Re

pub
li
cofBu
lga
ria
≠ EDI
CTOFGOVERNMENT±
Inorde
rtop r
omot
ep u
bli
cedu
cati
onandp u b
licsaf
et
y,equal
j
ust
iceforal
l,abet
te
rinf
ormedci
ti
zenr
y ,ther ul
eoflaw,
wor
ldtradeandwor
ldpea
ce,t
hisl
egaldocume nti
sh e
reby
madeavai
lab
leonanonco
mmercia
lbasi
s,a sitisth
erightof
al
lhumanstoknowandspe
akthela
wstha tgovernthe
m.

EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010: Railway
applications - Track - Track geometry
quality - Part 5: Geometric quality levels
- Plain line [Required by Directive
2008/57/EC]
 Май 2010

БДС EN 13848-5:2008+A1

ICS: 93.100 Заменя:

БДС EN 13848-5:2008.

Железопътна техника. Релсов път. Качество на геометрията на

релсовия път. Част 5: Нива на качеството на геометрията на
релсовия път. Обикновена линия

Railway applications - Track - Track geometry quality - Part 5: Geometric quality levels

Европейският стандарт EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 има статут на български

стандарт от 2010-05-11.

Този стандарт е официалното издание на Българския институт за стандартизация на

английски език на европейския стандарт EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010.

24 стр.
© 2010 Национален № за позоваване:БДС EN
. , , 13848-5:2008+A1:2010
, 1797 ,
. , .“ ” 3
 НАЦИОНАЛЕН ПРЕДГОВОР

Този стандарт е подготвен с участието на БИС/TK 70 "Железопътен транспорт".

Следват 22 страници на EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010.

,
:

- : , . , . 3, 1
- On-line : www.bds-bg.org
- +359 2 873-55-97
- : info@bds-bg.org
EUROPEAN STANDARD EN 13848-5:2008+A1
NORME EUROPÉENNE
EUROPÄISCHE NORM April 2010

ICS 93.100 Supersedes EN 13848-5:2008

English Version

Railway applications - Track - Track geometry quality - Part 5:

Geometric quality levels - Plain line

Applications ferroviaires - Voie - Qualité géométrique de la Bahnanwendungen - Oberbau - Qualität der Gleisgeometrie
voie - Partie 5: Niveaux de la qualité géométrique de la voie - Teil 5: Geometrische Qualitätsstufen - Gleise
- Voie courante

This European Standard was approved by CEN on 7 February 2008 and includes Amendment 1 approved by CEN on 22 March 2010.

CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European
Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national
standards may be obtained on application to the CEN Management Centre or to any CEN member.

This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation
under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN Management Centre has the same status as the
official versions.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION

COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION
EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels

© 2010 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010: E
worldwide for CEN national Members.
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Contents Page

Foreword ..............................................................................................................................................................3!
1 Scope ......................................................................................................................................................4!
2 Normative references ............................................................................................................................4!
3 Terms and definitions ...........................................................................................................................4!
4 Symbols and abbreviations ..................................................................................................................5!
5 Background ............................................................................................................................................5!
6 Overview .................................................................................................................................................5!
7 Assessment of track geometric quality ...............................................................................................6!
8 Immediate action limits .........................................................................................................................7!
8.1 Introductory remarks .............................................................................................................................7!
8.2 Track gauge ............................................................................................................................................7!
8.3 Longitudinal level ..................................................................................................................................9!
8.4 Cross level ..............................................................................................................................................9!
8.5 Alignment ............................................................................................................................................ 10!
8.6 Twist ..................................................................................................................................................... 10!
9 Alert and intervention limit ................................................................................................................ 11!
Annex A (informative) Relative importance of the various parameters ...................................................... 12!
A.1 Track-vehicle system ......................................................................................................................... 12!
A.2 Influence of track geometry parameters on vehicle behaviour and safety .................................. 13!
A.3 Other criteria ....................................................................................................................................... 13!
Annex B (informative) Alert and intervention limits ..................................................................................... 15!
B.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 15!
B.2 Alert limit and intervention limit ........................................................................................................ 15!
B.2.1 Track gauge ......................................................................................................................................... 15!
B.2.2 Longitudinal level ............................................................................................................................... 16!
16 16!
B.2.3 Cross level ........................................................................................................................................... 17!
B.2.4 Alignment ............................................................................................................................................ 17!
B.2.5 Twist ..................................................................................................................................................... 18!
Annex C (informative) !A-Deviations" .................................................................................................... 19!
Annex ZA (informative) Relationship between this European Standard and the essential
rd
requirements of EU Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July 1996 on the interoperability of the
th
trans-European high-speed rail system amended by the EU Directive 2004/50/EC of 29
April 2004 ............................................................................................................................................. 20!
Bibliography ..................................................................................................................................................... 22!

2
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Foreword
This document (EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 256
“Railway applications”, the secretariat of which is held by DIN.

This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical
text or by endorsement, at the latest by October 2010, and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at
the latest by October 2010.

This document includes Amendment 1, approved by CEN on 2010-03-22.

This document supersedes EN 13848-5:2008.

The start and finish of text introduced or altered by amendment is indicated in the text by tags ! ".

Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.

This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission and the
rd
European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive 96/48/EC of 23 July
1996 on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system amended by the EU Directive
th
2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004.

For relationship with EU Directive, see informative Annex ZA, which is an integral part of this document.

This European Standard is one of the series EN 13848 Railway applications — Track — Track geometry
quality as listed below:

 Part 1: Characterisation of track geometry

 Part 2: Measuring systems — Track recording vehicles

 Part 3: Measuring systems — Track construction and maintenance machines

)
 Part 4: Measuring systems — Manual and light weight devices 1

 !Part 5: Geometric quality levels — Plain line"

According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following
countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech
Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain,
Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

1) To be published.

3
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

1 Scope
This European Standard defines the minimum requirements for the quality levels of track geometry, and
specifies the safety related limits for each parameter as defined in EN 13848-1.

This standard covers the following topics:

 description of quality levels;

 relative importance of parameters;

 immediate action limit;

 considerations on other quality levels.

This European Standard applies to high-speed and conventional plain line of 1 435 mm and wider gauge
railways provided that the vehicles operated on those lines comply with EN 14363 and other vehicle safety
standards.

For lines covered by the high speed infrastructure TSI, the requirements stated in the HS INS TSI prevail. Any
track geometry parameter not covered by the HS INS TSI needs to be compliant with this European Standard.

2 Normative references
Not applicable.

3 Terms and definitions

For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.

3.1
nominal track gauge
reference value for track gauge used by individual networks

3.2
design track gauge
design value of track gauge for a given track section, which might be different from the nominal track gauge

3.3
QN1 level
refer to EN 14363

3.4
QN2 level
refer to EN 14363

3.5
QN3 level
refer to EN 14363

4
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

4 Symbols and abbreviations

For the purposes of this document, the following symbols and abbreviations apply.

Table 1 — Symbols and abbreviations

Symbol or
Designation Unit
abbreviation
AL Alert limit mm or mm/m
IL Intervention limit mm or mm/m
IAL Immediate action limit mm or mm/m
D1 Wavelength range D1: 3 m < λ ≤ 25 m m
D2 Wavelength range D2: 25 m < λ ≤ 70 m m
D3 Wavelength range D3: 70 m < λ ≤ 150 m for longitudinal level
m
Wavelength range D3: 70 m < λ ≤ 200 m for alignment
HS INS TSI High Speed Infrastructure Technical Specification for Interoperability
! Twist base-length m
λ Wavelength m
N/A Not applicable
r Curve radius m
u Cross level mm
V Speed km/h

5 Background
th
The importance of knowing the track geometric quality arose in the middle of 20 century, when European
infrastructure managers developed their own track recording vehicles allowing a continuous measurement of
track geometry and based on this, their own track geometry quality evaluation standards.

These independent developments resulted in different measuring and evaluation methods which are no longer
adequate in the light of the requirements of European railway interoperability. This is because it is difficult to
compare the track geometry conditions of various European infrastructures. Yet, at least for safety reasons, it
is necessary to make such comparisons. The main purpose of the standard is to define a minimum track
geometry quality to ensure safe operation of trains based on the experience of various European
infrastructure managers.

6 Overview
This European Standard sets out quality levels, in particular immediate action limits, with the aim of
harmonising European track geometry quality standards.

It can be significant in:

 optimisation of track geometry maintenance works;

 optimisation of vehicle ride quality and dynamic loading of the track;

5
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

 harmonising vehicle acceptance procedures.

Requirements given in this European Standard should be taken into account:

 by infrastructure managers;

 by track maintenance managers;

 by vehicle manufacturers;

 by track contractors;

 by regulatory authorities;

 for research purposes.

The values stated in this European Standard are based on the values prescribed by various European
railways. Furthermore, this standard takes into account, as far as possible, the previous studies made on this
topic:

 Annex C of EN 14363:2005;

 TSI for high-speed line infrastructure;

 ORE Question B55 report N.o 8 (1983).

7 Assessment of track geometric quality

All the parameters as defined in EN 13848-1 are encompassed in this European Standard; their respective
importance and their influence on vehicle behaviour are described in Annex A.

Three indicators can describe the track geometric quality:

 extreme values of isolated defects;

 standard deviation over a defined length, typically 200 m;

 mean value.

NOTE 1 Consideration should be given to successions of isolated defects because they could generate resonance
effects, and to combinations of defects in several parameters at the same location (see Annex A).

Three main levels have to be considered:

 Immediate Action Limit (IAL): refers to the value which, if exceeded, requires taking measures to reduce
the risk of derailment to an acceptable level. This can be done either by closing the line, reducing speed or by
correction of track geometry;

 Intervention Limit (IL): refers to the value which, if exceeded, requires corrective maintenance in order
that the immediate action limit shall not be reached before the next inspection;

 Alert Limit (AL): refers to the value which, if exceeded, requires that the track geometry condition is
analysed and considered in the regularly planned maintenance operations.

6
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

These values are given as a function of speed, which is an important factor for the evaluation of track
geometry quality. Parts 2, 3 and 4 of EN 13848 give measuring methods for track geometry whereby track
geometry quality can be assessed.

The values in the tables are given for a loaded track as defined in EN 13848-1. When the measurements are
made on unloaded track, the difference in the measured values that may result need to be taken into account.

The normative part of the standard gives IALs for isolated defects and for mean track gauge.

The informative part of this European Standard gives ILs and ALs for isolated defects and mean track gauge,
and ALs for standard deviations.

The track geometry limits AL, IL and IAL differ from the 3 vehicle acceptance levels QN1, QN2 and QN3 used
in EN 14363. More particularly QN3 is quite different from IAL because, according to EN 14363, it
characterises track sections which do not exhibit the usual track geometry quality. Quality level QN3, however,
does not represent the most adverse but still tolerable maintenance status which still allows regular train
operations.

NOTE 2 A further quality level of track geometry can be used for track works acceptance (see EN 13231-1).

NOTE 3 The intervention limit depends on the corrective maintenance policy, the frequency of inspection and defect
growth rate.

8 Immediate action limits

8.1 Introductory remarks

The immediate action limit values given in this standard are derived from experience and from theoretical
considerations of the wheel-rail interaction as physical tests with different vehicles up to the point of
derailment are not practicable.

Exceeding these immediate action limit values requires specific measures to be implemented to reduce the
risk of derailment or other hazards to an acceptable level.

The wavelength range D3 is not taken into account in the following, as it is not directly linked with safety, but
more with vehicle ride quality.

The immediate action limits given in the following tables and figures are normative.

With the exception of track gauge, all values stated are absolute.

8.2 Track gauge

The values provided in the following tables apply to the nominal track gauges 1 435 mm, 1 524 mm and
1 668 mm. Networks using other nominal track gauges shall adjust the values accordingly.

The reference for the track gauge in the HS INS TSI is 1 435 mm.

NOTE The minimum and maximum values in Table 2 and Table 3 are independent from the design track gauge.

7
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Table 2 — Track gauge – IAL – Isolated defects – Nominal track gauge to peak value

Nominal track gauge to peak value Nominal track gauge to peak value
Speed (in mm) (in mm)
(in km/h) IAL HS INS TSI (reminder)
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
V ≤ 80 -11 +35 -9 +35
80 < V ≤ 120 -11 +35 -9 +35
120 < V ≤ 160 -10 +35 -8 +35
160 < V ≤ 230 -7 +28 -7 +28
230 < V ≤ 300 -5 +28 -5 +28

Table 3 — Track gauge – IAL – Nominal track gauge to mean track gauge over 100 m

Nominal track gauge to mean track gauge over 100 m

Speed
(in mm)
(in km/h)
Minimum Maximum
V ≤ 40 N/A +32
40 < V ≤ 80 -8 +32
80 < V ≤ 120 -7 +27
120 < V ≤ 160 -5 +20
160 < V ≤ 230 -5 +20
230 < V ≤ 300 -3 +20

NOTE The minimum values may be relaxed by 1 mm when the nominal rail inclination is 1:20.

8
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Table 4 — Gauge – HS INS TSI IAL – Minimum value of mean gauge (mm) over 100 m in service, on
straight track and in curves of radius R > 10 000 m (reminder)

Speed Minimum value of mean gauge (mm) over 100 m in service, on

straight track and in curves of radius R > 10 000 m
(in km/h)

V ! 160 1 430
160< V ! 200 1 430
200< V ! 230 1 432
230< V !250 1 433
250< V !280 1 434
280< V !300 1 434
V > 300 1 434

8.3 Longitudinal level

Table 5 — Longitudinal level – IAL – Isolated defects – Mean to peak value

Mean to peak value

(in mm)
Speed Wavelength range
(in km/h) D1 D2
V ≤ 80 28 N/A
80 < V ≤ 120 26 N/A
120 < V ≤ 160 23 N/A
160 < V ≤ 230 20 33
230 < V ≤ 300 16 28

The mean, in the table above, is calculated over a length of at least twice the higher wavelength in the D1 or
D2 range. In practice the mean will be close to zero and therefore zero to peak values may be used.

Special attention should be paid to short wavelength defects which, although unlikely, can become dangerous
when their amplitude is high.

NOTE For speeds less than or equal to 40 km/h, the limit can be relaxed to 31 mm.

8.4 Cross level

This standard gives no IAL values for cross level because the risk associated with a cross level defect is tied
to twist and cant deficiency. IAL values for twist are given in 8.6. Cant deficiency limits depend on the track
alignment design and construction rules, and the characteristics of the traffic, on each network.

Each infrastructure manager may specify limits for his own network taking into account the above
characteristics.

9
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

8.5 Alignment

Table 6 — Alignment – IAL – Isolated defects – Mean to peak value

Mean to peak value

(in mm)
Speed Wavelength range
(in km/h) D1 D2
V ≤ 80 22 N/A
80 < V ≤ 120 17 N/A
120 < V ≤ 160 14 N/A
160 < V ≤ 230 12 24
230 < V ≤ 300 10 20

The mean, in the table above, is calculated over a length of at least twice the higher wavelength in the D1 or
D2 range. In practice the mean will be close to zero and therefore zero to peak values may be used.

Special attention should be paid to short wavelength defects which, although unlikely, can become dangerous
when their amplitude is high.

NOTE 1 For speeds less than or equal to 40 km/h, the limit can be relaxed to 25 mm.

NOTE 2 Some types of track construction may have a greater risk of buckling when subject to high amplitude
alignment defects.

8.6 Twist

The track twist limit is a function of the measurement base-length applied (!) according to one of the
equations:

1) Limit twist = ((20/!) + 3) for u ! (r − 100)/2 (curve A)

with a maximum value of:

7 mm/m for lines designed for speed V ≤ 200 km/h;

5 mm/m for lines designed for speed V > 200 km/h;

2) Limit twist = ((20/!) + 1,5) for (r − 100)/2 < u < (r − 50)/1,5 (curve B)

with a maximum value of 6 mm/m and a minimum value of 3 mm/m.

For both equations:

! is the twist base-length, with 1,3 m ≤ ! ≤ 20 m;

u is the cross level (in mm);

r is the curve radius (in m).

10
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Key
! twist base-length (in m) – cf. Table 1
C IAL value for twist (in mm/m)

Figure 1 — Twist – IAL – Isolated defects – Zero to peak value

Twist values in accordance with the above figure shall only be applicable if the twist extends for at least 2 m.

The minimum base-length considered herein is 1,3 m and the maximum is 20 m in accordance with
ORE B55 RP8.

NOTE 1 Exceeding the above limits of cross level u can be allowed provided that other measures are taken to ensure
safety, e.g. installation of check rails or rail-lubrication systems.

NOTE 2 For long twist base-lengths, certain tight curves having a high design twist require special care in maintenance
because of the small difference between the IAL values and the design twist values.

NOTE 3 For gauges wider than 1 435 mm, different cross level u limits should be used.

9 Alert and intervention limit

Unlike immediate action limits, which take into account the track/vehicle interaction, as well as the risk of
unexpected events (see Annex A), the other quality levels are mainly linked with maintenance policy.

Maintenance policy may be directed either at upholding safety alone or at achieving good ride quality, lower
life cycle cost or more attractive (higher speed) services in addition to safety. The alert limits and intervention
limits set by the European infrastructure managers will be set at least to ensure safety and can be tightened to
achieve a given level of ride quality.

The frequency of inspections should be chosen to take account of the intervention and alert levels set down in
each European infrastructure manager standard and to assure the geometric quality of the track.

For these reasons, the values given in Annex B should be considered as purely indicative, reflecting the
common practice in most European infrastructure managers.

11
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Annex A
(informative)

Relative importance of the various parameters

A.1 Track-vehicle system

The railway track has the three functions: carrying the train, guiding it and absorbing the traction forces. These
functions lead to vertical, lateral and longitudinal forces between train and track.

The track-vehicle interaction cannot be defined precisely as a deterministic process, because it depends on a
great number of external and internal factors of the system.

Some external factors have not been taken into account in the determination of immediate action limits, such
as wind or resonance effects due to the substructure.

Considering only track-vehicle interaction, 3 types of criteria have to be taken into account:

a) Safety parameters

1) Sum of the lateral forces (ΣY)

This parameter characterises the risk of track shift under load due to high forces on the track.

The lateral resistance of a track is mainly related to the friction of sleepers on the ballast. Then, it
depends on the vertical force applied on the track. It is expressed with a very simple law, the so
called Prud’Homme formula or limit, which is given by:

ΣY ! α (10 + P0/3)

where

P0 is the static axle load (in kN)

α being equal to 1 for locomotives and coaches, and 0,85 for freight wagons.

2) Lateral (Y) and vertical (Q) forces combination

The ratio Y/Q generated by a wheel characterises the risk of derailment, corresponding to climbing of
the wheel flange onto the rail.

Y/Q ratio has to be lower than a critical value depending on the angle between wheel and rail, the
contact condition, the speed and other factors.

3) Quasi static lateral and vertical forces

In small radius curves (R ≤ 600 m), quasi-static lateral and vertical forces have also to be taken into
account.

b) Comfort parameters

Comfort is evaluated by measuring vertical and lateral accelerations in the vehicle body (respectively
z&&* and y&&* ).

12
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

c) Parameters influencing components life

Track components and vehicle components life is mainly linked to vertical and lateral forces.

A.2 Influence of track geometry parameters on vehicle behaviour and safety

To define track geometry quality, it is necessary to choose and to combine significant geometrical parameters
of the track and determine thresholds for safety taking into account the above mentioned track/vehicle
interactions aspects.

Experience and theoretical considerations have shown that practically all track geometry parameters have an
influence on the vehicle response.

Particular combinations of track geometry parameters could have a strong influence on the vehicle response.

The predominant influences of individual track geometry parameters on vehicle response are those identified
in the table below by a cross.

Table A.1 — Relationship between vehicle response and track geometry parameters

Vehicle Parameters
response
Track
(forces and Longitudinal level Twist/cross level Alignment
gauge
accelerations)
ΣY X X X
Q X X X

y&&* X X

z&&* X
Y/Q X X X X

Twist and track gauge are particularly important because of their respective influences on wheel loading and
on vehicle stability.

A.3 Other criteria

The track-vehicle system should also be considered from the standpoint of other factors that can generate
substantial vehicle responses. These factors, as listed below, although not treated exhaustively in this
European Standard, have been considered in the immediate action limits set down in the standard without,
however, taking into account their extreme conditions, which could by themselves, create a hazardous
situation:

 cant deficiency or cant excess, which generates quasi-static forces that can worsen the reaction of the
vehicle on a local defect;

 horizontal curvature, which generates quasi-static forces that can be quite substantial depending on the
running speed;

 shape and sequence of defects; track geometry quality standards usually address the problem of
isolated defects without considering their shape or their sequence. However, experience shows that the

13
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

shape and sequence of defects, as well as combinations of defects of different nature, may also affect the
vehicle reaction;

 wheel-rail contact geometry; for example equivalent conicity, which is important for the running
behaviour of the vehicle;

 rate of change of the defect; since any track defect can evolve between two inspections, its amplitude
should be monitored against the corresponding limit and its rate of change and other characteristics
evaluated;

 vehicle type and state of maintenance; the track usually cannot be devoted to a single vehicle type.
Since each type has its own characteristics and response, provision should be made so that all vehicles
complying with EN 14363 and other vehicle safety and maintenance standards will run safely;

 environmental conditions should be considered. Wind loads for example can have a quasi-static effect
in the same manner as cant deficiency as well as a dynamic effect on the vehicle.

14
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Annex B
(informative)

Alert and intervention limits

B.1 Introduction
Examples of intervention and alert limits are given in the following tables and figures. These values are not
mandatory but are proposed as a guideline. To take account of the differing tolerances on certain parameters,
some values are expressed as a range, others as a discrete value.

With the exception of track gauge, all values stated are absolute.

B.2 Alert limit and intervention limit

B.2.1 Track gauge

The values provided in the following tables apply to the nominal track gauges 1 435 mm, 1 524 mm and
1 668 mm. Networks using other nominal track gauges should adjust the values accordingly.

NOTE The minimum and maximum values in Table B.1 and Table B.2 are independent from the design track gauge.

Table B.1 — Track gauge – AL & IL – Isolated defects – Nominal track gauge to peak value

Speed Nominal track gauge Nominal track gauge Nominal track gauge
to peak value to peak value to peak value
(in km/h)
(in mm) (in mm) (in mm)
AL IL IAL (reminder)
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
V ≤ 80 -7 +25 -9 +30 -11 +35
80 < V ≤ 120 -7 +25 -9 +30 -11 +35
120 < V ≤ 160 -6 +25 -8 +30 -10 +35
160 < V ≤ 230 -4 +20 -5 +23 -7 +28
230 < V ≤ 300 -3 +20 -4 +23 -5 +28

15
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Table B.2 — Track gauge – AL & IL – Nominal track gauge to mean track gauge over 100 m

Speed nominal track gauge to nominal track gauge to nominal track gauge to
mean track gauge over mean track gauge over mean track gauge over
(in km/h)
100 m 100 m 100 m
(in mm) (in mm) (in mm)
AL IL IAL (reminder)
Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum Minimum Maximum
V ≤ 40 N/A +25 N/A +28 N/A +32
40 < V ≤ 80 -6 +25 -7 +28 -8 +32
80 < V ≤ 120 -5 +22 -6 +25 -7 +27
120 < V ≤ 160 -3 +16 -4 +18 -5 +20
160 < V ≤ 230 -3 +16 -4 +18 -5 +20
230 < V ≤ 300 -1 +16 -2 +18 -3 +20

B.2.2 Longitudinal level

Table B.3 — Longitudinal level – AL & IL – Isolated defects – Mean to peak value

Speed Mean to peak value Mean to peak value Mean to peak value
(in km/h) (in mm) (in mm) (in mm)
AL IL IAL (reminder)
Wavelength range Wavelength range Wavelength range
D1 D2 D1 D2 D1 D2
V ≤ 80 12 to 18 N/A 17 to 21 N/A 28 N/A
80 < V ≤ 120 10 to 16 N/A 13 to 19 N/A 26 N/A
120 < V ≤ 160 8 to 15 N/A 10 to 17 N/A 23 N/A
160 < V ≤ 230 7 to 12 14 to 20 9 to 14 18 to 23 20 33
230 < V ≤ 300 6 to 10 12 to 18 8 to 12 16 to 20 16 28

The mean, in the table above, is calculated over a length of at least twice the higher wavelength in the D1 or
D2 range. In practice the mean will be close to zero and therefore zero to peak values may be used.

NOTE For speeds less than or equal to 40 km/h, the ALs and ILs can be relaxed.

16
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Table B.4 — Longitudinal level – AL – Standard deviation

Standard deviation
(in mm)
Speed
D1
(in km/h)
V ≤ 80 2,3 to 3
80 < V ≤ 120 1,8 to 2,7
120 < V ≤ 160 1,4 to 2,4
160 < V ≤ 230 1,2 to 1,9
230 < V ≤ 300 1,0 to 1,5

B.2.3 Cross level

IL and AL values are not given for cross level because the risk associated with a cross level defect is tied to
twist and to cant deficiency.

IL and AL values for twist are given in B.2.5. Cant deficiency limits depend on the track alignment design and
construction rules, and the characteristics of the traffic, on each network.

Each infrastructure manager may specify limits for his own network taking into account the above
characteristics.

The difference between the measured peak cross level and the design cross level should not exceed 20 mm.

B.2.4 Alignment

Table B.5 — Alignment – AL & IL – Isolated defects – Mean to peak value

Mean to peak value Mean to peak value Mean to peak value

(in mm) (in mm) (in mm)
Speed
AL IL IAL (reminder)
(in km/h)
Wavelength range Wavelength range Wavelength range
D1 D2 D1 D2 D1 D2
V ≤ 80 12 to 15 N/A 15 to 17 N/A 22 N/A
80 < V ≤ 120 8 to 11 N/A 11 to 13 N/A 17 N/A
120 < V ≤ 160 6 to 9 N/A 8 to 10 N/A 14 N/A
160 < V ≤ 230 5 to 8 10 to 15 7 to 9 14 to 17 12 24
230 < V ≤ 300 4 to 7 8 to 13 6 to 8 12 to 14 10 20

The mean, in the table above, is calculated over a length of at least twice the higher wavelength in the D1 or
D2 range. In practice the mean will be close to zero and therefore zero to peak values may be used.

NOTE For speeds less than or equal to 40 km/h, the ALs and ILs can be relaxed.

17
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Table B.6 — Alignment – AL – Standard deviation

Standard deviation
(in mm)

Speed
D1
(in km/h)
V ≤ 80 1,5 to 1,8
80 < V ≤ 120 1,2 to 1,5
120 < V ≤ 160 1,0 to 1,3
160 < V ≤ 230 0,8 to 1,1
230 < V ≤ 300 0,7 to 1,0

B.2.5 Twist

In practice, twist is measured on a 3 m base by the majority of networks, therefore IL and AL values are only
given for that base-length (! = 3 m).

Table B.7 — Twist – AL & IL – Isolated defects – Zero to peak value (! = 3 m)

Speed Zero to peak Zero to peak Zero to peak

value value value
(in km/h)
AL IL IAL (reminder)
(in mm/m) (in mm/m) (in mm/m)
V ≤ 80 4 5 7
80 < V ≤ 120 4 5 7
120 < V ≤ 160 4 5 7
160 < V ≤ 200 4 5 7
200 < V ≤ 300 3 4 5

If necessary, the Infrastructure Manager can give values for other base-lengths, with the help of both the
above table and the Figure 1 in 8.6, applying a factor to the IAL values, such as 0,6 for AL and 0,7 for IL.

NOTE In order to take into account the high rate of change of cross level of certain transition curves by design, the IL
and AL can be increased provided the IAL is not exceeded.

18
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Annex C
(informative)

!A-Deviations

A-Deviation: National deviation due to regulations, the alteration of which is for the time being outside the
competence of the CEN/ CENELEC member.

Switzerland

In addition to the regulations in sub-clause 8.2 "Track gauge" and sub-clause 8.6 "Twist" of EN 13848-5, the
requirement of the executing provisions of the Railway ordinance (SR 742.141.11 /
http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/c742_141_11.html) and the complementary provisions of Regulation R 220.46
have also to be complied in Switzerland.

According to these regulations:

 the minimum track gauge is 1 430 mm;

 within existing curves and radii in which the cant exceeds the value u = (r-50)/1,5 [mm], the twist
appearing in the track in service shall not exceed the value of 3 mm/m for base-lengths greater than or
equal to 1,3 m. On such curves, check rails or rail lubrication systems are not necessary.

Justification:

In Switzerland, the upper limits of cant values in existing curves can be exceeded if the following measures
(cf. note 1, sub-clause 8.6) are provided:

 a good track quality (twist < 3 mm/m);

 wheel flange lubrication on the locomotives/traction units.

NOTE (From CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations Part 2:2008, 2.17): where standards fall under EU
Directives, it is the view of the Commission of the European Communities (OJ No C 59, 9.3.1982) that the
effect of the decision of the Court of Justice in case 815/79 Cremonini/Vrankovich (European Court Reports
1980, p. 3583) is that compliance with A-deviations is no longer mandatory and that the free movement of
products complying with such a standard should not be restricted within the EU except under the safeguard
procedure provided for in the relevant Directive."

19
EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Annex ZA
(informative)

Relationship between this European Standard and the essential

requirements of EU Directive 96/48/EC of 23rd July 1996 on the
interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system amended
by the EU Directive 2004/50/EC of 29th April 2004

This European Standard has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN by the European Commission to
rd
provide a means of conforming to Essential Requirements of the New Approach Directive 96/48/EC of 23
July 1996 on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system amended by the EU Directive
th
2004/50/EC of 29 April 20042.

Once this standard is cited in the Official Journal of the !European Union" under that Directive and has
been implemented as a national standard in at least one Member State, compliance with the clauses of this
standard given in Table ZA.1 confers, within the limits of the scope of this standard, a presumption of
conformity with the corresponding Essential Requirements of that Directive and associated EFTA regulations.

Table ZA.1 — Correspondence between this European Standard and Directive 96/48/EC

Chapter/§/points and Corresponding text,

Chapter/§/annexes of this Qualifying
annexes of the TSI articles/§/annexes of the
European Standard remarks/Notes
Infrastructure –23/06/2006 Directive 96/48/EC
Chapter 3 Essential
requirements
-§ 3.3.5 Technical Annex III – Essential
Clause 7 Assessment of
compatibility requirements - § 1.5 –
track geometric quality
Technical compatibility
Chapter 4 Description of the
Infrastructure domain
- Point 4.2.10.2 Definitions
Chapter 4 Description of the
Infrastructure domain
- § 4.2.2. Nominal track
gauge
-§ 4.2.9. Equivalent conicity–
4.2.9.3.1-Minimum values of
mean track gauge
Annex II – Subsystems –
Clause 8 Immediate Action -§ 4.2.10-Track geometrical Point 3 – Basic parameters
Limits: quality and limits on isolated for interoperability
§ 8.2 Track gauge defects
Annex III – Essential
-Point 4.2.10.3 Immediate requirements§ 1.1 – Safety
action, intervention and alert – Point 1.1.2
limits
-Point 4.2.10.4-Immediate
action limit-4.2.10.4.2-
Variation of gauge, isolated
defects and nominal gauge to
peak value

20
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Chapter 4 Description of the

Infrastructure domain
-§ 4.2.10-Track geometrical
quality and limits on isolated
defects
Clause 8 Immediate Action
Limits: -Point 4.2.10.3 Immediate
§ 8.6 Twist action, intervention and alert
limits

-Point 4.2.10.4-Immediate
action limit-4.2.10.4.1-Track
twist, isolated defects and
zero to peak value
Chapter IV – Subsystems
– Art. 18-3
Annex III – Essential
Chapter 4 Description of the requirements - § 1.1 –
Clause 9 Alert and Safety – Point 1.1.1
Infrastructure domain
intervention limit
§ 4.5.1.Maintenance plan Annex III – Essential
requirements - § 1.2 –
Reliability and availability

Annex A – Relative
Chapter 4 Description of the Annex III – Essential
importance of various
Infrastructure domain requirements - § 1.1 –
parameters
§ 4.2.13 Track resistance Safety – Point 1.1.2 and
A1 – Track – vehicle
1.1.3
system
Chapter 4 Description of the
Infrastructure domain
Annex B – Alert and
-§ 4.2.10-Track geometrical
intervention limit – B 2 Alert
quality and limits on isolated
limit and intervention limit
defects
§ B 2.1 – Track gauge
§ B 2.2. – Longitudinal
-Point 4.2.10.3 Immediate
level
action, intervention and alert
§ B 2.4. - Alignment
limits
§ B 2.5 - Twist

21
 EN 13848-5:2008+A1:2010 (E)

Bibliography

[1] EN 13231-1, Railway applications — Track — Acceptance of works — Part 1: Works on ballasted track
— Plain line

[2] EN 13848-1, Railway applications — Track — Track geometry quality — Part 1: Characterisation of track
geometry

[3] EN 14363:2005, Railway applications — Testing for the acceptance of running characteristics of railway
vehicles — Testing of running behaviour and stationary tests

[4] Technical specification for interoperability relating to the infrastructure subsystem of the trans-European
high-speed rail system

[5] ORE B 55, Prevention of derailment of goods wagons on distorted tracks: RP 8 (April 1983), Conditions
for negotiating track twists – Recommended values for the track twist and cant – Calculation and
measurement of the relevant vehicle parameters – Vehicle testing (final report)

[6] 96/48 – ST13 Part 2 Version EN4 23-06-2006 - Draft technical Specification for Interoperability:
Infrastructure Sub-system

22

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)