(For Report, see p. 429.)

Professor A. N. Talbot (University of Illinois) :-I think you are all glad to be at the end of a very long session, and I will make my presentation on this report brief. As stated in the report, the work of the year has been given to the working up of tests already made. This has involved a great deal of detail work. I am glad to say, however, that the progress on the work has been such that we now have the material nearly in form to present to the whole Committee for discussion, and we expect to have a report during the year covering all of these tests.

The work I refer to is the calculation of the stresses in earth, both straight and curved track, in a number of types of locomotive, and the effect of both these and the counterbalance of these stresses. The lateral bending is also included.

There have also been carried on a series of tests in the laboratory on the stresses in angle bars and joints of various kinds, and it is believed that this will give information of some interest on the way the different angle bars act, and how far back it is from the end of the rail, before the rail and the bar act as a single piece, and I think that information will have an influence on the forms of angle bar which should be used.

The Committee is enabled only to present a report of progress at this time. I think, however, that all the members of the Committee will be glad to have suggestions either here or afterwards, as to the work to be done, or the work which should be undertaken.

Mr. C. H. Mottier (Illinois Central):-I would like to ask Professor Talbot if the Committee has given any attention to the distribution of pressure through embankment. I am prompted to ask this question because the Committee has done considerable work on distribution of stresses through ballast, perhaps to a depth of two feet. They have the information on that subject available, and presumably have the apparatus necessary to make further tests at a greater depth. I feel that definite knowledge as to the distribution of pressure through embankment will be of great value and I am, therefore, wondering if the Committee has in mind the development of this subject.

Chairman Talbot:-The work on that has not gone very far. Tests in the laboratory have been conducted which are applicable to the transmission of pressures through any granular material, and during the year some effort has been made to find out whether it is worth while to conduct further tests in the laboratory on the way in which the pressures are transmitted in granular material. So far as the determination of the distribution of pressures in embankments is concerned, I am afraid that tests would not result in anything of value unless done on a large scale and under many different conditions, in which case the cost of the work would be prohibitive.

I think before summer comes we shall have information that will enable us to judge if it is worth while to go into this matter further.

The President:-Are there any further discussions? If not, the Committee is excused with the thanks of the Association.

DISCUSSION ON TRACK

(For Report, see pp. 575-620.)

Mr. W. P. Wiltsee (Norfolk & Western) :-The first subject, Revision of the Manual, is so connected with the second subject, that it will be preferable to have Sub-Committee No. 2 report first. Mr. Neubert, Chairman of Sub-Committee No. 2, will present the report on frogs, crossings, etc.

Mr. J. V. Neubert (New York Central) :—These plans for bolted rail crossings, 701 to 706 inclusive, were included in last year's report, and we have made such slight changes and alterations as are deemed advisable and have added other plans in order to meet the various angles.

Under "Manganese Steel Insert Crossings," we recommend the adoption of plans 751 to 765. Nos. 751-2-3-4 and 7, and 762 were included in last year's report. We have made such changes and alterations as are deemed necessary, and added such other frog angles as were required to meet the general requirements. The plans referred to and offered for adoption are shown in a portfolio which was sent out as supplementary to the Bulletin.

Mr. Wiltsee-I move the adoption of plans 701 to 710, bolted rail crossings. Some of these plans have been before the Committee for several years. They have been discussed with and criticized by the Manganese Track Society, and are the result of the joint work of the two associations.

Mr. C. W. Baldridge (Santa Fe):-I am aware the Committee put out these plans last year for discussion, but I was not able to go over the plans at that time. In the plans for crossings, so far as I have been able to look them over, I do not find any built-up crossings showing an easer rail extending beyond the joint of the rail.

Mr. Neubert:-There seemed to be some misunderstanding last year -the specification for crossing frogs was left out. Where the easer rails are necessary, we provide for them.

Mr. Baldridge:-I have had occasion to follow up some crossings with long easer rails, as compared with short caser rails, and an easer rail extending the matter of 14 or 18 inches beyond the joint will last longer than a similar crossing with a short easer rail.

The President:-Are you ready to vote whether this shall go into the Manual?

(The motion was put to vote and carried.)

Mr. Wiltsee:-I move the adoption of plans 751 to 768 inclusiveManganese Steel insert crossings. Some of these plans have been before the Committee for several years, and are the result of the work of the Committee of Manganese Track Society and this Committee.

(Motion put to vote and carried.)

Mr. Neubert:-There seemed to be some misunderstanding. We did not print in this addendum the specifications which should have accompanied these crossing frog plans, and I will read them.

(Mr. Neubert then read the matter "Application of crossing designs and recommended practices.")

The President:-Is there any discussion of these specifications? Mr. C. E. Lindsay (New York Central) :-Do I understand these specifications have not yet been submitted to the membership?

Chairman Wiltsee:-They were not printed in the Bulletin.

Mr. Lindsay-May I ask whether the recommendations contained therein are merely a repetition of what has heretofore been submitted to the Association?

Chairman Wiltsee:-No, sir; they are not. They are not exactly a specification, but they cover the method of construction of these crossings.

Mr. Lindsay-Then I submit that it would be very unfortunate to have these recommendations go in the Manual without having been submitted to the Association, regrettable as the delay may be.

The President:-There is no motion before the house at the present time. I asked for discussion on the specification.

Mr. Neubert:-As I understand it, these are not specifications, but merely explanations of these plans.

Chairman Wiltsee:-If it is in order, I will move the adoption of these explanations, to be printed with the plans in the Manual.

Mr. Earl Stimson (Baltimore & Ohio):-In seconding the motion, I would like to express my confidence in the Committee, that they are not trying to put anything over. What they have to offer is not a specification, but merely an explanation, and the plans would be rather incomplete unless that was included.

Mr. W. M. Camp (Railway Review) :-It seems to be overlooked that this document was mailed out to the members about a month ago. I received a copy of it about that time, I think.

Mr. Neubert:-It was not really the fault of the Committee that these were not printed. These are nothing more than instructions in regard to the application as well as drawing up the design, as we answered the question of the previous speaker. There is no catch in them, and I think if they are inserted with the plans, the plans can be used more clearly and more properly.

The President-Does that cover your point, Mr. Lindsay?

Mr. Lindsay: No, sir: I feel it is very improper to print something as recommended practice that has not been considered by the Association.

Mr. E. A. Frink (Seaboard Air Line) :-While it would be unfortunate to adopt something by this convention that has not been put before the members, to my mind it will be still more unfortunate if this Committee has got to see the results of its work carried over for another year. I cannot pretend to remember all of that memorandum as it was read, but my recollection of it is that a large part of it is explanatory that we can adopt without question. There are, however, some paragraphs in there that lay down certain limiting angles of certain types of frogs, limiting

curves, etc. I think we can solve this problem by having those paragraphs read, paragraph by paragraph and yoted on, and adopting the rest of it as a whole.

Mr. Baldridge:-I did not hear anything in this explanation that I would consider objectionable. It seems to me the only objection to having this adopted without having it printed is the matter of establishing a precedent. It has been customary in the past not to allow anything to go in the Manual that has not been previously printed in the Bulletin. If that precedent is to be followed, we should let it go over another year, so that if anyone does find something there that he wants to criticize, it can be done after mature study.

Mr. Hunter McDonald (Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis) :—I should regret very much to see this report held out of the Manual due to this delay in the presentation of a portion of it. I believe that we have time enough in the discussion of this report to have the paper that the Chairman read considered paragraph by paragraph, and I feel that it would probably receive very much more careful attention than the remainder of the report has, because I know that the volume of it is such it would prevent anyone from reading it all and studying it to the extent that would be necessary in order to criticize anything that the Committee has done.

The President:-There is a motion before the house now to adopt these explanations and place them in the Manual with the plans.

Mr. McDonald:-I move to amend that motion to the effect that we consider this section that has been read paragraph by paragraph.

Mr. H. M. Lull (Southern Pacific) :—I do not recall that there is anything on these plans specifying the kind of bolts to be used in these crossings. I did not hear anything in the explanation relating to that.

Chairman Wiltsee:-Under the General Specification you will find that we specify heat-treated bolts.

(The motion to include the matter under consideration in the Manual was put and carried.)

Chairman Wiltsee:-I will now present the matter appearing on p. 577: "Supplement to specifications for switches, frogs, crossings and guardrails." This is supplemental to the specifications adopted last year. We feel that this supplement, which is a specification for making Manganese steel castings, will be of special assistance to inspectors on work of this kind. I move that it be approved and printed in the Manual. (Motion put and carried.)

The next subject appears on page 581—“Submit final plans and specifications for track tools, collaborating with Committee on Ballast." Mr. T. T. Irving, Chief Engineer of the Grand Trunk, is Chairman of that sub-committee, and he will present the report to you.

(Mr. Irving then presented the matter in question and said:) There is one dimension missing in the pickeye adze. In the elevation drawing the bottom dimension should be marked 3 in.

Chairman Wiltsee:-I move the adoption for printing in the Manual of the following plans: Pinch bar, lining bar, two claw bars, track wrenches, adze, pickeye adze, spike pullers, rail fork, track gage, rail tongs, track chisel, clay pick, spike mauls, sledge, and two track levels. Mr. Lindsay:-On pages 582-583, lining bars and switch bars are shown. The limit of wear is indicated in outline by a measurement from the initial point of the bar. In the event that the point is worn off, you will not have any place to measure from. Also, I think it is as necessary to show the owner's name on the bar as the manufacturer's name. I would like to have the Committee include in the plans instructions that the owner's name appear on it. Why is it necessary to have bars of 18 lb. weight and bars of 20 lb. weight? Why not have two classes18 lb. and 26 lb.?

Mr. P. C. Newbegin (Bangor & Aroostook):-In the design for claw bars, there does not seem to be any necessity for making such a heavy bar. In design No. 1 a typical bar is shown, 1 inch, and in design No. 2, a bar 13 in. It would seem to me that the size of the handle could be cut down to advantage to save carrying unnecessary weight.

Mr. Camp:-For a lining bar the Committee shows a crow-bar, or one with a wedge point. It seems to me that a pinch-point is preferable for a lining bar. For all other purposes there is no question about it. If one tries to lift up the end of a tie with a crow-bar, the bar will slip back. Either a wedge point or diamond point is a poor one for a lining bar.

Mr. Neubert:--The name for that tool is lining bar, and is what is being manufactured and used on railroads in this country. The Committee felt it should be given that name and called a lining bar.

Mr. E. D. Swift (Belt Railway of Chicago):-On page 592 a track chisel is shown. The minimum size of the chisel is of no consequence for cutting the rail.

Mr. Baldridge-It struck me in looking over these plans that the size of the jaws of the rail tongs as shown on page 591 were unnecessarily close to the size of the present rail head. Rail tongs ordinarily last for a good while and it seemed to me it would be better to allow a little larger spread and depth, particularly the depth of the jaws of the rail tong. Rail tongs do not wear out very fast and should be made to take care of a variation greater than is shown.

Mr. Neubert:-The rail tong shown here will take care of a Pennsylvania 130-lb. rail section.

Chairman Wiltsee:-The Committee went into that question very carefully.

Mr. Baldridge:-I believe that 24 in. depth, which is the amount allowed here, is hardly enough clearance to protect against what may occur in the design of rail heads in the future, and there is no reason for holding to a close fit between the depth of the grip of the tongs and the rail head that I know of. It is a case of providing an extra half-inch