Standard width of ballast section for Metre Gauge (MG) In Indian Railways, what is the commonly adopted standard width of the ballast section for MG track measured at the formation level?

Difficulty: Medium

Correct Answer: 2.30 m

Explanation:


Introduction / Context:
The ballast section width (at formation) provides lateral stability, drainage, and proper seating for sleepers. For MG, the required width is lower than BG because of narrower gauge and reduced sleeper size and spacing. Selecting the correct width is essential for track stability and maintenance economy.


Given Data / Assumptions:

  • Gauge considered: Metre Gauge (MG).
  • We refer to typical standard practice values used historically on Indian Railways.
  • Width is the overall ballast/formation width supporting the sleeper ends and shoulder.


Concept / Approach:
MG track uses smaller sleepers and has smaller clearances than BG. A common dimension used historically for MG ballast section width is about 2.30 m, which balances shoulder width for lateral restraint with economic use of ballast. Larger widths like 3.35 m or 3.53 m are characteristic of BG sections and therefore not appropriate for MG.


Step-by-Step Solution:
Identify that MG has narrower requirements than BG.Compare values: 2.30 m suits MG standards; larger values are BG-oriented.Therefore, select 2.30 m as the standard MG ballast width.


Verification / Alternative check:
Formation drawings and permanent-way manuals for MG show overall ballast widths around 2.30 m, aligning with shoulder and crib requirements for typical sleeper spacing.


Why Other Options Are Wrong:
3.35 m and 3.53 m: Typical for BG or heavy-duty sections, excessive for MG.2.50 m: Larger than common MG practice and not the standard reference dimension.None of these: Incorrect because 2.30 m is standard for MG.


Common Pitfalls:

  • Mixing BG and MG dimensions due to memory overlap.
  • Confusing ballast section width with formation width in special cases (e.g., turnouts).


Final Answer:
2.30 m

More Questions from Railways

Discussion & Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!
Join Discussion