Railroad tank cars are designed to transport liquid commodities, gaseous commodities, and commodities that are gas-liquid mixtures. The interior of a tank car is sometimes lined with a material to isolate the structural components of the tank car from the commodity being transported. Tank cars can be insulated or non-insulated, pressurized or non-pressurized, and can be designed for single or multiple loads. Non-pressurized cars have plumbing at the bottom for unloading, and may have an access port and a dome housing with various valving on the top. Pressurized cars can have a pressure plate, valving, and a protective cylindrical dome housing at the top through which loading and unloading can be accomplished.
Various designs of tank cars have been developed for the transportation of specific types of commodities, including for example, foodstuffs and other materials, including hazardous materials that can pose a threat to safety and health if they are spilled. Traditionally, railroad tank cars have been engineered to contain their commodity based on the commodity's physical and chemical properties, and the inherent stresses placed upon the tank car due to those properties. However, in instances of collision and derailment, a tank car can be subjected to additional forces. In recent years, work has been done towards developing standards and criteria for strengthening railroad tank cars to reduce the risk of spills and increase public safety should a train accident occur.
In response to safety concerns, trends in tank car design have resulted in tank cars that are constructed of thicker steels than what would be required based solely upon the structural loading of specific commodities. Current tank cars thus have steel thickness in excess of what is required to retain the commodity pressure and sustain structural loads, and the additional thickness improves the puncture resistance and crashworthiness of the tank car so that the tank car can be less prone to damage. However, the amount of benefit derived from adding thickness to the outer structure of a tank car is limited, and may not suffice to meet desired criteria for avoiding the release of hazardous materials during events such as collisions or derailment.
The present technology relates to railroad tank cars that contain a commodity according to its physical and chemical properties, and also provides increased levels of puncture resistance and energy absorption to resist release of the commodity in the event of a collision or derailment. In particular, tank cars of the present technology have an outer tank, and an inner tank within the outer tank.
The inner tank is supported by a bottom support structure, where there is a tank to tank clearance defined between the inner tank and the outer tank. Spacers and insulation are located within the tank to tank clearance defined between the inner tank and the outer tank. The inner tank can shift within the outer tank under impact loading conditions and the insulation and spacers absorb energy of the impact loading conditions.
Specific examples have been chosen for purposes of illustration and description, and are shown in the accompanying drawings, forming a part of the specification.
Tank cars of the present technology are designed to have improved impact resistance as compared to conventional tank cars. The tank cars have an outer tank that surrounds an inner tank. The inner tank is enclosed by the outer tank, and is supported within the outer tank.
Tank cars of the present technology can be used to transport commodities, including but not limited to liquid commodities, gaseous commodities, and commodities that are gas-liquid mixtures. The transported commodities can be hazardous or non-hazardous, and can be pressurized or not pressurized.
The inner tank 104 can be made of any suitable material or materials, and includes an inner tank heads 116 and an inner tank shell 118. In one embodiment, the inner tank heads 116 and the inner tank shell 118 are both made from TC 128 Gr B steel. The thickness of the inner tank heads 116 can be from about ¾ of an inch to about 1 inch. The thickness of the inner tank shell 118 can be from about 7/16 of an inch to about 9/16 of an inch, and preferably has a thickness that is at least about 15/32 of an inch.
The outer tank 102 can also be made of any suitable material, and includes outer tank heads 120 and an outer tank shell 122. In one embodiment, the outer tank head 120 and the outer tank shell 122 can both be made from TC 128 Gr B steel. The thickness of the outer tank head 120 can be at least about ½ an inch, and can preferably be from about ¾ of an inch to about 1 inch. The thickness of the outer tank shell 122 can be at least about 15/32 of an inch, and can preferably be from about ¾ of an inch to about 1 inch.
In one embodiment, the outer tank 102 may be constructed from a special high toughness steel. The high toughness steel is produced by continuous casting from a melt produced in either basic oxygen or electric furnaces. The steel may either be hot rolled with a maximum finishing temperature of 1125° C. or normalized after rolling in order to achieve optimal toughness properties. If normalized, the temperature for the normalization treatment is 950° C. for 1 hour and air cooled. The composition of the steel is: 0.05% C, 0.94% Mn, 0.52% Si, 1.29% Cu, 0.74% Ni, 0.07% Nb, 0.08% Ti, 0.005% S maximum, 0.005% P maximum, remainder Fe. This composition is nominal and may be adjusted for manufacturing and physical property optimization.
In some embodiments, the inner tank shell 118 and the outer tank shell 122 have a combined thickness of at least about 1.5 inches, and the inner tank head 116 and the outer tank head 120 have a combined thickness of at least about 1.7 inches.
The tank to tank clearance 106, which is measured from the outside surface of inner tank shell 118 to the inside surface of the outer tank shell 122, can be any suitable distance. In at least one example, the tank to tank clearance 106 is about 4 inches. As another example only, the clearance could be in the range of approximately 2 to 5 inches.
Spacers 110 are placed between the inner tank 104 and outer tank 102, and can allow for energy absorption. The spacers 110 can be designed to crush under impact loading conditions of significant force loading, such as when the tank car experiences an impact or derailment. The spacers can be made from any suitable material, including, but not limited to, A516-70 or TC128 Gr B steel.
One example of a spacer is indicated in general at 110 in
An alternative arrangement of spacers is illustrated in
One example of an upper spacer 206 is shown in
One example of a lower spacer 208 is illustrated in
Referring back to
Referring to
The outer tank 102, insulation 108, spacers 110, and the inner tank 104 act as an energy absorbing system in the event of a derailment or other event that would possibly lead to a puncture, or other breach, of the inner tank 104. The energy absorbing system of the tank car 100 allows the inner tank 104 to move independently of the outer tank 102, which can absorb at least a significant amount of the force applied to the tank car 100 in an impact or derailment scenario, thus reducing the likelihood that the shell of the inner tank 104 will be breached.
Puncture Resistance
The tank car 100 preferably has a shell impact energy absorption of at least about 2.5 million foot-pounds at the tank centerline, and a head impact energy absorption of at least about 1.5 million foot-pounds at a point that is about 29 inches below the tank centerline. This can be about a 1.5 times increase in shell impact energy absorption, and a 1.4 times increase in head impact energy absorption, over current tank car designs, as shown in the Table 1 below.
With reference to Table 2, tank cars having an inner tank and an outer tank were analyzed, using finite element analysis, for shell impact energy absorption using a ram, as shown in
The first and second tank car designs each had an inner tank shell 510 having a cylindrical length of about 472 inches and an inner diameter of about 100 inches, made of TC 128 GR B steel having a thickness of 0.4688 of an inch. The inner tank was pressurized at about 100 psi. The inner tank heads were 2:1 ellipsoidal heads made of TC 128 GR B steel, and the overall length of the inner tank car was about 522 inches as measured from the center point of the inner tank head at one end of the inner tank to the center point of the inner tank head at the opposite end of the inner tank.
The first tank car design had an inner and outer tank shell 508 made of TC 128 GR B steel having a thickness of 0.4688 inches, and a tank to tank standoff of about 4 inches. The ram impact speed was about 16.2 miles per hour (mph), delivering an impact energy of about 2.5 million foot-pounds. The impact energy delivered by the ram upon impact with the first tank car caused deformation of the outer tank shell and the inner tank shell, and also resulted in both shells being punctured. Calculations showed that the outer tank shell punctured at a ram displacement of about 29 inches and a peak force of about 855,000 pounds. The inner tank shell punctured rapidly after failure of the outer tank shell. The impact energy absorption at failure was calculated to be about 1.32 million foot-pounds. The results of the testing for the first tank car design are shown in row 7 of Table 2 below.
The second tank car design had an outer tank shell 508 made of TC 128 GR B steel having a thickness of 0.777 inches, and a tank to tank standoff of about 4 inches. The ram impact speed was about 16.2 miles per hour (mph), delivering an impact energy of about 2.5 million foot-pounds. As shown in
The second tank car design was also tested at ram impact speeds of 17.7 mph, and 18.8 mph, and 20.0 mph, which delivered impact energies of 3.0 million ft-lbs, 2.6 million ft-lbs, and 2.6 million ft-lbs, respectively. The 3.0 million ft-lb impact energy was sufficient to initiate fractures in the 0.777 inches thick outer tank shell, but the outer tank shell was not fully penetrated and no fractures were initiated in the inner tank shell. Thus, the puncture threshold of the tank car is higher than the 3.0 million ft-lb impact energy. However, when the impact speed was further increased to 18.8 mph and 20.0 mph, puncture of the tank car resulted. Calculations determined that the puncture occurred at a an impact energy of approximately 2.6 million ft-lbs. Without being bound by any particular theory, it is believed that the puncture resulted due to additional dynamic effects that are introduced in the tank car response to impact at these higher speeds. Accordingly, the inertial effects at the higher speeds resulted in the impact forces exceeding the puncture threshold for the tank car at a lower displacement than was achieved when the impact speed was at the slightly reduced 17.7 mph. However, in each instance, the tank car still maintained a impact energy absorption above 2.5 million ft-lbs. The additional results of the testing for the second tank car design at these higher speeds are shown in rows 9-11 of Table 2 below.
The third tank car design had an outer tank shell 508 made of TC 128 GR B steel having a thickness of 0.7145 inches, and a tank to tank standoff of about 4 inches. The third tank car design had an inner tank shell 510 having a cylindrical length of about 472 inches and an inner diameter of about 100 inches, made of TC 128 GR B steel having a thickness of 0.5625 of an inch. The inner tank was pressurized at about 100 psi. The inner tank heads were 2:1 ellipsoidal heads made of TC 128 GR B steel, and the overall length of the inner tank car was about 522 inches as measured from the center point of the inner tank head at one end of the inner tank to the center point of the inner tank head at the opposite end of the inner tank. The third tank car design also tested at ram impact speed of 17.7 mph, which delivered impact energies of 3.0 million ft-lbs. The 3.0 million ft-lb impact energy was determined to be at the puncture threshold for the third tank car design. The results of the testing for the third tank car design are shown in row 12 of Table 2 below.
Testing was conducted on additional tank car designs as reported in Table 2 below. The dimensions and materials of the tank car designs, and the ram impact conditions, were the same as those above except for the dimensions noted in Table 2.
1Tank was not fully punctured at this impact velocity.
Tank cars having an inner tank and an outer tank were analyzed for head impact energy absorption using a ram, as shown in
Three test designs for the outer tank were evaluated, each having identical inner tank geometries, with a 0.879 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel inner tank head 610 and a 0.4688 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel inner tank shell 614. The inner tank head 610 for each tank car tested had a diameter that was nominally about 100 inches, and the inner tank was pressurized to an internal pressure of 100 psi. The geometry of the inner tank head 610 for each tank car was a 2:1 ellipsoid. The outer tank head 612 for each tank car had a 108 inch inner diameter and a dished geometry with a tank to tank clearance of 4 inches from the inner tank head 610.
The ram impact speed used for the initial head impact energy absorption analyses of all three outer tank test designs was 12.52 mph, which delivered an impact energy of 1.5 million ft-lbs. As shown in
The first outer tank design had a 0.500 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank head 612, and a 0.375 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank shell 616. The outer tank head 612 was punctured at a ram displacement of approximately 18 inches and a peak ram force of approximately 1.06 million lbs. The inner tank head 610 was punctured at a ram displacement of approximately 22 inches and a ram force of 1.06 million lbs. The head puncture energy at puncture of the inner tank head 610 was calculated to be about 1.11 million ft-lbs. The results for the first design are listed in row 16 of Table 3 below.
The second outer tank design had a 0.879 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank head 612, and a 0.375 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank shell 616. The outer tank head 612 was partially penetrated late in the impact response, at a ram displacement of approximately 20 inches and a peak force of approximately 1.57 million lbs. However, the ram was stopped at a maximum displacement of approximately 21 inches, and the inner tank head 610 was not punctured. The entire impact energy of 1.5 million ft-lbs was absorbed and dissipated by this second design. The results for the second design are listed in row 17 of Table 3 below.
The third outer tank design had a 0.879 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank head 612, and a 0.777 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel outer tank shell 616 to be consistent with some of the outer tank shell designs of Example 1. The outer tank head 612 was partially penetrated late in the impact response, at a ram displacement approximately 19 inches and a peak force of approximately 1.59 million lbs. The ram was stopped at a maximum displacement of approximately 21 inches, and the inner tank head 610 was not punctured. The entire impact energy of 1.5 million ft-lbs was absorbed and dissipated by this third design. The results for the third design are listed in row 18 of Table 3 below.
To establish the maximum puncture energy that the third outer tank design can withstand, additional testing was performed at a higher ram impact speed of 14.5 mph, corresponding to an impact energy of 2.0 million ft-lbs. The higher speed impact was sufficient to puncture both the outer tank head and the inner tank head with a puncture energy of 1.86 million ft-lbs. The results for the third design at the higher speed are listed in row 19 of Table 3 below.
Testing was conducted on additional tank car designs as reported in Table 3 below. The dimensions and materials of the tank car designs, and the ram impact conditions, were the same as those above except for the dimensions noted in Table 3. The inner tank heads were all made of TC128 Gr B steel having a thickness indicated in Table 3 below, and the inner tank shells were all 0.4688 inch thick TC128 Gr B steel.
A tank car of the present technology having a tank to tank clearance of about 4 inches was made having the following dimensions:
The shell impact energy absorption of the tank car was determined to be about 3.0 million foot-pounds at the tank car centerline, and the head impact energy absorption was determined to be about 1.9 million foot-pounds at a point about 29 inches below the tank car centerline.
From the foregoing, it will be appreciated that although specific examples have been described herein for purposes of illustration, various modifications may be made without deviating from the spirit or scope of this disclosure. It is therefore intended that the foregoing detailed description be regarded as illustrative rather than limiting, and that it be understood that it is the following claims, including all equivalents, that are intended to particularly point out and distinctly claim the claimed subject matter.
This application is a Continuation of U.S. Non-Provisional application Ser. No. 12/966,335 filed Dec. 13, 2010, which claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application Ser. No. 61/285,644, filed on Dec. 11, 2009. The entirety of all the above-listed applications are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
951239 | Garrett | Mar 1910 | A |
1908684 | Buchanan | Apr 1930 | A |
2714516 | Brown | Aug 1955 | A |
3100458 | Baker et al. | Aug 1963 | A |
3158383 | Anderson et al. | Nov 1964 | A |
3338185 | Phillips | Aug 1967 | A |
3547047 | Needham | Dec 1970 | A |
3631815 | Heap | Jan 1972 | A |
3653333 | Taylor | Apr 1972 | A |
3766862 | Heap | Oct 1973 | A |
3876739 | Loveland | Apr 1975 | A |
4466356 | Messersmith | Aug 1984 | A |
4474632 | Spees | Oct 1984 | A |
4496073 | Silver | Jan 1985 | A |
4674674 | Patterson | Jun 1987 | A |
5042395 | Wackerle et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5802984 | Thoman et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5855174 | Thoman et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5857414 | Thoman et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5890435 | Thoman et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5988074 | Thoman | Nov 1999 | A |
6092472 | Thoman et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6138580 | Thoman | Oct 2000 | A |
6575102 | Norton et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6615741 | Fecko et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6892433 | Barry et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
7228805 | Beers et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7305923 | Creighton et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
20020195019 | Woodall | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20040089194 | Homes | May 2004 | A1 |
20100307373 | Kinsella et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110139032 | Shirvinski | Jun 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2712749 | Jul 2005 | CN |
201283867 | Aug 2009 | CN |
0768225 | Apr 1997 | EP |
0839101 | May 1998 | EP |
1690770 | Aug 2006 | EP |
1 925 524 | May 2008 | EP |
20080070973 | Aug 2008 | KR |
PA05005965 | Aug 2006 | MX |
1068313 | Jan 1984 | SU |
WO 0044601 | Aug 2000 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20140338560 A1 | Nov 2014 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61285644 | Dec 2009 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12966335 | Dec 2010 | US |
Child | 14451088 | US |