Talk:Rail profile
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Merge from Vignoles rail (date=April 2007)
At the same time merge the following two as well.
Peter Horn 18:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Copy and paste from Talk:Flanged T rail
any person with two cents of brains already knows that steel is strongerthan iron.User:71.240.76.151/71.240.76.15114:17,30 september 2007(UTC)
Right, because strength is such a clear term in and of itself right Strength_of_materials. As a child I used encyclopedic references all the time to gain a broader more general understanding of the world. "Brains" does not equate to accumulated knowledge. In fact the choices of materials and design is what brought me to this page. I assume that the typical cross section i see when I see train lines is the Flanged T Rail or Bullhead? What I would like to see explained is the reasoning for this shape. I suspect there's "saving on materials" but I'm still curious as to how effective this profile is, and why it stacks up to alternatives. If anyone has the energy to expand on the engineering aspects of rail tracks I for one would be very interested. --Squee-D (talk) 03:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC) Peter Horn 01:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- The point is that steel and wrought iron weren't available in the first days. It was also a limiting factor in the design of early locomotives, particularly coupling rods and crank axles. Chevin (talk) 08:30, 11 April 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Merger
I agree that these articles should be merged.Rosser (talk) 21:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
- So do I Peter Horn 23:06, 4 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Appeal for 137 lb/yd rail cross section
Hi,guys, I want to know the cross section of 137 lb/yd(68kg/m) rail. I think it is yea-saying that someone can do me the favour.My email is ykh_qrrs@163.com. Thanks, Michael 2-6-2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.168.75.12 (talk) 23:28, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
