Characterisation of head-hardened rail steel in terms of cyclic plasticity response and microstructure for improved material modelling

Stress- and strain-controlled tests of heat treated high-strength rail steel (Australian Standard AS1085.1) have been performed in order to improve the characterisation of the said material׳s ratcheting and fatigue wear behaviour. The hardness of the rail head material has also been studied and it has been found that hardness reduces considerably below four-millimetres from the rail top surface. Historically, researchers have used test coupons with circular cross-sections to conduct cyclic load tests. Such test coupons, typically five-millimetres in gauge diameter and ten‐millimetres in grip diameter, are usually taken from the rail head sample. When there is considerable variation of material properties over the cross-section it becomes likely that localised properties of the rail material will be missed. In another case from the literature, disks 47 mm in diameter for a twin-disk rolling contact test machine were obtained directly from the rail sample and used to validate ratcheting and rolling contact fatigue wear models. The question arises: How accurate are such tests, especially when large material property gradients exist? In this research paper, the effects of rail sampling location on the ratcheting behaviour of AS1085.1 rail steel were investigated using rectangular-shaped specimens obtained at four different depths to observe their respective cyclic plasticity behaviour. The microstructural features of the test coupons were also analysed, especially the pearlite inter-lamellar spacing which showed strong correlation with both hardness and cyclic plasticity behaviour of the material. This work ultimately provides new data and testing methodology to aid the selection of valid parameters for material constitutive models to better understand rail surface ratcheting and wear.

Decomposition analysis to examine Australia’s 2030 GHGs emissions target: How hard will it be to achieve?

The Australian government has recently pledged a reduction in GHGs emissions of 26–28% below the 2005 level by 2030. How big is the challenge for the country to achieve this target in terms of its present emissions profile, recent historical trends, and the contributions to those trends from key proximate factors contributing to emissions? In this paper, we attempt a quantitative judgement of the challenge by using decomposition analysis. Based on the analysis it appears the announced target will be quite challenging to achieve if the average annual mitigating effects from economic restructuring, energy efficiency improvements and movement towards less emissions-intensive energy sources in evidence over 2002–2013 continued through to 2030; however, if the contribution from these mitigating sources in evidence over 2006–2013 can be sustained, achievement of the target will be much less challenging. The challenge for government then will be to provide a policy framework to ensure the more pronounced beneficial impacts of the mitigating factors evidenced during 2006–2013 can be maintained over the years to 2030.