and ischaemia. Prompt surgical
decompression, debridement and evacuation of foreign
material should be performed under general anaesthetics, and
wide exploration is essential.
5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES
Clear fire area of all non-emergency personnel.
Flash point : Typical 185 C / 365 F (COC)

Upper / lower : Typical 1 - 10 %(V)(based on mineral oil)
Flammability or
Explosion limits
Auto ignition temperature : > 320 C / 608 F
Specific Hazards : Hazardous combustion products may include: A complex
mixture of airborne solid and liquid particulates and gases
(smoke). Carbon monoxide. Unidentified organic and inorganic
2/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
compounds.
Suitable Extinguishing : Foam, water spray or fog. Dry chemical powder, carbon
Media dioxide, sand or earth may be used for small fires only.
Unsuitable Extinguishing : Do not use water in a jet.
Media
Protective Equipment for : Proper protective equipment including breathing apparatus
Firefighters must be worn when approaching a fire in a confined space.
6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES
Avoid contact with spilled or released material. For guidance on selection of personal protective
equipment see Chapter 8 of this Material Safety Data Sheet. See Chapter 13 for information on
disposal. Observe all relevant local and international regulations.
Protective measures : Avoid contact with skin and eyes. Use appropriate containment
to avoid environmental contamination. Prevent from spreading
or entering drains, ditches or rivers by using sand, earth, or
other appropriate barriers.
Clean Up Methods : Shovel into a suitable clearly marked container for disposal or
reclamation in accordance with local regulations.
7. HANDLING AND STORAGE
General Precautions : Use local exhaust ventilation if there is risk of inhalation of

vapours, mists or aerosols. Properly dispose of any
contaminated rags or cleaning materials in order to prevent
fires. Use the information in this data sheet as input to a risk
assessment of local circumstances to help determine
appropriate controls for safe handling, storage and disposal of
this material.
Handling : Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Avoid inhaling
vapour and/or mists. When handling product in drums, safety
footwear should be worn and proper handling equipment
should be used.
Storage : Keep container tightly closed and in a cool, well-ventilated
place. Use properly labelled and closeable containers. Storage
Temperature: 0 - 50 C / 32 - 122 F
Recommended Materials : For containers or container linings, use mild steel or high
density polyethylene.
Unsuitable Materials : PVC.
Additional Information : Polyethylene containers should not be exposed to high
temperatures because of possible risk of distortion.
8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS/PERSONAL PROTECTION
Occupational Exposure Limits
Material Source Type ppm mg/m3 Notation

Molybdenu ACGIH TWA(Respira 0.5 mg/m3 as Mo
m ble fraction.)
disulphide
3/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
Molybdenu OSHA Z1 PEL 5 mg/m3 as Mo

m
disulphide
Molybdenu OSHA Z1A TWA 5 mg/m3 as Mo
m
disulphide
Molybdenu ACGIH TWA(Inhalabl 10 mg/m3 as Mo
m e fraction.)
disulphide
Molybdenu ACGIH TWA(Respira 3 mg/m3 as Mo
m ble fraction.)
disulphide
Molybdenu OSHA Z1 PEL(Total 15 mg/m3 as Mo
m dust.)
disulphide
Molybdenu OSHA Z1A TWA(Total 10 mg/m3 as Mo
m dust.)
disulphide
Additional Information : Due to the product's semi-solid consistency, generation of

mists and dusts is unlikely to occur.
Exposure Controls : The level of protection and types of controls necessary will vary
depending upon potential exposure conditions. Select controls
based on a risk assessment of local circumstances.
Appropriate measures include: Adequate ventilation to control
airborne concentrations. Where material is heated, sprayed or
mist formed, there is greater potential for airborne
concentrations to be generated.
Personal Protective : Personal protective equipment (PPE) should meet
Equipment recommended national standards. Check with PPE suppliers.
Respiratory Protection : No respiratory protection is ordinarily required under normal
conditions of use. In accordance with good industrial hygiene
practices, precautions should be taken to avoid breathing of
material. If engineering controls do not maintain airborne
concentrations to a level which is adequate to protect worker
health, select respiratory protection equipment suitable for the
specific conditions of use and meeting relevant legislation.
Check with respiratory protective equipment suppliers. Where
air-filtering respirators are suitable, select an appropriate
combination of mask and filter. Select a filter suitable for
combined particulate/organic gases and vapours [boiling point
>65 C (149 F)].
Hand Protection : Where hand contact with the product may occur the use of
gloves approved to relevant standards (e.g. Europe: EN374,
US: F739) made from the following materials may provide
suitable chemical protection: PVC, neoprene or nitrile rubber
gloves. Suitability and durability of a glove is dependent on
usage, e.g. frequency and duration of contact, chemical
resistance of glove material, glove thickness, dexterity. Always
seek advice from glove suppliers. Contaminated gloves should
4/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
be replaced. Personal hygiene is a key element of effective

hand care. Gloves must only be worn on clean hands. After
using gloves, hands should be washed and dried thoroughly.
Application of a non-perfumed moisturizer is recommended.
Eye Protection : Wear safety glasses or full face shield if splashes are likely to
occur.
Protective Clothing : Skin protection not ordinarily required beyond standard issue
work clothes.
Monitoring Methods : Monitoring of the concentration of substances in the breathing
zone of workers or in the general workplace may be required to
confirm compliance with an OEL and adequacy of exposure
controls. For some substances biological monitoring may also
be appropriate.
Environmental Exposure : Minimise release to the environment. An environmental
Controls assessment must be made to ensure compliance with local
environmental legislation.
9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES
Appearance : Clear. Semi-solid at room temperature.

Odour : Slight hydrocarbon.
pH : Not applicable.
Initial Boiling Point and : Data not available
Boiling Range
Pour point : Typical -39 C / -38 F
Flash point : Typical 185 C / 365 F (COC)
Upper / lower Flammability : Typical 1 - 10 %(V) (based on mineral oil)
or Explosion limits
Auto-ignition temperature : > 320 C / 608 F
Vapour pressure : < 0.5 Pa at 20 C / 68 F (estimated value(s))
Specific gravity : Typical 0.912 at 15 C / 59 F
Density : Typical 912 g/cm3 at 15 C / 59 F

Water solubility : Negligible.
n-octanol/water partition : > 6 (based on information on similar products)
coefficient (log Pow)
Kinematic viscosity : Typical 24 mm2/s at 40 C / 104 F
Vapour density (air=1) : > 1 (estimated value(s))
Evaporation rate (nBuAc=1) : Data not available
10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY
Stability : Stable.
Conditions to Avoid : Extremes of temperature and direct sunlight.
Materials to Avoid : Strong oxidising agents.
Hazardous Decomposition : Hazardous decomposition products are not expected to form
Products during normal storage.
11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Basis for Assessment : Information given is based on data on the components and the
toxicology of similar products.
5/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
Acute Oral Toxicity : Expected to be of low toxicity: LD50 > 5000 mg/kg , Rat
Acute Dermal Toxicity : Expected to be of low toxicity: LD50 > 5000 mg/kg , Rabbit
Acute Inhalation Toxicity : Not considered to be an inhalation hazard under normal
conditions of use.
Skin Irritation : Expected to be slightly irritating. Prolonged or repeated skin
contact without proper cleaning can clog the pores of the skin
resulting in disorders such as oil acne/folliculitis.
Eye Irritation : Expected to be slightly irritating.
Respiratory Irritation : Inhalation of vapours or mists may cause irritation.
Sensitisation : Not expected to be a skin sensitiser.
Repeated Dose Toxicity : Not expected to be a hazard.
Mutagenicity : Not considered a mutagenic hazard.
Carcinogenicity : Product contains mineral oils of types shown to be non-
carcinogenic in animal skin-painting studies. Highly refined
mineral oils are not classified as carcinogenic by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Other
components are not known to be associated with carcinogenic
effects.
Material : Carcinogenicity Classification

Molybdenum disulphide : ACGIH Group A3: Confirmed animal carcinogen with unknown
relevance to humans.
Reproductive and : Not expected to be a hazard.

Developmental Toxicity
Additional Information : Used grease may contain harmful impurities that have
accumulated during use. The concentration of such harmful
impurities will depend on use and they may present risks to
health and the environment on disposal. ALL used grease
should be handled with caution and skin contact avoided as far
as possible. High pressure injection of product into the skin
may lead to local necrosis if the product is not surgically
removed.
12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Ecotoxicological data have not been determined specifically for this product. Information given is
based on a knowledge of the components and the ecotoxicology of similar products.
Acute Toxicity : Poorly soluble mixture. May cause physical fouling of aquatic
organisms. Expected to be practically non toxic: LL/EL/IL50 >
100 mg/l (to aquatic organisms) (LL/EL50 expressed as the
nominal amount of product required to prepare aqueous test
extract). Mineral oil is not expected to cause any chronic
effects to aquatic organisms at concentrations less than 1 mg/l.
Mobility : Semi-solid under most environmental conditions. Floats on

water. If it enters soil, it will adsorb to soil particles and will not
be mobile.
Persistence/degradability : Expected to be not readily biodegradable. Major constituents
are expected to be inherently biodegradable, but the product
contains components that may persist in the environment.
6/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
Bioaccumulation : Contains components with the potential to bioaccumulate.

Other Adverse Effects : Product is a mixture of non-volatile components, which are not
expected to be released to air in any significant quantities. Not
expected to have ozone depletion potential, photochemical
ozone creation potential or global warming potential.
13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS
Material Disposal : Recover or recycle if possible. It is the responsibility of the

waste generator to determine the toxicity and physical
properties of the material generated to determine the proper
waste classification and disposal methods in compliance with
applicable regulations. Do not dispose into the environment, in
drains or in water courses.
Container Disposal : Dispose in accordance with prevailing regulations, preferably
to a recognised collector or contractor. The competence of the
collector or contractor should be established beforehand.
Local Legislation : Disposal should be in accordance with applicable regional,
national, and local laws and regulations.
14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION
US Department of Transportation Classification (49CFR)

This material is not subject to DOT regulations under 49 CFR Parts 171-180.
IMDG
This material is not classified as dangerous under IMDG regulations.
IATA (Country variations may apply)

This material is not classified as dangerous under IATA regulations.
15. REGULATORY INFORMATION
The regulatory information is not intended to be comprehensive. Other regulations may apply to this
material.
Federal Regulatory Status
Notification Status
EINECS All components listed.

TSCA All components listed.
Comprehensive Environmental Release, Compensation & Liability Act (CERCLA)
Alvania Grease WFX 2 () Reportable quantity: 40 lbs
Zinc alkyl dithiophosphate (68649-

42-3)
7/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
SARA Hazard Categories (311/312)

No SARA 311/312 Hazards.
SARA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) (313)
Zinc alkyl dithiophosphate (68649- 2.50%

42-3)
State Regulatory Status
California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Proposition 65)
This material does not contain any chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer, birth
defects or other reproductive harm.
New Jersey Right-To-Know Chemical List
Molybdenum disulphide (1317-33-5) Listed.

Zinc alkyl dithiophosphate (68649-42-3) Listed.
16. OTHER INFORMATION
NFPA Rating (Health, : 0, 1, 0

Fire, Reactivity)
MSDS Version Number : 3.0
MSDS Effective Date : 07/07/2008
MSDS Revisions : A vertical bar (|) in the left margin indicates an amendment
from the previous version.
MSDS Regulation : The content and format of this MSDS is in accordance with the
OSHA Hazard Communication Standard, 29 CFR 1910.1200.
MSDS Distribution : The information in this document should be made available to
all who may handle the product.
Disclaimer : The information contained herein is based on our current

knowledge of the underlying data and is intended to describe
the product for the purpose of health, safety and environmental
requirements only. No warranty or guarantee is expressed or
implied regarding the accuracy of these data or the results to
be obtained from the use of the product.
8/9
MSDS# 71041E
Version 3.0
9/9
Call us: 203-828-6956
LUBRICANTS.COM Search
Our mission is to make buying lubricants easy.
Product Categories Customer Service About Us
Rail Curve Grease Buyer's Guide Shell Cardura Plus
Manufacturer no preference
Brand Name no preference
Soap/Thickener no preference
NLGI Grade no preference
Additves no preference
Biodegradable no preference
Oil Viscosity cSt at 40C no preference
Oil Viscosity cSt at 100C no preference
Dropping Point C no preference
Max Op Temp C no preference
Min Op Temp C no preference

Need a Quote?
Color no preference
+/- Filters Call 1.877.519.2500 or complete this form:
25 of 25 Rail Curve Grease(s) Package Size:

Quantity:
Timeframe:
Your Name:
Company:
Precision Rail Royal Curve Cardura Plus Cardura WS
Curve Rail Phone:
Email:
Address:
Country:
Refresh Anti-Spam Code (Will Erase Content)
Citgo Summer Citgo Winter Clare Curve Conoco Curve Anti-Spam Code:
Rail Curve Rail Curve Rail Grease
Manufacturer: Shell
Brand Name: Shell
Curve Rail EnviroLogic GALENA Marinus Rail
Soap/Thickener: Microgel
803 MOLY EP Curve
NLGI Grade: 1
Additives: Graphite
Biodegradable: no
Oil Viscosity cSt at 40C: 22
(Kinematic)
Mobil Curve Petro Kote Petron Rail RCG 1255 Oil Viscosity cSt at 100C: unavailable
213 STML Flange (Kinematic)
Dropping Point C: 260
Max Op Temp C: 80
Min Op Temp C: -35
Color: gray
Worked Penetration: 340
Rocol Rail Soy Trak Rail Soy Trak Rail Super Lube Timken OK Load lb: unavailable
Curve Curve 1 Curve 2 Railroad
Extreme Pressure: yes
Food Grade (NSF H1): no
Many years of research and field

testing support the performance of
Cardura Greases, specifically
TempFlex 0 to TempFlex 0 to TempFlex 35 TempFlex designed as railcurve greases. These
100 100 MoS2 to 160 MoS2 Rail products are dispensed by rail
Curve
lubricators located at critical points along the railway
tracks to ensure excellent lubrication and reduce
wheel wear. Two grades are available; Cardura WS
and Cardura Plus.
NOTE: Please consult your Shell Product Specialist to

Timken Rail determine proper lubricator design.
Grease
PERFORMANCE BENEFITS
Cardura Greases offer the following benefits:
Reduced rail/wheel wear
Do you manufacture a Rail Curve Grease? Potential for Improved fuel economy
Add your product here Excellent track coverage - over 5 km with WS,
10km with Plus
Maintenance-free lubrication
All-season performance
Applications:
Cardura Plus contains an effective graphite EP
additive and is recommended for steep grade high
curvature applications where unsurpassed carrying
ability and maximum wear control is desired. With its
exceptionally high melting point, Cardura Plus
provides outstanding retention under very high wheel
temperatures.
Copyright 2013 Niche Sites LLC (DBA Lubricants.com). All rights reserved. Home | Product Links | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Shell Canada Limited
Effective Date: 2009-01-07
Supersedes: 2006-01-10
1. PRODUCT AND COMPANY IDENTIFICATION
PRODUCT: CARDURA* PLUS

SYNONYMS: Railcurve Grease
NLGI Grade 1
PRODUCT USE: Lubricating Grease
PRODUCT CODE: 504-508
SUPPLIER TELEPHONE NUMBERS

Shell Canada Limited (SCL) Shell Emergency Number 1-800-661-7378
P.O. Box 100, Station M CANUTEC 24 HOUR EMERGENCY NUMBER 1-613-996-6666
400-4th Ave. S.W. For general information: 1-800-661-1600
Calgary, AB Canada www.shell.ca
T2P 2H5
This MSDS was prepared by the Toxicology and Product Stewardship Section of Shell Canada Limited.
*An asterisk in the product name designates a trade-mark(s) of Shell Canada Limited, used under license by Shell
Canada Products.
2. COMPOSITION / INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS
THIS PRODUCT IS NOT A WHMIS CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.

See Section 8 for Occupational Exposure Guidelines.
3. HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION
Physical Description: Smooth Semi-Solid Grease Black colour Slight Hydrocarbon Odour
Routes of Exposure: Exposure will most likely occur through skin or eye contact. Inhalation is only possible
if the product is heated or mists are generated.
Hazards:
This product is not expected to be irritating and has a low level of toxicity under
normal use.
May be slightly irritating to the eyes.
Inhalation of oil mist or vapours from hot oil may cause irritation of the upper
respiratory tract.
For further information on health effects, see Section 11.
4. FIRST AID MEASURES

Eyes: Flush eyes with water for at least 15 minutes while holding eyelids open. If irritation
occurs and persists, obtain medical attention.
Skin: Wipe excess from skin. Wash contaminated skin with mild soap and water for at least
15 minutes. If irritation occurs and persists, obtain medical attention. If material is
injected under the skin, get medical attention promptly to prevent serious damage; do
not wait for symptoms to develop.
Page 1 of 4
CARDURA* PLUS 504-508
Revision Number: 6
Ingestion: Not normally required; obtain medical attention if large amounts have been ingested. Do
not induce vomiting. If vomiting occurs spontaneously, keep head below hips to prevent
aspiration of liquid into the lungs.
Inhalation: Remove victim from further exposure. Additional first aid treatment is not ordinarily
required.
Notes to Physician: In general, lubricating oils have low oral toxicity. High pressure injection under the skin
may have serious consequences and may require urgent treatment.
5. FIRE FIGHTING MEASURES

Extinguishing Media: Dry Chemical
Carbon Dioxide
Foam
Water Fog
Firefighting Instructions: Material will not burn unless preheated. Caution, spilled material is slippery. Do
not use a direct stream of water as it may spread fire. Product will float and can
be reignited on surface of water. Water may be used to flush spills away from
exposure. Use water to cool fire exposed containers. Do not enter confined fire
space without adequate protective clothing and an approved positive pressure
self-contained breathing apparatus.
Hazardous Combustion Carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide and dense smoke are produced on
Products: combustion.
6. ACCIDENTAL RELEASE MEASURES

Spilled material is slippery. Isolate hazard area and restrict access. Wear appropriate breathing apparatus (if
applicable) and protective clothing. Stop leak only if safe to do so. Dike and contain land spills; contain spills to
water by booming. For large spills remove by mechanical means and place in containers. Adsorb residue or
small spills with adsorbent material and remove to non-leaking containers for disposal. Notify appropriate
environmental agency(ies). After area has been cleaned up to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities, flush
area with water to remove trace residue. Dispose of recovered material as noted under Disposal Considerations.
7. HANDLING AND STORAGE

Handling: Avoid excessive heat, formation of oil mist, breathing of vapours and mist of hot oil and
prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Launder contaminated clothing prior to reuse. Wash with
soap and water prior to eating, drinking, smoking, applying cosmetics or using toilet facilities. Use
good personal hygiene.
Storage: Store in a cool, dry, well ventilated area, away from heat and ignition sources.
8. EXPOSURE CONTROLS / PERSONAL PROTECTION

The following information, while appropriate for this product, is general in nature. The selection of personal
protective equipment will vary depending on the conditions of use.
OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE LIMITS (Current ACGIH TLV/TWA unless otherwise noted):

North American exposure limits have not been established for the product. Consult local and provincial authorities
for acceptable values.
Oil mist (mineral): 5 mg/m3 (STEL: 10 mg/m3)
Mechanical Not normally required. Local ventilation is recommended if oil mist is present or if exposure
Ventilation: limit is exceeded. Make up air should always be supplied to balance air exhausted (either
Page 2 of 4
Revision Number: 6
generally or locally).
PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT:

Eye Protection: No special eye protection is routinely necessary. Wear safety glasses as appropriate.
Skin Protection: Not normally needed. Chemically-resistant gloves should be worn for frequent or
prolonged contact with this product.
Respiratory Not normally required under intended conditions of use. If vaporization of oil component is
Protection: occurring (i.e. under conditions of high heat), use a NIOSH-approved chemical cartridge
respirator with organic vapour cartridges in combination with a P95 particulate filter.
9. PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

Physical State: Smooth Semi-Solid Grease Odour: Slight Hydrocarbon Odour
Appearance: Black colour Odour Threshold: Not available
Pour Point Not available Boiling Point > 315 C
Vapour Pressure < 0.1 mm Hg @ 20 C Vapour Density (air = 1): Not available
(absolute):
Density: Not available Flash Point Not available
Specific Gravity (Water Lower Flammable Limit: Not available
= 1):
pH: Not applicable Upper Flammable Limit: Not available
Viscosity: (Baseoil) 21 - 25 cSt @ 40 C Auto-ignition Not available
Temperature:
Evaporation Rate (n- Not available Partition Coefficient ( log Not available
BuAc = 1): KOW):
Water Solubility: Insoluble Molecular Weight:
Other Solvents: Hydrocarbon Solvents Formula:
10. STABILITY AND REACTIVITY

Chemically Stable: Yes Hazardous Polymerization: No
Sensitive to Mechanical No Sensitive to Static Discharge: No
Impact:
Incompatible Materials: Avoid strong oxidizing agents.
Conditions of Reactivity: Avoid excessive heat, formation of vapours or mists.
11. TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Routes of Exposure: Exposure will most likely occur through skin or eye contact. Inhalation is only possible
if the product is heated or mists are generated.
Formulation: No data is specifically available for this product and therefore this toxicological
information is based on testing completed with the ingredients.
Irritancy: This product is not a primary skin irritant after exposure of short duration, is not a skin
sensitizer and is not irritating to the eyes.
Acute Toxicity: This product is not expected to be irritating and has a low level of toxicity under
normal use.
Chronic Effects: Prolonged or repeated contact may cause various forms of dermatitis including
folliculitis and oil acne. Long term intensive exposure to oil mist may cause benign
lung fibrosis.
12. ECOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Page 3 of 4
Revision Number: 6
Environmental Effects: Do not allow product or runoff from fire control to enter storm or sanitary sewers,
lakes, rivers, streams, or public waterways. Block off drains and ditches. Provincial
regulations require and federal regulations may require that environmental and/or
other agencies be notified of a spill incident. Spill area must be cleaned and restored
to original condition or to the satisfaction of authorities.
Biodegradability: Not readily biodegradable.
13. DISPOSAL CONSIDERATIONS

Waste management priorities (depending on volumes and concentration of waste) are: 1. recycle (reprocess), 2.
energy recovery 3. incineration, 4. disposal at a licenced waste disposal facility. Do not attempt to combust waste
on-site.
14. TRANSPORT INFORMATION

Canadian Road and Rail Shipping Classification:
This product is not regulated under the Canadian Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations for transport by
road and rail.
15. REGULATORY INFORMATION
This product has been classified in accordance with the hazard criteria of the Controlled Products Regulations
(CPR) and the MSDS contains all the information required by the CPR.
THIS PRODUCT IS NOT A WHMIS CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE.

DSL/NDSL Status: This product, or all components, are listed on the Domestic Substances List, as
required under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. This product and/or
all components are listed on the U.S. EPA TSCA Inventory.
Other Regulatory Status: The regulatory information is not intended to be comprehensive. Other
regulations may apply to this material.
16. OTHER INFORMATION

Revisions: This MSDS has been reviewed and updated. Changes have been made to: Section 3
Section 4 Section 6 Section 8 Section 15
Page 4 of 4
Mine Grease LM EP 680 D3;15= (No Responses);13= (1 Response);14= (% Responses) Page 1 of 3
_________________________________________________________________________________
BP Mine Grease LM EP 680

Heavy Duty Mining Grease
________________________________________________________________________________
Description
BP Mine Grease LM EP 680 is an extreme pressure BP Mine Grease LM EP 680 also contains 3%
lithium grease formulated with specially selected molybdenum disulfide, which provides additional
additives which provide superior protection under wear protection under conditions of vibratory motion.
arduous operating conditions.
________________________________________________________________________________
Applications
BP Mine Grease LM EP 680 is ideally suited for the BP Mine Grease LM EP680 is ideally suited for the
lubrication of heavily loaded plain and anti friction lubrication of heavily loaded plain and anti friction
bearings used in construction, earth moving and bearings used in construction, earth moving and
mining equipment. BP Mine Grease LM EP 680 mining equipment. BP Mine Grease LM EP680 is
provides protection against wear under heavy and particularly recommended for heavily shock loaded
shock loads, high temperature and wet equipment.
environments.
________________________________________________________________________________
Main Benefits
- Superior EP properties provide protection against -Excellent pumpability reduces the risk of blocked
extreme shock loading lubrication lines and lubrication starvation.
-High performance corrosion inhibitors protect -Outstanding structural stability means the lubricant
equipment and reduce maintenance costs and does not slump out of the application
downtime.
________________________________________________________________________________
Storage
All packages should be stored under cover and Grease guns and grease systems should be kept
secure. Where outside storage of drums is clean and working efficiently at all times. Equipment
unavoidable, some kind of cover is vital. Lids should should be employed in a dedicated manner - each
always be replaced to prevent entry of dirt. Extremes item for one product only - to minimise the likelihood
of temperature e.g. nearby steam pipes, furnaces, of cross-contamination of product. Only a small
heat exchangers, radiators etc. must be avoided; amount of cross-contamination can have serious
they can cause separation of the oil and soap effects on the product characteristics.
components of the grease.
________________________________________________________________________________
Health, Safety and Environment

Health, safety and environmental information is The British Petroleum Company p.l.c. or its
provided for this product in the Materials Safety Data subsidiaries will not accept liability if the product is
http://tds-au.bp.com/bpglis/oztds3.nsf/4aea4a2e0606ab8fca256512007da189/597dba54187... 7/07/2006
Sheet. This gives details of potential hazards, used other than in the manner or with the
precautions and First Aid measures, together with precautions or for the purpose/s specified. Before
environmental effects and disposal of used products. the product is used other than as directed, advice
These sheets are available from local BP office or should be obtained from the local BP office or the
the BP Lubricants and Fuels Technical Helpline 1- BP Lubricants and Fuels Technical Helpline 1300
800 033 558 (free call). 139 700.
________________________________________________________________________________
BP Mine Grease LM EP 680

Heavy Duty Mining Grease
________________________________________________________________________________
Typical Characteristics
Grade: Mine Grease LM EP 680
Pneumonic: LM EP 680
Product Code: N/A
____________________________________________________________________________________
Test Method Units Typical value

____________________________________________________________________________________
Appearance
Visual Smooth grey grease
Soap Type Lithium
NLGI Grade 2
Penetration, worked ASTM D217 mm/10 290
Dropping Point ASTM D5661 C >200

ASTM D445 cSt 680
Base Oil Kinematic Viscosity@ 40 C
Timken OK Load kg 20.5
4 Ball Weld Load IP 239 kg 420
4 Ball M.W.S.D (1 hr @ 40 kg) IP 239 mm 0.46
Rust Test ASTM D1743 Pass
________________________________________________________________________________
The above figures are typical of those obtained with normal production tolerance and do not constitute a
specification.
This Data Sheet and information it contains is considered to be The Seller shall not be responsible for any loss or damage resulting
accurate as the date of printing. No warranty or representation, from any hazards or risks identified in the data sheet and which are
express or implied, is made as to the accuracy or completeness of the associated with petroleum products concerned (provided that this
data and information contained in this publication. disclaimer shall not affect any statutory rights of the Buyer of the
petroleum products concerned).
It is the User's obligation to evaluate and use products safely and
within the scope advised in the data sheet and to comply with all BP Australia Pty Ltd. Lubes & Fuels Tech. Helpline: 1300 139 700
applicable laws and regulations. No statement made in this publication ABN 53004 085 616 Fax (Australia): (03) 9268 4394
shall be construed as a permission, recommendation or authorisation
given or implied to practice any patented invention without a valid
licence.
BP Oil International Ltd.

________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Last Modified: 04/09/2003 06:35:45
_________________________________________________________________________________
1 . Identification of the material and supplier

Product name Minegrease LM EP 680
SDS # 460420
Product use Grease for industrial applications
For specific application advice see appropriate Technical Data Sheet or consult our company
representative.
Supplier BP Australia Pty Ltd (ABN 53 004 085 616)
Melbourne Central,
360 Elizabeth Street,
Melbourne,
Victoria 3000,
Australia
Tel: +61 (03) 9268 4111
Fax: +61 (03) 9268 3321
EMERGENCY TELEPHONE 1800 638 556
NUMBER
Product code 460420-AU11, -AU51
2 . Hazards identification
Statement of NON-HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. NON-DANGEROUS GOODS.
hazardous/dangerous nature
3 . Composition/information on ingredients
Highly refined mineral oil (IP 346 DMSO extract < 3%).
Ingredient name CAS no. %

molybdenum sulphide 1317-33-5 1-5
4 . First-aid measures
Eye contact In case of contact, immediately flush eyes with a copious amount of water for at least 15 minutes. Get
medical attention if irritation occurs.
Skin contact In case of contact, immediately flush skin with plenty of water. Remove contaminated clothing and
shoes. Wash clothing before reuse. Clean shoes thoroughly before reuse. Get medical attention if
irritation develops.
Inhalation If inhaled, remove to fresh air. Get medical attention if symptoms appear.
Ingestion Do NOT induce vomiting unless directed to do so by medical personnel. Never give anything by mouth
to an unconscious person. If large quantities of this material are swallowed, call a physician
immediately.
5 . Fire-fighting measures
Extinguishing Media
Suitable In case of fire, use water fog, foam, dry chemical or carbon dioxide extinguisher or spray.
Not Suitable Do not use water jet.
Hazards from combustion These products are
products carbon oxides
sulfur oxides
phosphorus oxides
metal oxide/oxides
Unusual fire/explosion This material is not explosive as defined by established regulatory criteria.
Hazards
Product name Minegrease LM EP 680 Product code 460420-AU11, -AU51 Page: 1/5
Version 1 Date of issue 22 January 2007 Format Australia Language ENGLISH
Build 3.2.1 (Australia)
Special fire-fighting None identified.
procedures
Protection of fire-fighters Fire-fighters should wear self-contained positive pressure breathing apparatus (SCBA) and full turnout
gear.
6 . Accidental release measures

Emergency Procedures Immediately contact emergency personnel. Keep unnecessary personnel away. Use suitable
protective equipment (See Section: "Exposure controls/personal protection"). Follow all fire fighting
procedures (See Section: "Fire-fighting measures").
Methods and materials for If emergency personnel are unavailable, contain spilled material. For small spills add absorbent (soil
containment and clean-up may be used in the absence of other suitable materials) scoop up material and place in a sealed,
liquid-proof container for disposal. For large spills dike spilled material or otherwise contain material to
ensure runoff does not reach a waterway. Place spilled material in an appropriate container for
disposal. Avoid contact of spilt material with soil and prevent runoff entering surface waterways. See
Section 13 for Waste Disposal Information.
7 . Handling and storage

Handling Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Wash thoroughly after handling.
Storage Keep container tightly closed. Keep container in a cool, well-ventilated area.
Combustibility Classification Combustible liquid Class C2 (AS 1940).
8 . Exposure controls/personal protection

Ingredient name Occupational exposure limits
Base oil - unspecified NOHSC (Australia).
TWA: 5 mg/m3 8 hour(s). Form: Oil mist, mineral
molybdenum sulphide NOHSC (Australia, 8/2005).
TWA: 10 mg/m3, (as Mo), 0 times per shift, 8 hour(s). Form: Insoluble
Residual oils (petroleum), solvent-dewaxed (Highly NOHSC (Australia).
refined mineral oil) TWA: 5 mg/m3 8 hour(s). Form: Oil mist, mineral
Whilst specific OELs for certain components are included in this SDS, it should be noted that other components of the preparation will be
present in any mist, vapour or dust produced. For this reason, the specific OELs may not be applicable to the product and are provided
for guidance purposes.
Biological Limit Values No biological limit allocated.
Control Measures Provide exhaust ventilation or other engineering controls to keep the relevant airborne concentrations
below their respective occupational exposure limits.
Hygiene measures Wash hands, forearms and face thoroughly after handling chemical products, before eating, smoking
and using the lavatory and at the end of the working period.
Personal protective equipment
Respiratory system Avoid breathing of vapours, mists or spray. Select and use respirators in accordance with AS/NZS
1715/1716. When mists or vapours exceed the exposure standards then the use of the following is
recommended: Approved respirator with organic vapour and dust/mist (Type P1) filters. Filter capacity
and respirator type depends on exposure level.
Skin and body Avoid prolonged or repeated contact with skin. Wear protective clothing if prolonged or repeated
contact is likely.
Hands Wear protective gloves if prolonged or repeated contact is likely. Chemical resistant gloves.
Recommended: Nitrile gloves.
The correct choice of protective gloves depends upon the chemicals being handled, the conditions of
work and use, and the condition of the gloves (even the best chemically resistant glove will break down
after repeated chemical exposures). Most gloves provide only a short time of protection before they
must be discarded and replaced. Because specific work environments and material handling practices
vary, safety procedures should be developed for each intended application. Gloves should therefore
be chosen in consultation with the supplier/manufacturer and with a full assessment of the working
conditions.
Eyes Safety glasses with side shields.
9 . Physical and chemical properties
Physical state Grease
Colour Black.
Odour Oily.
Flash point >180 C (Closed cup) Pensky-Martens.
Boiling point / range Not available.
Melting point / range Not available.
Density 900 kg/m3 (0.9 g/cm3) at 15C
Vapour density Not available.
Vapour pressure Not available.
Solubility Insoluble in water.
pH Not available.
Relative density Not available.
10 . Stability and reactivity

Stability The product is stable.
Conditions to Avoid Avoid extreme temperatures, strong oxidizers, fire.
Incompatibility with various No hazardous reactions identified.
substances/Hazardous
Reactions
Hazardous Decomposition These products are
Products carbon oxides
sulfur oxides
phosphorus oxides
metal oxide/oxides
11 . Toxicological information
Effects and symptoms
Eyes Unlikely to cause more than transient stinging or redness if accidental eye contact occurs.
Skin Prolonged or repeated contact can defat the skin and lead to irritation and/or dermatitis.
Inhalation Inhalation of oil mist or vapours at elevated temperatures may cause respiratory irritation.
Ingestion Unlikely to cause harm if accidentally swallowed in small doses, though larger quantities may cause
nausea and diarrhoea.
Chronic toxicity
Carcinogenic effects No component of this product at levels greater than or equal to 0.1% is identified as a carcinogen by
ACGIH, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the European Commission (EC), or
the National Occupational Health and Safety Commission (Australia).
12 . Ecological information
Ecotoxicity Notcl
assi
fi
edasenvi
ronment
all
yhazardousi
naccor
dancewi
tht
heAppr
ovedCr
it
eri
aforCl
ass
ify
ing
Hazar
dousSubst
ances[
NOHSC( 1008)/
2004asamendedandadapt
ed]
.
Biodegradability
Persistence/degradability The biodegradability of this material has not been determined.
13 . Disposal considerations
Disposal Consideration / Avoid contact of spilled material and runoff with soil and surface waterways. Consult an environmental
Waste information professional to determine if local, regional or national regulations would classify spilled or
contaminated materials as hazardous waste. Use only approved transporters, recyclers, treatment,
storage or disposal facilities. Dispose of in accordance with all applicable local and national
regulations.
Special Precautions for No additional special precautions identified.
Landfill or Incineration
14 . Transport information
Not classified as dangerous for transport (ADG, IMDG, ICAO/IATA).
Special precautions for user No known special precautions required. See Section: "Handling and storage" for additional information.
15 . Regulatory information
Standard for the Uniform Scheduling of Drugs and Poisons
No Listed Substance
Control of Scheduled Carcinogenic Substances
No Listed Substance
Other Classification Information
Other regulations
Inventories AUSTRALIAN INVENTORY (AICS): In compliance.
CANADA INVENTORY (DSL): Not determined.
CHINA INVENTORY (IECS): Not listed.
EC INVENTORY (EINECS/ELINCS): Not determined.
JAPAN INVENTORY (ENCS): Not listed.
KOREA INVENTORY (ECL): Not determined.
PHILIPPINE INVENTORY (PICCS): Not determined.

US INVENTORY (TSCA): Not determined.
16 . Other information
Key to abbreviations AMP = Acceptable Maximum Peak
ACGIH = American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, an agency that promulgates
exposure standards.
ADG = Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail
ADG Code = Australian Code for the Transport of Dangerous Goods by Road and Rail
CAS Number = Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number
HAZCHEM Code = Emergency action code of numbers and letters which gives information to
emergency services. Its use is required by the ADG Code for Dangerous Goods in bulk.
ICAO = International Civil Aviation Organization.
IATA = International Air Transport Association, the organization promulgating rules governing shipment
of goods by air.
IMDG = International Maritime Organization Rules, rules governing shipment of goods by water.
IP 346 = A chemical screening assay for dermal toxicity. The European Commission has
recommended that Method IP 346 be used as the basis for labelling certain lubricant oil base stocks
for carcinogenicity. The EU Commission has stipulated that the classification as a carcinogen need
not apply if it can be shown that the substance contains less than 3% DMSO extract as measured by
IP 346. (See Note L, European Commission Directive 67/548/EEC as amended and adapted.) DMSO
is a solvent.
NOHSC = National Occupational Health & Safety Commission, Australia
TWA = Time weighted average
STEL = Short term exposure limit
UN Number = United Nations Number, a four digit number assigned by the United Nations Committee
of Experts on the Transport of Dangerous Goods.
History
Date of issue 22/01/2007.
Date of previous issue 19/01/2007.
Prepared by Product Stewardship
Notice to reader
All reasonably practicable steps have been taken to ensure this data sheet and the health, safety and environmental information
contained in it is accurate as of the date specified below. No warranty or representation, express or implied is made as to the accuracy or
completeness of the data and information in this data sheet.
The data and advice given apply when the product is sold for the stated application or applications. You should not use the product other
than for the stated application or applications without seeking advice from us.
Itistheuser sobl igat

iont oevaluat eandus et hisproduc tsaf el
yandt ocompl ywi t
hal lappl i
cablelawsandr egulati
ons.TheBPGr oup
shall not be responsible for any damage or injury resulting from use, other than the stated product use of the material, from any failure to
adhere to recommendations, or from any hazards inherent in the nature of the material. Purchasers of the product for supply to a third
party for use at work, have a duty to take all necessary steps to ensure that any person handling or using the product is provided with the
information in this sheet. Employers have a duty to tell employees and others who may be affected of any hazards described in this sheet
and of any precautions that should be taken.
M
MMMM
Environmental
Conditions for the Rail
Curve Lubrication Test
Program
R3.110 Appendix 5
Environmental conditions for rail curve lubrication test program
Document:
Old Central Station Title: Environmental Conditions for the Rail Curve
290 AnnSt Lubrication Test Program
Brisbane Qld 4000
GPO Box 1422 Project Leader: Prof Gopinath Chattopadhyay

Brisbane Qld 4001
Tel: +61 7 3221 2536 Author: Prof Colin Cole

Fax: +61 7 3235 2987
Project No.: R3.110 (Appendix 5)
www.railcrc.net.au Project Name: Rail Curve Lubrication
Synopsis:
Tests were completed in a heavy haul environment with track subject to traffic of approximately 50 GMT/year.
The climatic conditions were sub-tropical and testing took place during the period of 26 April 10 June 2010.
The test program was mainly carried out in May 2010 indicative weather conditions for the test program
were: Temperatures 15 to 26 degrees C and fairly dry, 20mm of rain for the month.

1 30/11/2013 D Raman
2 30/04/14 Colin Cole Project Steering Chris Gourlay

Committee
DISTRIBUTION
REVISION
DESTINATION
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Industry x X X
Participant for
Review
Established and supported under the Australian Governments Cooperative Research Centres Programme
process, nor may any other exclusive right be exercised, without the permission of the CRC for Rail Innovation.
Copyright2014 CRC for Rail Innovation
CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page ii

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page iii

Table of Contents
1. Test Environment .......................................................................................................................................................1
2. Prevailing Weather Conditions...................................................................................................................................1
CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page iv

1. Test Environment
Tests were completed in a heavy haul environment with track subject to traffic of approximately
50GMT/year. The climatic conditions were sub-tropical and testing took place during the period of 26 April
10 June 2010.
Measurements were made in the direction of travel of loaded trains. Axle loads were typically 26.5 tal.
The test location was near Yarwun, Queensland and so near latitude -23.845 degrees and longitude 151.126
degrees.
2. Prevailing Weather Conditions
The climate at the location is sub-tropical, just south of the Tropic of Capricorn, -23.845 degrees latitude.
Weather during the test was typical for the time of year as Bureau of Meteorology data from the nearby
Gladstone Airport showed in the following figures. Temperature and rainfall in the test period are given in
Table 1.
Table 1 Temperatures and Rainfall April-June 2010
April May June

Maximum Temperatures (C) 28 26 24
Minimum Temperatures (C) 21 15 13
Rainfall (mm) 70 20 15

Figure 1: Maximum Temperatures Gladstone Airport - 2010
Figure 2: Minimum Temperatures Gladstone Airport - 2010

Figure 3: Rainfall Gladstone Airport - 2010

Combined Final Reports Updated

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Combined Final Reports Updated

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

M

Project No.: R3.110

Tel: +61 7 3221 2536

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 2

research that leads to ranking applicators in order of effectiveness

Pump Types: Hydraulic, Electric X, Electric Y

Details of products are included in Appendix 4.

Key results included:

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 3

Table 1 Project Milestones

Milestone Description Date %

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 4

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 5

List of Figures and Tables

Table 1 Project Milestones..................................................................................................................... iv

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 6

Proportion of tangent and curved track

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 1

2.1. Literature review

Table 2 Target Values of Coefficient of Friction

Source Gauge Face Top of Rail

A collection of standards, practices and information is also included in Appendix 3.

2.2. Field Trials of Lubricants and Application Equipment

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 2

3.1 Testing Environment

Table 3 Temperatures and Rainfall

April May June

Maximum Temperatures (C) 28 26 24

Minimum Temperatures (C) 21 15 13

3.1 Application Equipment

Table 4 Carry Distance showing differences due to Application Equipment

Grease A Trial Grease C Trial

Hydraulic Electric Electric Hydraulic Hydraulic Electric Electric

Grease A Grease A Grease A Grease C Grease C Grease C Grease C

0.34 km 1.39 km 0.33 km 0.72 km 2.87 km 4.62 km 1.55 km

3.2 Grease Type

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 3

Table 5 Properties of Greases used in Field Tests

Grease Grease Grease Grease Grease

Drop Point, C 190 190 385 260 >200

Table 6 Carry Distance showing differences due to Grease Type

Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric

Grease Type Grease A Grease B Grease C Grease D Grease E

Carry Distance (km) From

Curve Distance (km) Covered 0.27 km 1.59 km 3.37 km 1.19 km 1.19 km

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 4

Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator Curve Distance (km) Covered

Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator Curve Distance (km) Covered

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 5

Curve Details Lubricator Details

Hydraulic Electric Electric Electric Electric Electric

Curve Radius (m)

Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier Supplier

Carry Distance (km) From Lubricator located

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 6

Track Curvatures at Test Site

Direction of Travel 4.6 km Carry Distance

Radius (m) Curvture (1/m)

Figure 3 Track Curvatures at test Site

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 7

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 8

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 9

CRC for Rail Innovation April 2014 Page 10

Appendix 1: CRC Project Report (R3.110)