Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Progress in Materials Science

journal homepage: [Link]/locate/pmatsci

Steels for rails

W. Solano-Alvarez a, *, H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia a, b
a
Materials Science and Metallurgy, University of Cambridge, UK
b
School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary University of London, UK

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Transport by rail is an efficient way of moving goods and people while managing problems such
Steel as congestion and the consequences on the environment. The relatively low energy consumption
rails and CO2 emissions are attributed to the low rolling-resistance due to the stiffness of the wheel and
Wear
rail, leading to small contact area [1]. Investments in rail transportation has boomed in recent
White-etching layer
Rolling contact fatigue
years. London, with the oldest underground rail system in the world, has added the Elisabeth Line
Pearlite at a cost of some £14 billion; China now has the largest high-speed rail system in the world. All
Bainite these developments rely on the safe performance of steel rails, which suffer from two primary
Alloy design damage mechanisms, rolling-contact fatigue caused essentially by repeated contact stresses with
Weldability the wheel, and a variety of wear mechanisms. Factors such as weldability are important, given
Inclusions that all modern rails are continuous. This review deals with the detailed physical-metallurgy of
Contact mechanics rail steels, including alloy design, microstructure, variety and choice, and damage mechanisms.

1. Introduction

Steel rails enable the movement of goods and people on well-defined pathways that ensure right-of-way. The rolling stock relies
entirely on steel wheels so its motion involves metal-to-metal contact that must be optimised to ensure safety and service life. Amongst
many variables, the nature of that contact depends on whether the rolling stock is configured for passenger traffic or to carry heavy
goods. Conditions often require that the rail path is not straight, in which case the loading on the rail section will not be uniform,
causing uneven wear and damage. There is, therefore, a considerable combination of engineering and metallurgy involved in the
design of rails.
The metallurgical variables involved in the design of rail steels are really quite complex and difficult to characterise or estimate
theoretically [2–4]. They include localised plasticity [5], wear [6], rolling contact fatigue [7], corrosion [8] and impact fracture during
service [9]. These mechanisms require a basket of properties to be optimised simultaneously, with the focus on strength, work-
hardening behaviour, toughness, hardness, subsurface initiated fatigue, crack growth rates, wear resistance and weldability
[10–12]. And these parameters do not work in isolation – for example, a high wear-resistance means that surface-initiated fatigue
cracks are not “tribologically machined” away during service.

1.1. Snippet of history

Wooden railways appeared first in Great Britain, in locations where the goods would be conveyed to one place only, such as at coal

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wilberths@[Link] (W. Solano-Alvarez).

[Link]
Received 20 October 2023; Received in revised form 26 April 2024; Accepted 15 May 2024
Available online 31 May 2024
0079-6425/© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
([Link]
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Nomenclature

α, β Terms involving the Poisson’s ratio in contact mechanics

α Ferrite
αʹ Martensite
αb Bainite
γ Shear strain
γ0 Initial shear strain increment
γs % difference in surface speeds of wheel and rail
γ Austenite
δ Tensile ductility
∊a Strain amplitude in cyclic loading
Δ∊ Difference between maximum and minimum strain components
θ Cementite
μf Coefficient of friction, dimensionless
ν Poisson’s ratio
ξ Creepage, the difference between surface velocities of items rolling against each other, divided by the mean velocity
σ Stress - subscript ‘f’ for cleavage fracture stress, ‘i’ for friction stress, ‘y’ for yield stress, ‘u’ for ultimate tensile stress,
‘0.2’ for proof stress
τ Principal shear stress in contact zone
A Contact area
Ac3 Temperature at which austenite formation begins during heating
ds Sliding distance
F Normal force in Newtons
Ft γ/A Tractive force
H Hardness in N m− 2
k Archard wear coefficient
ke Stress corresponding to radius of Tresca yield-locus circle
kHP Hall–Petch coefficient
KIc Plane strain fracture toughness
L Mean lineal intercept defining grain size
N Number of rolling-contact cycles
p0 Hertzian contact pressure
ps0 Hertzian pressure at shakedown
P Contact load per unit length
P Load corresponding to ratcheting limit
q Tangential traction
qʹ Heat flow
SI Pearlite interlamellar spacing
SWT Smith-Watson-Topper damage parameter
TE Eutectoid temperature
TE − T Undercooling at which pearlite forms
vr Relative velocity of rubbing surfaces
Vw Wear volume
V θV Volume fraction of phase θ
ppmw Parts per million by weight
CCT Continuous cooling transformation
RCF Rolling Contact Fatigue
SEM Scanning electron microscope (microscopy)
WEL White-etching layer
WEM White-etching matter

mines [13]. The wood, though of great strength, “would soon become reduced in depth … and break long before it was worn through”.
The wood was then overlaid with cast iron; fully cast-iron rails were subsequently implemented in 1738 but tended to be short in
length, uneven and brittle. This was followed by wrought iron rails which were installed at the Walbottle Colliery (Newcastle-upon-
Tyne) in 1805; although ductile, they suffered from low hardness, had a large slag content [14] and tended to wear quickly, so slivers of
the steel could be found in the vicinity of the track. Indeed, a report by Robert Stephenson and Joseph Locke in July 1857 is said to have
stated that [15]:

2
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 1. Structure and carbon concentration of rails over the years. (a) An 1820 wrought iron rail with 0.05C wt%. (b) Mushet’s 1857 pearlitic rail
with 0.25C wt%. (c) A 1950 pearlitic steel with ≈0.55C wt%. (d) A 1970 pearlitic rail with 0.75 wt% C. Adapted and reproduced with the permission
of Dr. J. Jaiswal [18]. (e) Experimental hypereutectoid rail-steel containing 0.92C-0.96Mn-0.32Cr, with a true interlamellar spacing of 203±32 nm
[19]. (f) Hypoeutectoid Fe-0.57C-1Mn-0.08–0.2 V wt% rail with an interlamellar spacing of about 200 nm with thin cementite sheets separated by
ferrite [20].

3
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

“… all attempts have failed to provide a good durable rail – and the consequence is that destruction and not fair wear and tear
results”.
Within two months of this report, Henry Bessemer announced the mass manufacture of steel; by 1905 about 11 million tonnes of
Bessemer steel was made into rails [16]. The original implementation of a steel rail was by Robert Forester Mushet, installed at the
Derby Midlands station in the UK, early 1857 [17]; the rail was a low carbon manganese pearlitic alloy, a disruptive technology that in
time completely replaced the cast iron or wrought iron rails. The manufacturing process steadily improved with continuous casting
introduced during the 1970s alongside an enhancement in the cleanliness of the steel produced. Rails could be made in longer lengths,
minimising the number of joints required.
Fig. 1 illustrates the evolution of the rail microstructure over a period of two centuries. The original metal rail was wrought iron
which is ductile but too soft to sustain reliable service over prolonged periods. This was replaced by a higher carbon steel that had a
mixture of allotriomorphic ferrite and pearlite, with the carbon concentration increased subsequently to generate fully pearlitic mi­
crostructures. Subsequent developments in the modern era focused on the refinement of the interlamellar spacing of the pearlite in
order to enhance the strength without excessive alloying which can jeopardise weldability.

1.2. Towards the modern rail

The essential objective over the last 150 years has been the optimisation of manufacturing process and service life, given the ever
more arduous conditions the rails are required to endure [21]. This entails the following:

• production of cleaner steels to mitigate damage originating at inclusions such as MnS, Al2 O3 and SiO2 , some of which become
shaped during the hot-rolling of rails [22] or in localised regions even during service [23]. In some scenarios, Al2 O3 − SiO2 − MnO
inclusions stimulate the nucleation rate of MnS by providing heterogeneous nucleation sites, thus refining its particle size, which
must benefit performance [24].
• It has long been known that phosphorus in a rail steel does not add desirable qualities [25], causing breakage when the concen­
tration is above 0.12 wt% – this concentration is far too high to be tolerated in modern rails given the tendency for prior austenite
grain boundary embrittlement. Although this kind of embrittlement may not be common in modern pearlitic rails where the prior
boundaries are eliminated as pearlite grows across them, it is a critical feature of rails based on displacive transformations such as
bainite [3,26]. Dissolved and diffusible hydrogen is well-established to embrittle all steels [27,28]. It can be present within the
rolled rail and evolve during cooling (leading to flaking) [29] and it may enter rail steels through the cathodic reactions associated
with corrosion [30]. The role of sulphur in forming MnS has already been mentioned.
• Greater yield strength to avoid gross plastic deformation at the head of the rail, and to reduce the wear rate. There is a large
reduction in wear rate when the hardness is increased beyond ≈ 260 HV, with the improvement becoming less sensitive to strength
beyond that [31].
• Increase in the rail head cross section to reduce the load, and increased hardness achieved by refining the interlamellar spacing of
pearlite using a combination of solute additions and heat treatments [29,18].

All of these aspects are related to rail failures of the type illustrated in Fig. 2, albeit in old rails and details connected to modern rails
are described later in the text.
The introduction of the basic oxygen furnace, secondary steelmaking, and continuous casting all help limit inclusions and undesired
elements. The topic is still a focus of research in the manufacture of rail steels [e.g., 32–34]. A new understanding is related to the role
of slag basicity defined often by the ratio ([CaO +MgO]/[SiO2 +Al2 O3 ] wt%); the silica is classified as an acidic oxide because it accepts
oxygen atoms from the basic oxides. An increase in the basicity ratio changed inclusion compositions from SiO2 − CaO to
Al2 O3 − MgO − SiO2 − CaO with a greater alumina content, so they remained only partly liquid during the hot-rolling of rails, and hence
were in a more beneficial state in the final rail [34]. The CaO-Al2O3 phase diagram has a deep eutectic at 49 wt% of CaO [35], with a
slag of that basicity ensuring finer inclusions [36].
Cleanliness using better steelmaking processes has a cost so choices have to be made by balancing the factors controlling service life
against the through life costs. It would not, for example, be practical from the point of view of cost, to reduce the phosphorus con­
centration of rail steel to less than 0.005 wt%, although the technology exists for doing so in other contexts (Table 1).
There nevertheless is a continuing demand on steel quality given the requirements for greater traffic densities, mixed traffic, higher
speeds and greater axle-loads from freight trains in response to greater demand [40,41]. Weldability can also be compromised by the
cleanliness of the base rail-steel [42]; the rolling contact fatigue limit of a repair-welded rail depends on the steel cleanliness [43]. The
welding itself may introduce oxide inclusions in the region that melts and solidifies.
An axle-load is defined by the weight on two wheels joined by an axle, or equivalently, the total permitted weight of a loaded wagon
divided by its number of axles. The maximum permitted axle-load in Europe is 22.5 tonnes [44] though it is greater in the USA and on
the so-called heavy-haul railroads, where it can be in excess of 40 tonnes [45]. These factors can induce different failure mechanisms
such as the loss of rail profile, corrugation, plastic deformation, fatigue and rolling contact fatigue, and catastrophic fracture induced
by corrosion or weld repairs, Fig. 3, mechanisms that can jeopardise safety if the damage is not detected and ameliorated following
inspections [18,46,47]. In a modern rail-steel containing a typical 0.013 wt% of sulphur, it is possible to find MnS particles that are
flattened by the rolling, some 60 μm long; these particles may have oxide at their cores [48].
The complexity of modern wheel-rail contacts is defined by a large number of variables, from rail, pads, clips, sleepers, ballast,

4
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 2. Examples of rail failures in old rails. Reproduced with the permission of Dr. J. Jaiswal [18].

Table 1
Approximate dissolved impurity levels achievable in commercial steels. From a compilation [37] based on data from [38,39].
Solute P C S N H O Ti
Concentration/ ppmw 10 5 5 10 <1 3 10

wheel, suspension, environment, vehicle dynamics and contact mechanics. This makes it difficult to relate microstructure and rail-
performance. Reduction of gross damage has, therefore, been focused on reducing contact stresses [49], grinding the rail to remove
small surface cracks, improving rail steel, and conducting regular non-destructive inspections [50]. Fatigue initiation and propagation,
can be sensitive to the microstructure, as evident in steels for bearings [37]; although both bearings and rails involve rolling contact,
there is a huge difference because the former operate while carefully lubricated, whereas the latter may include sliding friction.
Rolling contact fatigue, general wear (a loss ⩾20% unacceptable), and loss of rail profile are responsible for the replacement of rails
that have yet to reach the design life. Early efforts to enhance rail performance focused on increasing the carbon concentration and
refining the interlamellar spacing within pearlite in order to make the rail harder. In spite of very early work that indicated a dete­
rioration in the wear performance of rails [51], it is now throughly established that making the rail harder mitigates general wear. In
rolling-sliding tests on pearlitic rail-steels, the volume of material lost per distance slid correlates nicely with hardness (HV) for a given
maximum contact pressure P and creepage ξ1 [52]:
/
wear rate mm3 m− 1 = − 0.008HV + 3.73 (1a)

for HV 280→400 P = 1300 MPa ξ = 0.03

/ (1b)
wear rate mm3 m− 1 = − 0.0033HV + 1.38

1
The creepage is the difference between the two surface velocities of the items rolling against each other, divided by the mean velocity.

5
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 3. Failures in contemporary rails: (a) break caused by corrosion at base of foot; (b) fatigue initiated crack at weld repair; (c) corrugation; (d,e)
gross plastic deformation; (f,g) rolling-contact fatigue cracks, and (h) squat defect. Reproduced with the permission of Dr. J. Jaiswal [18].

6
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

for HV 280→400 P = 500 MPa ξ = 0.1

In unique work, Ueda and Matsuda [53] discovered that the effect of carbon is not simply via the change in hardness. In wear tests done
without creepage because the profiled rail disc was driven by pearlitic-wheel disk with an angle of attack of 0.5◦ and initial contact
pressure 2000 MPa, the carbon concentration of the pearlitic rail had an independent effect on reducing both the wear rate and the
spalling rate due to rolling contact fatigue, at the same hardness, Fig. 4. It was established that a greater carbon concentration increases
the hardness beneath the rolling contact surface, thus suppressing the development of plastic flow needed for damage evolution.
An increase in the hardness of pearlite does decrease wear and enhances rolling contact fatigue resistance [54], but one conse­
quence might be a reduction in toughness and an increase in the fatigue crack growth rate. However, data do not support a systematic
dependence of toughness on the yield strength of rails over the range illustrated in Fig. 5. This is likely a reflection of other factors, such
as inclusion type and distribution [55], that may influence toughness and at the same time, explain scatter in measured values. In fact,
the toughness varies with the location of the sample in the rail cross-section [56,57]. After all, the deformation of the original rect­
angular bloom used to roll the shape of the rail is not uniform, which affects strength and the shape and size of inclusions.
Some specifications include a minimum value of K1C which presumably is because it allows an estimation of how long it takes for a
crack growing by fatigue to reach a critical size:
/
Minimum yield strength/MPa Minimum toughness K1C MPa m1/2
460 26
560 24
460 but head − hardened 30

Hardness of course, is important and its consequences will be discussed in detail in the sections that follow. But it is worth summarising
the elementary mechanical properties first and their role in the selection of rail steel.
The stress–strain behaviour in tension of rail steels is similar to other air-cooled pearlitic steels, exhibiting continuous yielding [63].
The head of the rail intentionally can be much stronger if the interlamellar spacing there has been refined by accelerated cooling,
− 1/2
Fig. 6, where key properties are summarised. The yield strength and hardness correlate strongly and are both linear functions of SI ,
with either parameter controlled to design appropriate steels; the ultimate strength does not feature in the analysis of critical properties
such as fatigue and wear.
It is difficult to be explicit about the tensile elongation required to successfully implement rail steels, and oddly, a greater elon­
gation is specified for less-strong rails; lower values of 9→10 % are accepted for harder rails, presumably because larger ductility
simply cannot be achieved, Fig. 6c. The surface of a rail undergoes plastic shear during service, leading to an accumulation of strain.
Cracks initiate when the ductility there becomes exhausted so there must be a tolerable extent of ductility, whether that should be
measured in tension or in compression experiments [64].
Cracks in rails usually are initiated at the surface due to fatigue; it is important that these cracks do not reach a critical size for rapid
propagation as defined by the fracture toughness, Fig. 5. There is a routine maintenance procedure whereby the surface of the rail is
ground down to remove any fatigue damage while maintaining the head profile.
There is a suggestion that it may be possible to achieve the same performance goals by implementing a bainitic microstructure or
tempered martensite for better resistance to gross plastic deformation and rolling contact fatigue at lower hardness values than the
conventional or head-hardened varieties [18]. The overriding aim of this review is therefore to assess the role that each microstructural
parameter plays in the main degradation mechanisms of modern rails so a better understanding of wheel-rail interaction can lead to
improved design criteria for rail steels with enhanced properties.

2. Rail metallurgy

2.1. Rail manufacture

Pearlitic rail steels are manufactured by continuous casting at about 0.7 m s− 1 into rectangular blooms ≈ 410 × 320 mm, which
after cooling are reheated to 1200–1300 ◦ C in a gas furnace containing a balanced atmosphere that helps avoid decarburisation
[75,76]. This is followed by descaling and hot-deformation in the austenitic condition, using rolls that are shaped so that the cross-
section of the rail evolves during multiple passes through roll-gaps to the final shape, as illustrated in Fig. 7.
After rolling, the rails are laid on their sides on a bed where they cool. Given the asymmetric cross-section and consequent non-
uniform cooling, the long rails become curved, Fig. 8a,b.
So once they have cooled to less than 100 ◦ C, they are straightened first by passing through a series of driven rollers that are located
in an alternating sequence above and below the rail. The final hot-rolling pass delivers the required rail-profile; the top rolls of the
straightening machine are profiled to the required crown shape and the loads imparted are sufficient to make marginal, final modi­
fications to the shape of the crown. This straightening process subjects the rail to alternating bending of different magnitudes during
the passage across the rollers, with the resulting plastic deformation reducing the distortion, i.e., straightening the rail, but leaving it in
a state that contains residual stresses, illustrated in Fig. 8. The details of the stress distribution and the signs and magnitudes of the
stresses are a function of the straightening machine [77].
While there has been much work on the modelling and measurement of residual stress distributions, it is not obvious that these
stresses have a detrimental or beneficial effect on the rolling-contact fatigue performance of the rail. A combination of residual stress

7
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Test data due to Ueda and Matsuda [53] showing the effect of both carbon and hardness on (a) area loss on the cross-section of the rail; (b)
the number of spalls due to rolling contact fatigue when each test was completed.

Fig. 5. The fracture toughness of rail heads as a function of the yield strength. Compilation of data from [58–62,55].

and fatigue calculations have been carried out on heavy-haul (30 tonne axle-load) rails that are stress-free and in a second case using a
residual-stress field measured from a newly manufactured rail, and a third scenario which used a calculated residual-stress field from a
cooling and roller-straightening analysis [79]. Only small differences were found, leading to the conclusion that the large axle-loads
dominate fatigue life because any initial states of stress are redistributed after the first wheel passages. It remains to be demonstrated
that the same situation prevails with lighter axle-loads.
On the other hand, a clear connection has been demonstrated between fatigue resistance in bending (both vertical and transverse)
over 5 × 106 cycles, with the mean residual stress at the rail foot and edge being added to the mean applied stress [80]. The magnitudes
of the residual stresses in roller-straightened rails become larger with stronger rails, leading to web fracture both before and in service
[81,82], with the effects being exacerbated at the cut ends where the stress intensity at an existing defect can cause the crack to
propagate.
In some cases, the rail-head after straightening is hardened by induction heating and rapid cooling using compressed air or water
spray, or even cooling rapidly immediately from the rolling heat by dipping the whole head into a coolant-bath to obtain fine pearlite
[83]. This accelerated cooling is followed by a second straightening operation. These processes leave a longitudinal residual stress
which is tensile in the head and foot, peaking at about 200 MPa, balanced by a compressive stress in the web (Fig. 7). This distribution
of residual stress remains largely unchanged during service [84]. During the 1990s, Voestalpine developed the “head special hardened”
process in which the whole length of the hot-rolled rail is dipped into the heat-treatment bath immediately after rolling. This results in
a fine, relatively uniform pearlite, which enhances many of the properties required for high-performance rails [54].

2.2. Flash butt-welding

Rails are produced in lengths up to ≈ 120 m so installation necessitates a method of joining the segments. This was done originally
using bolts and fishplates but the method is largely abandoned because of the costs of maintenance, cracking due to stress concen­
tration at the bolt holes, and the gaps between the bolted segments cause the periodic “clickety-clack” sound as wheels traverse the

8
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a)

(b) (c)

Fig. 6. (a) Stress–strain curves from tensile tests conducted on the head of as-hot-rolled rail with the dashed curve representing a head-hardened
rail. Compiled using data from [65,66]. The elongation data have sometimes been corrected to remove the elastic part of the σ -∊ curve, which often
1
includes machine deflection. The dashed line refers to a 10% elongation often quoted in specifications. (b) Hardness as a function of SI 2 , using rail
−

steel data due to Perez-Unzueta and Beynon [52]. (c) Compilation of strength and elongation data on a variety of rail steels [65–74]. The data come
from individual tensile tests conducted on the head of the rail, rather than the minimum specified values that often are quoted in the literature.

Fig. 7. Schematic illustration of the evolution of the rail-section during hot-rolling. Only a few of the 15 or so steps are illustrated. The final figure
on the right shows schematically, the longitudinal residual-stress profile left within the rail following manufacture.

joint. The sound is tolerable but it is a manifestation of impact between the wheel and rail at the joint. Modern rails are mostly joined
using flash butt-welding, a process developed originally at the E. O. Paton Electric Welding Institute in the USSR. But in climates where
large temperature differences occur, thermal expansion and contraction can lead to long-range distortions in continuous, welded rails.
Therefore, the rails are laid such that they are in tension to counter the effects of thermal strains. For a temperature range − 5 to 30 ◦ C,
the tensile stress within the rail laid at an intermediate temperature in this range, is of the order of 10–15 MPa [85]. A 15 MPa stress
would cause an elastic strain of ≈ 7 × 10− 5 . If the expansion coefficient is 12 × 10− 6 K− 1 , then a variation of 35/2 ◦ C would lead to a
thermal strain of ±2.1 × 104 , which would not be compensated by the prestressing but might be tolerable.
During flash butt-welding, aligned segments of rails are heated locally by the passage of an electrical current (flash) across the gap
between the touching rail-segments, until melting occurs, when the segments are forced together (upset) in a direction parallel to the
rails. The contact surfaces therefore become intimately bonded, with sufficient displacement to ensure that some material is expelled
away from the joint. This helps ensure intimate contact between the rails and in reducing oxide entrapment. The expelled material is
then ground off in stages to produce a neat joint replicating the contours of the adjacent rails. The electrical pulses during welding can
be managed to deliver controlled bursts of energy. Pre-heating pulses can help raise the temperature of the segments before the main
flash is applied, in order to reduce the forces during upsetting or for controlling the cooling rate after the upsetting is completed so that

9
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

(c)

Fig. 8. (a) Calculated temperature field of heavy rail following cooling for 800 s after rolling. (b) Because the cooling is not uniform, the rails bend
as the temperature decreases. The rails on the right are relatively hot. (a,b) are adapted from Chen et al. [78] with permission of Springer Nature. (c)
State of residual stress when a rolled rail passes through a straightening machine consisting of six rollers, three at the bottom and three at the top.
The latter were set to impart vertical deformations on the rail by 10, 7 and 4 mm. The measurements were made at a distance 1.6 m from the entry
end of the rail. Adapted from [77].

the microstructures in the heat-affected zones can be optimised. With strong rails, it is found that a reduced heat input helps optimise
the integrity of the weld [85,40]. Even the implementation of the flash component can be pulsed [85]. Contoured induction heaters are
sometimes applied to provide a heat-treatment to the finished joint in order to improve properties and microstructures [86].
If the molten region, which will contain oxides, solidifies too quickly then it will not be removed completely by the mechanical
upsetting. Fig. 9 shows that the measured temperature reached as near to the abutting surfaces as experiments permit, may actually be
less than that at which the steel becomes completely liquid [87] (Table 2). There is in fact a small gap between the “abutting” surfaces
which are, during flashing, put in contact and again slightly separated, while the electrical potential between the rail segments is
maintained constant. During these repeated short detachment phases, multiple electrical arcs form between the surfaces. Localised
events occur where steel in the immediate proximity is rapidly heated to temperatures well above melting – this largely is expelled
from the weld gap because of the explosion-like local events [88]. The flash stage continuously generates sufficient heat in the steel
close to the fusion surface, raising the temperature close to melting. This sets the scene for the abutting surfaces to be forged together in
the upsetting stage.
Surface preparation prior to welding is not required because the flashing and displacement can in combination remove contam­
inants, although the contact surfaces should be clean enough to apply the electrical current. The equipment used on-site is illustrated in
Fig. 10a with some example process-parameters listed in Table 3. The preheating pulses before the flash help raise the peak tem­
perature achieved prior to the displacement.
Flash butt-welding now accounts for some 80% of rail welds in the world [90] and is recognised as a process that generates welds of
high quality [40].
One goal is to avoid a large change in hardness across the weld junction, but metallurgical changes are inevitable in the heat-
affected zones [91]. Fig. 11a illustrates both microstructural and hardness variations across the flash butt weld on a pearlitic rail
steel. It is interesting that the coarsest austenite grains generated towards the central region of the joint result in the finest interlamellar
spacing, similar to that of the base plate, on cooling, because the large grain size enhances hardenability so the transformation during
cooling is suppressed to lower temperatures. The partially-austenitised region cools to a relatively soft mixture of pearlite and
spheroidised cementite, the latter in regions that did not become austenitic at the peak temperature. The microstructures illustrated in
Fig. 11b-c represent the web region of a similar flash butt weld; the degree of spheroidisation in the intercritically annealed region
(262 HV) is remarkable [92].
There is, therefore, an undesirable hardness dip in that region which may during service lead to localised plasticity; the softened
region is estimated to lead to a reduced rolling-contact fatigue life. What is not clear is how to avoid the softened zone given that there
always will be temperature gradients created that leave some regions an a partially austenitised condition during the heating stage.

10
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 9. Measured temperature in the closed proximity of welding face of rail during the flash component of the electrical butt-welding process.
Selected data from Weingrill et al. [87].

Table 2
Phase diagram calculations [89] of the melting temperature at which the steel is completely liquid (TM ) and the mass fraction of liquid at
1400 ◦ C.
Composition / wt% TM / ◦ C Fraction liquid, 1400 ◦ C

R260 Fe-0.71C-0.3Si-0.95Mn 1473 0.15

R350 Fe-0.76C-0.3Si-0.95Mn 1468 0.20
R400 Fe-0.97C-0.3Si-1.15Mn 1454 0.39

Fig. 10. The joining of rails during installation or repair, using (a) flash butt welding, and (b) thermit welding. Images courtesy of Howard Smith.

Table 3
Example of flash butt welding parameters, data from Porcaro et al. [91].
Parameters Values

Intensity and duration of initial flash 77.4 kA 20 s

Number of preheat current pulses and pulse duration 10 3.8 s
Intensity of preheat pulses 45–70 kA
Force during preheating pulses 106 kN
Intensity and duration of final flash 38.3 kA 14.4 s
Final force 477 kN
Total displacement 37–45 mm

11
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 11. (a) Changes in microstructure and hardness across a flash butt weld on a rail of composition Fe-0.72C-0.84Mn-0.24Si-0.08Cr wt%. The
upper micrographs are thermally etched. The metallographic observations were made on the rail head, about 10 mm below the surface.
Figure reproduced from Porcaro et al. [91] with permission of Elsevier. (b-d) Changes in microstructure in the web of Fe-0.79C-1.01Mn-0.22Si-
0.24Cr wt% rail due to flash butt welding. (b) Weld centreline. (c) At a position where the Ac3 temperature is reached. (d) At a position where the
material is intercritically annealed. Images courtesy of Henrique Boschetti Pereira, described in detail in [92].

One solution would be to explore methods of making the softened zones narrow, with the width being specific to the expected axle-
load; the constraint from the harder adjacent regions might then prevent the localised plasticity. Another speculative suggestion is to
surface harden the softened zone using techniques such as laser hardening, shot peening or cladding.
Modern flash butt welding machines can operate in either the continuous flashing or pulsed flashing mode, with the latter generally
associated with a narrower softened zone; in one study the width of this zone was reduced by a factor of two form 80 to 40 mm with the
application of pulsed flashing [93]. The flash butt welding process provides the flexibility to adjust the preheating conditions to ensure
that the ends of the two rails that are upset and forged are heated to the required temperature as rapidly as possible, while minimising
the heat transfer into adjacent regions of the rail.

12
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 12. A ceramic mould is assembled around the rail segments to be joined. The aluminothermic reaction at the top then creates the molten steel
covered by a layer of slag, which then is released into the mould. The gap between the rail segments becomes filled with steel (some melting also
occurs of the rail segments), thus creating the weld on solidification. The welded region is then contoured by grinding to the required rail profile.

2.3. Thermite welding

This igneous process of welding rails essentially creates a cast weld with heat generated by a reaction of aluminium and iron oxide;
the reaction is intense so molten steel is created, which then fills the pre-assembled mould surrounding the rail segments. There will
also be some localised melting of the surfaces of the rails within the mould. Solidification results in a weld, with some preparation
afterwards to maintain a correct profile at the joint. This is a long-established process which is mobile so amenable to all locations, and
has served well for more than a century, with the first rail welded in Essen, Germany in 1899 [94–96] (see Fig. 12).
During thermit welding, aluminium powder reacts with iron oxide to generate molten iron in an exothermic process, Fig. 10b, via
the reaction
Fe2 O3 + 2Al→2Fe + Al2 O3 .

with an enthalpy change of − 16.5 kJ cm-3 at 298 K, which is roughly twice the volumetric energy density of the explosive trinitro­
toluene [97]. A pre-formed refractory mould is assembled over the gap between adjacent rails so that the molten metal fills the gap.
There are additions to the mixture that result in an alloy of the desired chemical composition on melting, resembling that of the rail
itself. The reaction proceeds following induced ignition of the powder mixture to achieve temperatures of the order of 2500 ◦ C. After
solidification, the mould and excess steel are removed from the tops of the rail with a hydraulic trimmer, and the cold joint is then
ground to generate the rail profile. There will be inevitable peak-temperature gradients from the centre of the weld, leading once again
to a softened zones where the pearlite has been partially austenitised [98], as in flash butt welds. The softened zones are generally
wider than in flash butt welds, but shortening the preheat period during thermit welding helps mitigate the problem. Sometimes,
alloying additions are made to the thermite mixture to optimise the properties of the weld metal.
The consequences of a soft zone in welded rails must be assessed in terms of service requirements. At the running surface, the
softened zone in flash butt welds generally does not present any concerns with excessive deformation or dipping provided the hardness
in the reaustenitised zone is equivalent or slightly above that of the parent rail. However, at the gauge corner, particularly under
curved track conditions, where the conditions are more severe (higher contact stresses and surface creepage forces), increasing the risk
of surface damage [99].

2.4. Linear friction-welding

With the aim of achieving a weld strength close to that of the rail and minimising any softened region in the heat-affected zone, a
friction welding process has been developed for the joining of full-size rail segments [100]. During linear friction-welding, two flat
surfaces of the segments to be joined are forced into contact by applying a load in the direction normal to the surfaces. One of the
segments is held stationary while the other is rubbed repeatedly via a reciprocating motion parallel to the abutting surfaces. This
generates frictional heat that plasticises the steel in its vicinity, with material expulsion due to the load-induced forging, and part
movement creating a clean joint from the resulting fresh surfaces [101]. The heat generation is given by
qʹ = μf Pvr (2)

where q is the heat flow (W m− 2), P is the contact pressure, vr (m s− 1) is the relative velocity and μf is the friction coefficient which may
depend on temperature, velocity and pressure [102]. The process is sometimes known as vibrational welding because it can join non-
axisymmetric workpieces [103], which makes it suitable for the joining of rails. It is important, of course, that when the process is

13
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a)

(b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 13. (a) Schematic representation of the linear friction-welding process. (b) An actual joint between rail segments, produced using linear
friction-welding, with the flash resulting from the expulsion of material from the joint still in place. (c) A macroscopic section from weld. (d)
Hardness profile; the dashed curve is from a flash butt-weld [106], for comparison with the friction method. The commercial designation of the rail
is 136RE. Images and selected data from US Department of Transportation report [100] that has no copyright restrictions.

completed, the rails are accurately aligned, so the machine is computer controlled.
The process is illustrated schematically in Fig. 13 together with an actual weld of cross-sectional area 85.8 cm2. The reciprocating
motion frequency was 45 Hz, amplitude 11.5 mm, initial pressure ≈ 26 MPa, and a forging pressure of ≈ 70 MPa. The rails were
preheated to 260 ◦ C prior to welding, presumably to avoid as far as is possible, the formation of martensite. All stages of the welding
operation could be completed in about 2 min.
Rail alignment at the head was shown to result in a vertical offset of 0.76 mm, a horizontal offset of 1.3 mm and the rail base was
offset by 3.2 mm, all assessed to be satisfactory. Macroscopic metallographic examination of joint sections showed that the segments
were fully fused with the joint continuing a small distance into the flash, which is good because the integrity is preserved after grinding
off the flash. The microstructure of the weld was found to be predominantly fine-pearlite and small amounts of martensite. The
hardness variation still shows a significant softening within the heat-affected zone of the weld. The width of the softened zoned seems
comparable to that obtained in flash butt-welding [91] so linear friction-welding does not seem to offer an advantage in that respect; a
comparison is presented in Fig. 13d.
An experimental investigation of small rail steel (≈Fe-0.7C-0.25Si-1.25Mn wt%) samples joined using linear friction-welding found
predominantly martensite with hardness reaching ≈ 800 HV and no softened region in the heat-affected zone [104]. However, such
levels of hardness and large amounts of martensite make the weld brittle with a recorded elongation of < 1 % and premature failure in
tension at ≈ 640 MPa. To ameliorate this, the joints were reheated to 900 ◦ C for 3 min followed by air cooling, to generate a

14
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

microstructure of pearlite and Widmanstätten ferrite with a uniform hardness across the joint of about 300 HV. Such a treatment is
impractical in practice when joining rails.
To avoid martensite in the linear friction-weld, it has been recommended to preheat a steel such as R260 rail up to 350 ◦ C and
possibly even increase the welding time [105].

2.5. Orbital friction-welding

In this solid-state process, both of the rail segments are held stationary but the joint is made by using an eccentrically rotating steel
disc in between the segments, to generate the heat and form the joint [107]. The goal again is to reduce the extent of heat-affected zone
softening. In modelling the process for a particular rail profile (“UIC 60”), the disc is set with a diameter of 0.3 m and a thickness of
0.03 m, and presumably would be of a comparable chemical composition to the rail (Fig. 14).
It does not appear that there have been any full-scale trials of the process, though it is clear that preheating would be required in
order to reduce the cooling rate sufficiently to avoid the formation of martensite [102].

2.6. Friction Stir Welding

Friction stir welding is a solid–state, hot-shear joining process [108–111], [chapter 3, 112] in which a rotating tool with a shoulder
and terminating in a threaded pin, moves along the butting surfaces of two rigidly clamped plates placed on a backing plate as shown in
Fig. 15a. The shoulder makes firm contact with the top surface of the work–piece. Heat generated by friction at the shoulder and to a
lesser extent at the pin surface, softens the material being welded. Severe plastic deformation and flow of this plasticised metal occurs
as the tool is translated along the welding direction. Material is transported from the front of the tool to the trailing edge where it is
forged into a joint.
The astounding success of the process in the context of aluminium alloys [114] has naturally stimulated exploration of its appli­
cability to other materials such as steel, titanium, magnesium, nickel and copper alloys. There is a “conceptual” study of the friction stir
welding of rails [113] that reaches the perhaps surprising conclusion that the process is viable and with a reduction in cost when
compared with flash butt-welding, thermit and other less common methods. The work, however, appears to be simplistic in its
interpretation of the capabilities of the process. There does not seem to be an accounting for the cross-sectional geometry of rails that
have to be welded, with translation of the tool on the top surface only, so it might assume that the whole rail can be joined without
making the tool follow the detailed profile. There is no indication of the depth of the weld expected, which cannot conceivably
penetrate the whole cross-section section. The costing is flawed, with no account taken of the cost of the tool, which is a major omission
given the hot-strength of steel which wears expensive tools quickly [115,116]. The process has not been particularly successful when
applied to ordinary steels, for these very reasons.

2.7. Alloy design

The steel used in the manufacture of rails must, above all, be able to resist rolling-contact fatigue and wear; it should also be
weldable. Naturally, it must be capable of mass production in long dimensions at a reasonable cost.
Pearlite has a complicated three-dimensional shape. It does not consist of parallel, flat, alternating plates of ferrite and cementite,
but has convoluted three-dimensional form with features such as branching, twisting and the passage of ferrite through the cementite
[117]. Each θ-lamella has curvature and contains holes through which ferrite permeates, so it can appear to terminate in two-
dimensional sections while others sharing the growth front continue unabated [118–120]. Therefore, any spacing that is measured
is an imperfect representation of the real structure. It is likely, nonetheless, that the spacing SI between adjacent lamellae observed on
two-dimensional sections will correlate well with macroscopic properties, given that such measurements represent the collective
behaviour of a polyphase, polycrystalline sample.
In this context, the strength of pearlitic rails, whether expressed in terms of macroscopic tension-tests or hardness values, is
dependent mostly on the interlamellar-spacing achieved in the final state of the rail. Solid-solution strengthening, for example by
silicon additions, can make a small contribution to the strength of ferrite [121–124]. The rail steel R260Mn has SI ≈ 0.15 μm and
contains 1.4Mn-0.29Si wt% [125]. The yield strength from just the pure iron and interlamellar spacing is given by σy =
1
174SI 2 +128 MPa [124] where the units of the spacing are expressed in micrometres; therefore, the contribution due to SI alone comes
−

to 450 MPa. Using carefully determined solution-strengthening data for ferrite from [126], the contributions of manganese and silicon
amount to just 1.14 × 37 +0.29 × 106 = 83 MPa.2 The solubility of silicon in cementite is close to zero but manganese can dissolve in
large concentrations [127]; however, information on its contribution to the strength of cementite is absent.
A fine interlamellar spacing can be achieved by suppressing the transformation temperature. Alloying with substitutional solutes
can be effective if as a result, greater undercoolings can be achieved before pearlite forms [128,129]. However, a fine spacing is best
achieved by nurturing the transformation of austenite during accelerated cooling. This works because a greater amount of free energy
is available to cope with the creation of a larger density of ferrite-cementite (α-θ) interfaces at enhanced undercoolings below the

2
There are many empirical expressions claiming to represent the solution strengthening terms, but are not well-founded because they neglect
structure or the strength contribution from the iron itself.

15
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 14. Schematic illustration of the orbital friction-welding of stationary rails.

Fig. 15. (a) Schematic illustration of the friction stir welding process. (b) Schematic of machine proposed for friction stir welding of rails, a much
simplified version of the detailed diagrams available in [113].

eutectoid temperature. Alloying additions that increase the free energy change for the reaction γ→α +θ at a given temperature, will
have the same effect [119,130,131].
It is worth noting that rails have large cross-sections with a profile that cannot guarantee uniform cooling; the cooling rate can also
vary along the length of the rail when placed on the cooling platform after hot rolling [132]. As a result, both the structure and
properties will vary with position [133,56,71]. This applies also to heat-treated rails [134]. From the point of view of service con­
ditions, it is the head of the rail that determines service life. It has even been argued that a heat treatment process needs to be developed
that allows hardness gradients to develop on the rail-head, such that lateral wear can be reduced [135].
The alloy composition must permit the formation of a fully pearlitic microstructure in a eutectoid steel that is air-cooled at
reasonable rates after hot-rolling. A typical rail steel will contain about 0.8 wt% of Mn and not much of any other hardenability
enhancing alloying element. Depending also on the austenite grain size, this can lead to a fully pearlitic microstructure if the cooling
rate is maintained ≲4 ◦ C s− 1 [136]; this is confirmed by the continuous cooling transformation (CCT) diagram in Fig. 16a. In eutectoid
rail steels containing 0.8–1.2Mn wt%, the bainite-start temperature during isothermal transformation is found to be about 520 ◦ C
[137]. This means that the cooling cycle for the rail should be such that pearlite formation is complete above this temperature in order
to avoid bainite; in Fig. 16a, the cooling rate 1 ◦ C s− 1 clearly leads to the completion of the pearlite transformation at a temperature well
above 520 ◦ C, whereas 5 ◦ C s− 1 does not. Small concentrations of alloying elements such as chromium can greatly reduce the cooling
rate required. The cooling rate is not constant, so the best approach is to generate a continuous cooling transformation diagram.
Fig. 16b is an interesting study on how hot plastic-deformation of the austenite affects the phase transformations in rail steels.
Although the austenite in rail steels is in a recrystallised state after hot-rolling or after reheating, such deformation may be relevant in
flash butt-welded segments which will transform after the upsetting operation. From a fundamental point of view, reconstructive

16
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 16. Continuous cooling transformation diagrams for some rail steels, the exact compositions are not available, nor the austenite grain sizes, in
the original publications. In all cases, dashed cooling curves lead to ultimate microstructures that are not fully pearlitic, whereas the other such
curves lead only to pearlite. (a) For “R350LHT”. Adapted using selected data from Yuryev et al. [138]. (b) The CCT curves for the undeformed
austenite and when deformed (in grey colour) in compression so that the maximum diameter in the barrelled region is increased by 36%. Adapted
using selected data from [139]. (c) Hypereutectoid “R400HT” steel. Adapted using selected data from Chen et al. [140]. (d) The shaded region
between the two extrapolated boundaries represents the domain into which hypo- or hyper-eutectoid steels must be supercooled in order to obtain a
fully pearlitic microstructure.

transformations including pearlite are accelerated when the austenite is a deformed state, because transformation destroys any defect
structures, thus providing an additional driving force. Displacive transformation are retarded when the austenite is in a severely
deformed condition, because the defects get in way of the glissile γ/α interfaces, a process known as mechanical stabilisation
[141–144], [p. 314, 131]. Consistent with this Fig. 16b shows that both the bainite and martensite transformations from deformed
austenite are markedly retarded, whereas pearlite is less affected.
When dealing with hyper- or hypo-eutectoid steels, it is necessary to undercool the steel below its eutectoid temperature in order to
generate a fully pearlitic microstructure, without any proeutectoid α or θ. Fig. 16c shows the range of cooling rates available to avoid
anything but pearlite is reduced in the hypereutectoid rail steel. Slow cooling rates can induce the precipitation of proeutectoid
cementite. For pearlite to form it is necessary to be able to simultaneously precipitate both of its constituent phases; this only is possible
if the alloy is supercooled into the region between the extrapolated γ/α +γ and γ/θ +γ phase boundaries [145,146], Fig. 16. Pro­
eutectoid cementite at the austenite grain boundaries is known to be detrimental to the mechanical properties in rail steels – it
contributes to the development of rolling contact fatigue in rails [147]. An increase in the silicon concentration to about 1 wt%, and
cooling at a sufficiently large rate through the temperature range where precipitation at the austenite grain boundaries occurs prior to
the onset of pearlite, is effective in suppressing the precipitation of proeutectoid cementite in hypereutectoid steels [148,149].
The eutectoid temperature can be estimated using an empirical equation by Andrews, here presented for the alloying elements
common in rail steels [150]:
TE / ◦ C ≈ 723 − 10.7wMn + 16.9wCr + 29.1wSi ± 12 ◦ C (3)

17
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

and each wt% (w) of molybdenum is assumed here to contribute the equivalent of 1.5Cr wt%, as associated with welding [151]. It is
emphasised that the eutectoid temperature is defined uniquely only for a binary Fe-C steel; in substitutionally-alloyed steels there will
exist a temperature range within which α +γ +θ can coexist in equilibrium. The best way to deal with this is to use routinely available
computer software and thermodynamics databases to calculate the phase diagrams for multicomponent steels.
Takahashi [152] derived the following empirical equation from published experimental data on interlamellar spacings, to cover a
range of substitutionally alloyed steels as a function of temperature (◦ C):
log{SI /μm} = − 2.21358 + 0.09863wMn − 0.05427 wCr
⏟⏞⏞⏟0− 1.8 ⏟⏞⏞⏟0− 9
{
TE − T
} (4)
+0.03367 wNi − log
⏟⏞⏞⏟0− 3 TE

with temperature in the range 600–790 ◦ C. It becomes possible using these two equations to estimate the expected interlamellar
spacing of pearlite, assuming that TE − T = 27 ◦ C for rails that are air-cooled after hot-rolling, and TE − T = 52 ◦ C for those that are
reaustenitised and cooled rapidly using compressed air, the so-called heat-treated rails, Fig. 17a.
Fig. 17 shows that the hardness can be represented reasonably well in terms of the Hall–Petch function of interlamellar spacing,
yielding the following relationship:
1
HV = 2152SI 2 + 150 (5)
−

which explains about 86% of the variation in observed hardness. There has, over the years, been some discussion about the rela­
tionship between the interlamellar spacing of pearlite and its strength [155–157]; however, a detailed analysis of data has shown that
the Hall–Petch relationship is the best and most physically meaningful representation of the strength of pearlite [124]. The constant in
Eq. 1f has contributions from the strength of pure iron which is ≈ 100 HV at ambient temperature [158] together with solid solution
strengthening terms. It follows that much of the hardness of a typical rail comes from the structure of pearlite, the interlamellar
spacing.

2.8. Varieties of rail steels

2.8.1. As-rolled rails

Nine types of rails steels have become firmly established for conventional and high-speed tracks [159]. The actual designations vary
by country but the essential features described below do not differ much; and many have equivalents in the variety of standards. For
example, the grade “R200” in European and US standards is similar to the Chinese designation 50Mn. Rails can be categorised ac­
cording to their carbon content or by their heat treatment, i.e., whether naturally-cooled after rolling or accelerated-cooled, Table 4.
The softest variety, R200 (as-rolled 0.4–0.6 wt%C), although used much in the past, is now rarely installed. Some applications
remain in tram networks due to the ease with which it can be restored by in situ weld deposition, or in sections of track where wear
abrades away any surface-initiated fatigue cracks [160]. Due to its low carbon-concentration and hardness (200–252 HV), it has good
machinability and weldability, with a reduced tendency for foot-failure, attributed to low residual stresses and relatively high fracture
toughness [161]. The microstructure contains significant quantities of soft allotriomorphic ferrite in addition to pearlite. Fig. 18a.
R220 has slightly higher carbon content (0.5–0.6 wt%C) and tensile strength. It is now substituted with R260 (0.62–0.8 wt%C),
accounting for 90% of metros and mainline tracks. It has a predominantly pearlitic microstructure, Fig. 18b. There is much accu­
mulated experience in the application and maintenance of R260 rails, but increased traffic density and reduced maintenance budgets
have driven the use of harder varieties in curved sections of track that have a radius less than 3000 m. R260Mn has on average a
reduced carbon concentration but a greater manganese level (0.55–0.75 wt%C,1.3–1.7 wt%Mn) to improve toughness without
compromising the hardness by maintaining the fine interlamellar spacing of R260; some countries specify a Charpy toughness of 40 J
minimum, measured at 20 ◦ C. This alloy is considered suitable for high-speed traffic.3 R260Mn has a fully pearlitic structure obtained
during cooling at ⩽2 ◦ C s− 1, with the pearlite generated over the temperature range 624–547 ◦ C [162]. Practical rail cross-sections that
are 15.6 cm in height and 6.7 cm head-width, will cool slower (0.14–0.24 ◦ C s− 1), with the head region cooling fastest [163], in which
case the transformation temperature range is likely to be in the range TE − 25→TE − 50.
R320Cr (0.6–0.8C, 0.8–1.2Cr wt%) is harder (≈ 320 HV) and more wear resistant but increases the wear of wheels [164], but this
adversely affects weldability and weld-repair, for example requiring a minimum time to cool between 800 and 500 ◦ C of 18 min, and
therefore, a post-heating treatment [165]. All this makes it less competitive against heat-treated grades [166]. The harder a rail is, the
( )
greater is the reduction in hardness ΔHV of the rail hardness HV rail and that of the the softest region HV soft of a flash butt weld, as
illustrated in Fig. 19. This might be expected because the further the microstructure deviates from equilibrium in a harder rail, such as
by possessing a finer pearlite, the greater is the driving force for recovery during tempering.

3
Where the speed exceeds 250 km h− 1. The rail steel used depends on the detailed characteristics of the route, the type of damage expected and
the desired inspection and repair cycles [e.g., 54]

18
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 17. (a) The interlamellar spacing of pearlite, with measured values plotted against those calculated using Eqs. 1d and 1e. Data from
1
[19,153,154]. (b) Hardness as a function of SI 2 , using rail steel data due to Perez-Unzueta and Beynon [52].
−

2.9. Heat treatment of rails

The primary aim of heat treatment is to condition the properties of the rail head by refining the pearlite interlamellar spacing. The
details vary and are mostly proprietary, but typical conditions include heating the rolled rail to about 900 ◦ C for 50 min and passing it
through a chamber containing a series of symmetrically placed air jets, Fig. 20, which also shows the hardness distribution in the rail-
head following cooling [170]. The air pressure used was 0.26 MPa with the jets of air at 28 ◦ C located 15 mm from each surface. The
final microstructure was fully pearlitic. The ordinary hardness of U75V rail is 350 HV [171] with values reaching 376 HV following the
heat-treatment. This is an illustrative case and details of the heat treatment and hardness improvement achieved will vary with steel
composition and the technology implemented for cooling. In the case of R260 which normally is not heat-treated, the hardness
increment is larger, from 285→342 HV [172].
Induction heating followed by cooling using jets of air–water mixtures is used in some cases to surface harden the rails [173,174].
Water-polymer mixtures can be used and in some cases, whole rails might be immersed into a cooling bath (p. 18). However, all heat
treatments which require separate heating after the rail has cooled, or induction heating as an off-line process, reduce productivity. So,
energy-efficient modern practice is to conduct any accelerated cooling as the hot rail emerges from the rolling process [174], with any
straightening applied after this in-line heat treatment.

2.9.1. Heat-treated rails

The heat treatment of rails almost always is designed to refine the pearlitic microstructure, taking care to avoid undesirable
constituents such as martensite. This usually is achieved by controlled accelerated-cooling using jets of air, the details of which are
proprietary.
R350HT (heat-treated 0.72–0.8C wt%) has a similar chemical composition as R260 but is cooled more rapidly to refine the
interlamellar spacing of pearlite, resulting in an increase in hardness from ≈ 310 HV for heat-treated R260 [175] to a minimum of
360 HV for R350HT, leading to a threefold increase in wear resistance and better rolling-contact fatigue resistance [45]4. It is therefore
the most common premium grade in European tracks [166].
R350LHT (heat-treated 0.72–0.8C-0.3Cr wt%) is essentially R350HT with added chromium to refine further the interlamellar
spacing. It has limited application outside of the Swiss network, because it does not show a significant improvement in gauge-corner
wear resistance, nor on rolling-contact fatigue crack development [31]; there also are difficulties during wear repairing and a tendency
associated with its greater hardenability, to generate non-pearlitic microstructures in the heat-affected zone. R370CrHT (heat-treated
0.7–0.82C, 0.4–1.0Si, 0.4–0.6Cr wt%) is similar to R350LHT but with added silicon and more chromium to achieve an even finer
interlamellar spacing with increased hardenability. Despite needing careful cooling control as well as special welding procedures,
thermit and flash butt welding can be performed satisfactorily, but weld repairs are very challenging for this grade. The high wear and
RCF resistance of this alloy are targeted towards heavy-haul tracks or heavily trafficked tight radii curves.
R400HT (heat-treated 0.9–1.05C,1.0–1.3Mn,wt%) is a hypereutectoid variant of R350LHT with enhanced manganese, meant for
the most severe loads and curve radii due to its high resistance to wear and rolling contact fatigue [177,178]. Its hardness in the hot-
rolled condition is about 350 HV but increases to ≈ 410 following heat treatment that ensures a cooling rate of 3→3.5 ◦ C s− 1 , leaving it
with a refined, fully pearlitic microstructure [179]. It is prone to form proeutectoid cementite at the austenite grain boundaries, which
is known to be deleterious to RCF (Section 6.7) having to rely on careful cooling to avoid this phase.

4
On tracks with a curve radius less than 1000 m, R350HT has been reported to be more susceptible to the penetration of grinding-initiated cracks
into the body of the rail when compared with softer varieties of rails [176].

19
 W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia
Table 4
Chemical composition in wt% of the most common rail steels. STD stands for standard, HH for head hardened, HT for heat treated (cf. as-rolled), EPMS for experimental pearlitic or martensitic steel, and
EBS for experimental bainitic steel. Hardness values quoted in Rockwell C have been converted to Vickers hardness (HV).
Alloy C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo P S Others HV Ref.

R200 0.4–0.6 0.7–1.2 0.15–0.58 <0.15 - - - - - 200–252 [191,192,161]

R220 0.5–0.6 1.00–1.25 0.2–0.6 <0.15 - - - - - 220–260 [191,192]
R260 0.62–0.80 0.7–1.2 0.15–0.58 <0.15 - - - - - 260–300 [191,192,161]
R260Mn 0.75 0.90 0.20 - - - 0.02 0.03 - 260–320 [193,162,192]
R320Cr 0.6–0.8 0.8–1.2 0.5–1.1 0.8–1.2 - - - - - 320–360 [191,192]
R350HT 0.72–0.80 0.7–1.2 0.15–0.58 <0.15 - - - - - 360–410 [191,192]
R350LHT 0.72–0.80 0.7–1.2 0.15–0.58 <0.30 - - - - - 360–410 [191,192]
R370CrHT 0.70–0.82 0.7–1.1 0.4–1.0 0.4–0.7 - - - - - 376–424 [191,192]
R400HT 0.90–1.05 1.0–1.3 0.2–0.6 <0.30 - - - - - 410–460 [191,192]
R450HT 0.80 0.89 0.65 0.95 - - 0.03 0.03 0.04Ti 474–494 [194]
ML330 0.75 1.25 0.80 - - - - - 0.1 V 330 [191,192]
HP335 0.95 0.9 0.9 - - - - - 0.1 V 350 [191,192]
20

BS11 0.53 1.07 0.26 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.021 0.024 - 227 [195]
STD 0.73 0.93 0.28 0.17 - - 0.01 0.03 0.001B 262 [196]
HH 0.79 0.91 0.66 0.47 - - 0.02 0.01 - 351 [196]
GOSTr 0.71–0.82 0.75–1.05 0.18–0.4 - - - <0.035 <0.045 <0.07 V 351–406 [197]
GOSTw 0.55–0.65 0.5–0.9 0.22–0.45 <0.25 <0.25 - <0.04 <0.04 <0.25Cu 255 [197]
EPMS-1 0.77 0.88 0.24 - - - 0.008 0.013 - 271–361 [198]
EBS-1 0.52 0.35 0.23 1.71 1.43 0.26 0.01 0.01 <0.01B 361 [10]
EBS-2 0.10 0.59 0.27 1.71 4.09 0.58 0.008 0.02 <0.01B 332 [10]
EBS-3 0.04 0.73 0.21 2.76 1.91 0.26 0.01 0.08 <0.01B 277 [10]
EBS-4 0.18 2.01 1.13 1.94 - 0.48 0.01 0.01 0.003B,0.03Ti 388 [196]
EBS-5 0.12 3.97 0.027 0.02 - 0.47 0.01 0.01 0.003B,0.04Ti 355 [196]
EBS-6 0.02 2.02 0.027 1.96 1.93 0.48 0.01 0.01 0.003B,0.02Ti 271 [196]

Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

B320 0.15–0.25 1.4–1.7 1.0–1.5 0.3–0.7 - - - - 0.1–0.2 V 335–354 [166]
B360 0.25–0.35 1.4–1.7 1.0–1.5 0.3–0.7 - - - - <0.03 V 370–400 [166]
DOBAIN340 0.76–0.84 0.8–0.9 0.2–0.35 0.4–0.55 - - - - - 360–400 [191]
DOBAIN380 0.76–0.84 0.8–0.9 0.2–0.35 0.4–0.55 - - - - - 400–440 [191]
DOBAIN430 0.76–0.84 0.8–0.9 0.2–0.35 0.4–0.55 - - - - - 450 [191]
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)
Fig. 18. Optical images of the rail microstructure. (a) R200. (b) R260. Micrographs adapted from Lu et al. [161] with permission of Elsevier.

Fig. 19. Maximum change in hardness in the heat-affected zone of a flash butt welded rail, versus the hardness of the rail in the unaffected region.
Data compiled from [167,91,168,169].

2.9.2. Other alloys

Additional steels (Table 4) have been approved for use on particular networks. The hypereutectoid HP335 has a composition
0.87–0.97C, 0.75–1.00Si and Mn, 0.09–0.13 V, <0.006 N wt%, tailored to prevent the precipitation of proeutectoid cementite while
increasing the fraction of cementite within the pearlite; the silicon also contributes moderately to solution strengthening of the ferrite,
with vanadium and nitrogen precipitation additionally hardening the steel though direct observations of this are lacking [180–182]. It
has a hardness of about 350 HV [182]. An advantage is that this rail variety does not require heat-treatment following rolling and
straightening; tests indicate that HP335 outperforms harder rails in pure sliding test [182] and in dry twin-disc tests (1% slip,
1500 MPa contact pressure), it has been shown to be better than the heat-treated R350HT, Fig. 21 [183]. The difference in strength
between the head and foot is just 6% for HP335, whereas it is about 15% for R350HT [184].
Non-pearlitic alternatives include the carbide-free B320 (0.15–0.25C, 1.0–1.5Si wt%), which is a weldable low carbon carbide-free
bainitic steel containing Si, Mn, Cr, V, and Mo with similar wear resistance as R260, but much improved RCF resistance; B360
(0.25–0.35C,1.0–1.5Si wt%) is similar but its greater carbon concentration enhances wear resistance as demonstrated on several track
sites across France, Switzerland, and Germany [166]. Carbide-free bainitic rail installed in the Channel Tunnel connecting the U.K.
with France has served reliably for more than ten years, after being subjected to > 1 billion gross tonnes of traffic by April 2020,
without the need for grinding [185] because of the extraordinary rolling-contact fatigue resistance of these steels. The carbide-free
bainitic rail is mostly used on fairly straight tracks; it may not perform as well as the best pearlitic rails on curves, transition
curves, or tangents [177,178]. DOBAIN 380 and 430 are high carbon (as-rolled 0.76–0.84C, 0.20–0.35Si wt%) lower-bainitic steels of
hardness levels comparable to the pearlitic R400HT; the evidence is that the DOBAIN rails tested on heavy haul tracks revealed no head
checks due to their high rolling contact fatigue resistance [54].

21
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

Fig. 20. (a) How the rail-head might be heat treated after austenitisation, with relatively rapid cooling implemented using air jets as the hot rail
passes through an enclosed cooling chamber. (b) Distribution of Rockwell C hardness in rail-head. The composition of the rail is Fe-0.75C-0.85Mn-
0.6Si-0.084 V wt%, with the commercial designation U75V. A Rockwell C hardness of 39 is equivalent to 376 HV. Selected data from Hao
et al. [170].

Fig. 21. Wear loss in dry twin-disc tests. Selected data from Wilby et al. [183].

The carbide-free bainite has now been mandated for all new French TGV high-speed movable points5 and repair-replacements
[186] because of the total suppression of head-checks which are a form of rolling-contact fatigue (p. 79). Apart from initial
grinding, no other grinding is necessary during the life of the crossing. The bainitic steel drastically reduced rolling contact fatigue
[187]. In contrast, R260 used in these applications requires annual grinding in order to remove the fatigue cracks. The use of the
carbide-free bainitic steel saves about 100 k€ per crossing on the life cycle cost, due to life-extension, reduced maintenance and track
availability [188]. Crossings like these can be subjected to greater rolling contact fatigue deterioration than the rail itself, due to wheel-
rail impacts during the transition [189,190].
In the case of light-weight traffic, such as tramways, it is wear that determines the life of the grooved rails, because of the density of
traffic, curved tracks, and the frequent acceleration and deceleration. The wear resistance can be enhanced by precipitation hardening
with small concentrations of vanadium. The R290V rail steel has the approximate composition Fe-0.5C-1.1Mn-0.3Si-0.14 V wt%; the
low carbon concentration helps weldability. Alternatively, the grooved rails can be hardened by heat treatment, for example, using the
Voestalpine method of immersing the whole rail into the cooling bath (p. 18).

3. Rail-wheel contact mechanics

Localised plasticity that extends over many micrometres (Fig. 22)a,c is induced if the cyclic traction6 forces operating on rails
exceed the elastic limit defined by Hertzian contact stress-fields. The plasticity at large depth is sometimes qualified with the adjective
global whereas that nearer the contact surface is designated tribological because it is associated with wear [201]. These do not of course
behave independently but the global component has shear deformation that influences rolling-contact fatigue-crack initiation and
propagation. This seems to be important in the modelling of rolling contact, where it is often assumed that the bulk material at depth

5
Moveable points allow the train to be continuously guided in one of two directions.
6
Traction refers to the tangential force across an interface between two bodies through some sort of friction [199]. The coefficient of traction is
the traction force divided by the weight on the tracks [200].

22
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 22. Plasticity at the contact surface, caused by rolling-sliding. (a) Hypereutectoid pearlitic rail steel. The rolling surface is on the right with the
rolling direction vertical. Reproduced and adapted from Chen et al. [203] with permission of Elsevier. (b) Rolling contact fatigue cracks following
the directional shear deformation. Image reproduced from Trummer et al. [204] with the permission of Elsevier. (c) Carbide-free bainitic rail steel,
showing the shear deformation, image courtesy of L. C. Chang.

below the contact surface responds in an elastic manner; in other words, shear stresses of significance are limited to the locality of the
wheel-rail contact.
The amount of plastic deformation is influenced by the normal and tangential stresses within the contact patch, which through
constraint influences the properties, including the yield strength, of the asperities [202]. The directional plasticity clearly makes the
affected structure anisotropic, which is then replicated by the fatigue cracks that grow along the shear bands, Fig. 22b. Flake formation
leading to wear is one consequence, which also influences surface roughness and hence contact behaviour.
In the case of rails, most plastic deformation is accumulated at the surface through a process referred to as ratcheting involving the
accumulation of small increments of plastic strain over the many cycles as the wheels traverse a specific region of track, Fig. 23. This
process is a non-linear function of both the operating/shakedown loads and the number of cycles, but also of the friction coefficient,
material hardening response, residual stress state, change in contact conditions, and shear yield strength of the material
[205–208,202].7 This ratcheting strain behaviour can be described mainly through two variables: the initial shear strain increment, γ 0 ,

7
The shakedown limit is the maximum contact pressure at which the material does not suffer permanent deformation.

23
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 23. Schematic representation of ratcheting due to the passage of a wheel on a rail. (a) Early stages. (b) Later stages with considerable
accumulation of plastic strain, leading to the laps forming on the surface. Cracks may develop along the deformation lines illustrated and in general
spreading underneath depending on vulnerable microstructural features.

and strain accumulation rate, dγ/dN [208].8 Incremental plastic deformation can be avoided even for applied loads above the elastic
limit if there exist protective residual stresses created by the first over-elastic load application, if the material strain hardens, or the
geometry of contact changes throughout the deformation [205,207].
Plastic flow can create voids and microscopic cracks that are associated with degradation mechanisms such as the flaking that leads
to wear in the tribological layer at the surface, fatigue when those cracks propagate deeper by low cycle fatigue, or rupture caused by
brittle fracture or ductile shear through progressive deformation of the surface [209]. The mechanism in each is discussed further in
relevant sections.
The normal and tangential traction forces can be modelled in different ways to facilitate analysis [202], for example longitudinal or
lateral contact applied either to a line or point on the surface of the rail (Fig. 24). In the case of longitudinal traction the stresses felt are
a sequence of tension, shear and compression [205]. The contact mechanism can be mixed rolling and sliding or each on its own. A slip
ratio is defined as some function of the distance slid to that rolled [198,206,75,210]. The term creepage is often used to describe the
ratio of the relative velocity of two rolling bodies, normalised by the rolling velocity; it has nothing to do with creep that is thermally
activated deformation at stresses well below the yield strength.
The effective friction coefficient9 μf is affected by the creepage, normal stresses, speed, surface roughness, lubrication type, and rate
of supply according to [211] – rails are not generally lubricated unless weather affected or with the application of “top-of-rail” products
[212] or debris at the contact surface [213]. Three stages can be identified in the context of lubrication, when μf is plotted against
creepage and number of revolutions [197,205,206]:

• at first, the surface of the rail is coated uniformly by a protective film of lubricant (μf ≃ 0.1),
• an acceleration stage in which the layer degenerates and μf increases,
• the steady state condition in which μf can reach values of up to 0.6.

In this last steady state condition, μf can become independent of creepage in the 2–100% range according to [197] or above 1%
according to [50]. It is recognised that unless there is a standardised test and control system for the friction coefficient, results using
different equipment will not be identical. Such steady state behaviour will not apply to conditions of full lubrication in which case the
friction coefficient can decrease to values of 0.1–0.2 if slippage is below 30% [197]. Instead, μf is dependent on slippage if it is between
1–2% and it will maintain a value close to 0.2 [214]. Such values of 0.2–0.25 can be achieved with slippage ratios of up to 10%
although they can vary as the number of cycles accumulates, by approximately 10% due to the degeneration of protective films
[197,196]. There are circumstances in which dry rolling whence cracks form, followed intermittently by friction modifiers, can
exacerbate wear because the modifier enters the cracks under pressure [215]. Fluid penetration into cracks can, by modifying friction
at the crack-faces, accelerate the shear mode of growth [216].
As mentioned earlier, friction coefficients below 0.2510 locate the maximum orthogonal shear stress below the surface whereas
higher coefficients shift its position to the surface. This is why wet service that lowers friction has been recognised to reduce wear but
enhance RCF [219,220,50]. The depth of such subsurface stresses can be of around 0.2 mm for twin-disc tests or 2 mm for actual rails
due to the fact that the contact patch is elliptical for rail/wheel contact, but just a strip in the case of twin disc tests (see Section 6 and

8
The following equations are for a pearlitic rail with a hardness of about 270 HV [208], to illustrate the ratcheting:
{ }
γ0 = 8.3275 × 10− 8 exp 0.024867μf p0

dγ
and = γ0 bNb− 1
= 1.1023 − 0.00127644μf p0 ,
dN

where γ0 is the initial shear strain increment, N is the number of cycles, μf , the friction coefficient, μf p0 is the maximum shear stress, p0 is the contact
pressure, and b ≈ 0.5 is a fitting parameter. The numerical coefficients are derived by Su et al. [208] using experimental data.
9
Defined as the usable force for traction divided by the weight on the running gear or alternatively, the shear force over the normal load
[207,206]. It sometimes is referred to as a traction coefficient but has the same meaning.
10
This threshold does not have a fundamental basis - indeed, others set it at μ=0.3 [75] 0.36 [217] or 0.4 [218].

24
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

Fig. 24. Schematic of (a) line and (b) point contact. p0 corresponds to the applied pressure, μf is the friction coefficient and σ and τ correspond to
normal and shear stresses along the described directions. Redrawn based on [205].

Fig. 25) [221].

At first, dry partial-slip generates only subsurface non-accumulative strain, until the shakedown limit is reached and the friction
coefficient rises above ≈ 0.25, which occurs after just ≈ 100-200 cycles for p0 =1200 MPa or 200–500 cycles for p0 =1500 MPa after
which, deformation occurs at the surface [206]. Instead, if the number of dry cycles is low or lubrication is introduced, the friction
coefficient will remain below 0.25, leading to hardening and eventual damage occurring below the surface. Since the friction coef­
ficient will normally have lower values under conditions of full slip than in dry partial slip, the latter type of contact can cause more
surface damage when the traction reaches a steady state [205]. If the cycles and contact pressure are maintained constant and only the
circumferential/rolling speed is increased, the effective friction coefficient, without lubrication, has been shown to slightly decrease
and therefore, the driven roller (rail) in twin disc tests shows lower wear due to higher deformation speeds at the subsurface [222,223].
With respect to its relation to contact stress, several authors have observed a decrease in the friction/traction/adhesion coefficient with
increasing contact force, but no relation was found between this coefficient and crack size or fatigue life [223,50].
The coefficient can be altered by the presence of non-intentional third-body layers that either cause a loss of adhesion between the
rail and the wheel such as oil, water, dew, or frost, and fallen leaves, whilst other contaminants such as sand enhance traction and can
remove the build-up of leaves but damage the surface by indentation. Fig. 26a shows how a variety of contaminants can affect the
traction coefficient for a range of slip values, confirming that leaves, either dry or wet, are a good lubricant as they form layers of
14–58 HV0.001, which can take from 200–600 cycles to be removed [224,225]. Safe train-braking or acceleration can be compromised
by the reduced adhesion due to leaf cover [e.g., 226]. The subject has been reviewed [1] but generic conclusions are difficult because
of the variety of leaves and their moisture content, whether that is due to dew or rain. Leaves from maple trees reduce traction less than
those from the oil-rich ginkgo trees [227].
The influence of water temperature or surface roughness in twin disc wheel-rail contact tests are illustrated in Fig. 26b,c, con­
firming that an increase in both of these parameters increases the adhesion [228]. The orientation of the rail roughness also influenced
the adhesion such that roughness perpendicular to the rolling direction decreased adhesion to its minimum, whilst parallel roughness
increased it to its greatest value; nevertheless, it is not clear why these results entirely contradict their earlier simulations on surface
roughness orientation [229].
In the spectrum of loading contact, from the perfectly elastic one where the maximum stress does not exceed the yield stress to
incremental collapse or ratcheting where every steady state cycle accumulates unidirectional plastic strain, there exists a deformation
mode known as shakedown that can be either elastic or plastic [207]. Elastic shakedown occurs when there is a load that exceeds the
yield stress thus creating plastic deformation and making subsequent cycles to lie once again in the elastic region. The maximum
contact pressure which can be carried purely elastically in the steady state is known as the shakedown limit, and it can be approxi­
mated as four times the shear yield stress in the case of frictionless rolling/sliding [230,207]. Instead, plastic shakedown refers to the
steady state cyclic loading that leads to no net accumulation of uni-directional strain. The maximum load possible in the plastic
shakedown region is referred to as the ratcheting threshold, as above it, ratcheting will start to occur (Fig. 27).
The boundaries of each of these loading behaviours with respect to the traction coefficient can be represented in a shakedown map

25
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)
Fig. 25. Maximum orthogonal shear stress as a function of depth below the contact surface. (a) Twin disc line-contact over a half width of 0.31 mm.
(b) For wheel/rail line contact over a half width of 6.6 mm. Note the similarity in curve shape but the huge difference in depth. Adapted using
selected data from Fletcher [219].

(a)

(b) (c)
Fig. 26. Relationship between the traction coefficient and slip ratio, while varying other parameters. (a) slip, showing how the coefficient increases
with slip, but is reduced by the presence of water, oil, or entrapped leaves. (b) As a function of the water temperature with a rolling speed of
100 km h− 1. (c) As a function of surface roughness expressed as the root mean square (rms) value, with a rolling speed of 100 km h− 1. Reproduced
with the permission from Elsevier [224,228].

26
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 27. Stress strain curves for the four different types of cyclic loading. (a) Perfectly elastic. (b) Elastic shakedown. (c) Cyclic plasticity, plastic
shakedown. (d) Incremental collapse, ratcheting. Reproduced with the permission of SAGE [231].

Fig. 28. General shakedown map obtained for a steady state circular region loaded with different normal and tangential loads, where k is the shear
yield strength and λ accounts for the shape of the contact area. (A) Upper bound to elastic shakedown limit against alternating plasticity. (B) Upper
bound to plastic shakedown limit against incremental growth. (C) Upper bound to elastic shakedown limit against incremental growth of surface
strain. (D) Elastic limit. The dashed line represents the lower bound to elastic limit. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier from [234] adapted
by [235].

(Fig. 28), which plots the material response and position of greatest fatigue damage for a specific load, friction, material ductility, and
contact geometry. The defining boundaries are variable since the real contact conditions may include friction and surface asperities,
which can create peak pressures up to eight times greater than the calculated by a smooth Hertzian contact and whose dimensions
dictate the depth of the deformed layers, allowing loads well below the elastic shakedown limit to induce significant plastic flow at the
subsurface of rails [230,232]. An example of this is the Shinkansen (Fig. 29) where plastically deformed sub-surface layers of 15–20 μm
have been observed on a rail whose shakedown limit is 2077 MPa but operates at loads imposing only 900–1180 MPa and a traction
coefficient of 0.01 [233].
The shakedown limits for line contact and other scenarios have been estimated by Johnson and co-workers [207,205]. The relevant
notation is illustrated in Fig. 24, the stress components are given by:11

11
c < |x| < a, where a is the semi-contact width.

27
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 29. Pressure distribution map of a wheel pressed against a Shinkansen rail where the idealised smooth Hertzian solution would be of 1 GPa.
Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier from [230].

( )1/2 ( )1/2
x2 x x2
σ xx = − p0 1 − − 2μf p0 σ zz = − p0 1 −
a2 a a2
( )1/2
x2
σyy = ν(σxx + σzz ) τxz = − μf p0 1 −
a2
[ ]1/2
1
τxy = τyz = 0 τ= (σxx − σzz )2 + τ2xz
4

where τ is the principal shear stress inside the contact area, in the plane of deformation. And the shakedown limit is given by:
ps0 1
= (6)
ke μf

where ps0 is the peak Hertzian pressure at shakedown and ke the stress corresponding to the radius of the Tresca yield locus circle.
In the case of a longitudinal point contact (of length a) under full slip the tangential traction q is given by [207]
3μf P ( 2 )1/2
q= a − x2 (7)
2π a3

where P is the contact load per unit length.

The shakedown limit in such a scenario, calculated by the von Mises criterion, is significantly smaller than in line contact.
A scenario that considers instead longitudinal line contact under partial slip is useful as it replicates the most standard work
condition of rails (dry and straight track or soft curves). This scenario, according to Fletcher, is a reasonable assumption since the major
axis of the real contact elliptical patch where the maximum stresses are located, is similar to a line contact (Fig. 25) [219]. The traction
in this case is given by
( )
c2
q = μf P 1 − 2 (8)
a

For point contact, but keeping the longitudinal traction and partial slip, the equation is
( )
c3
q = μf P 1 − 3 (9)
a

Lateral line contact under full slip can be represented through the following equations [205]:
( )1/2 ( )1/2
x2 x2
σxx = − p0 1 − σ zz = − p0 1 −
a2 a2
( )1/2
x2 (10)
σyy = ν(σ xx + σzz ) τyz = − μf p0 1 −
a2
x
τxy = − μf p0 with τxz = 0
a

For the lateral line full slip contact the shakedown is the same as that given by Eq. 1g. However, for the case of lateral point contact and
full slip, shakedown is [205]:

28
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[ ( )2 ]− 1/2
ps0 7 2 1 + β2
= α + μ2f (11)
ke 16 2

where α=(1–2ν)/3 and β=π(1-ν/2)/4 and ν is Poisson’s ratio with a value of 0.5 for incompressible materials or 0.3 for compressible
ones.
During longitudinal contact, the surface accumulates shear strain along the length of the rail. In contrast, lateral traction will
displace material towards the edges of the rail head. Under normal running conditions, lateral motion tends to be random so no change
of geometry is perceived, so the equations of lateral partial slip for line or point contact are not presented here [205].
An alternative to models for the estimation of contact stresses and the size and shape of contact patches during wheel-rail com­
binations is an experimental method that utilises the coefficient of reflection of ultrasonic waves [236,237]. It can be applied to the real
contact areas as a function of pressure [238]. The technique is calibrated against a known contact pressure distribution using a finite
element model for given values of surface roughness, wave frequency, and type of material [239,240]. The points of microscopic
contact and those of incomplete contact are averaged to generate maps of the size of the contact area with an error of 0.1–0.4 mm. The
method agrees with Hertzian theory, is easier to run and calibrate than for example, photoelastic frozen stress techniques [241], and
offers the option of performing dynamic measurements in order to investigate other phenomena such as corrugation or loss of
adhesion.12
A review on the experimental determination of contact geometry of rough surfaces by Woo and Thomas concluded that: “the real
area of contact increases with the load and this increase is due mainly to an increase in the number of micro-contacts, their mean size
remaining approximately constant; the separation of the contacting surfaces is approximately inversely proportional to the logarithm
of the load; the distribution of contact spot sizes is approximately log normal”. However, it appears that the density and average size of
micro-contacts can vary over several orders of magnitude for different surfaces at the same load. Contrary to established belief, the real
area of contact does not vary linearly with the load but increases as its 0.8th power [242], although the mechanism for this dependence
was not obvious. In fact, it is now considered that a linear relationship between the contact area and load is justified for random, rough-
surfaces [243,244].
When rough surfaces touch, fractal theory indicates that the contact area must depend on the resolution with which it is measured
[245]. Whether this matters when considering engineering scales is not established.

4. Wear

Wear can be defined as the displacement or removal of material as a result of tribological processes, which can be measured either
as a wear rate, i.e., material removed over the sliding distance or cycle, for example 1 μg cycle− 1 for R220 [50,75,219], or through the
dimensionless Archard wear coefficient k [246],
Vw H
k= (12)
Fds

where Vw is the wear volume in m3, H is the hardness in N m− 2, F is the normal force in Newtons, and ds is the sliding distance in metres
[247,248]. The coefficient k should be equal to unity if every asperity contact at the rubbing surfaces contributes to the worn volume,
but in fact is much smaller because they apparently must be rubbed many times before damage, possibly because many are elastically
deflected during the rubbing [246]. The coefficient depends on the location on the rail profile; it typically is, 10− 9 to 7 × 10− 8 on the
rail head and can reach 2 × 10− 7 on rail gauge corners [249].
The variation of mechanical parameters such as load, rolling/sliding speed, temperature, lubrication, and number of cycles during
wear testing or actual tribological scenarios produces a variety of material responses, mostly irrespective of the microstructure. The
regimes have been categorised based on the intensity of the wear volume, wear rate, and wear particles [250]. There are three main
qualitative categories according to Bolton and Clayton: mild (type I), severe (type II), and catastrophic (type III) [195], although some
others authors claim the existence of a heavy mode in between the severe and catastrophic modes [251] and others have simulated a
severe catastrophic mode where wear rates are still in the severe regime [252].
Each of these modes can be associated with a specific wear mechanism such as plasticity-dominated, delamination, oxidation,
melting, and seizure [253]. Maps of these modes and mechanisms during unidirectional dry-wear have been constructed by Lim,
Ashby, and Brunton as a function of normalised velocity or sliding velocity over seven orders of magnitude against normalised pressure
over six orders of magnitude, based on many experimental data from various types of steels, Fig. 30 [254,255]. A less comprehensive
map for lubricated wear was compiled by Akagaki et al. [256]. However, these maps should be regarded only as a first approximation
due to the inconsistencies in surface temperature estimation using either experiments or heat-flow calculations [254,250,257]. For
example, Fischer et al. investigated how surface flash temperatures change significantly from the ideal smooth contact if roughness is
considered due to friction and pressure intensification at individual asperities [258].
Another way of mapping the wear modes without involving surface temperatures is to plot the wear rate expressed as weight loss
per metre of rolling per unit of Hertzian contact area [mg m− 1 mm− 2] against Tγ/A where T is the tractive force (normal force times the

12
Corrugation occurs when the rail profile does not strictly conform to that of the wheel, especially on curves. It can be mitigated by using rails
that are more resistant to plastic deformation, and regular maintenance of rail and wheel profiles.

29
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(b)
(a)

Fig. 30. Empirical maps by Lim, Ashby, and Brunton plotted for sliding velocity against pressure obtained using an unlubricated pin on disc setup
for: (a) wear mode with constant normalised wear-rate contours. Each labelled field identifies the dominant wear mechanism. (b) Wear mechanisms,
where the grey regions represent transitions between modes and the solid lines the boundaries between mechanisms. Reproduced with the
permission of Elsevier [254,255].

30
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

Fig. 31. (a) Typical map of wear modes using the Ft γs /A method of BS11 grade in twin disc testing and (b) wear coefficient map by Lewis and
Olofsson for BS11 grade. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [252].

friction coefficient), γ the slide/roll ratio or slip, and A the Hertzian contact area [195]. Although these maps allow transitions to be
easily identified and comparison between different materials; plotting the wear coefficient against contact pressure and sliding speed
allows a more precise understanding of the contribution of these last two variables, Fig. 31 [252].
Wear modes occur sequentially as a result of increasing contact pressure, slide/roll ratio and greater wear volumes [195]. Type I
wear occurs at low slide-roll ratios (1 m s− 1) or contact forces (20 N) and refers to the process of material removal by the progressive
growth and mechanical breakdown of an oxide layer. For example, Wang et al. observed smooth surfaces with little ploughing, signs of
minimal plastic deformation, and the presence of thin flakes generated from the shear of asperities and oxidative particles removed
from the thin oxide layer or simply metallic particles that were removed and became oxidised [250]. This mode is often used to model
wear at the rail head or wheel thread [6,252]. The wear rates (see Table 5) are classified as mild and correspond to < 10− 6 mm rev− 1 if
derived using a twin disc setup (Amsler type) [197] or < 1 − 2 × 10− 8 mm3 N− 1 mm− 1 for pin-on-ring rigs and bearing steels [250]
although most authors agree that the dividing line between wear modes is not strict and depends mostly on the morphology of the worn
surfaces and the number and size of wear particles. In another context, 52100 bearing steel, the boundary has been explained in terms
of frictional heating temperatures with the boundary occurring at about 200 ◦ C [257]. Others attribute this boundary to the change
from partial slip to full slip contact [259]. Some of the most important degradation mechanisms associated with this mode are mild to
severe oxidation or delamination.
In type II wear there is extensive plastic deformation sometimes ripples on the surfaces and metallic debris particles which can
adhere to the deepened wear grooves and lead to deformation and fracture without necessarily having fatigue cracks. Such a mode of
wear is common at the wheel flange/rail gauge-corner contact [252]. For this mechanism, the wear rate follows a linear relationship
against Ft γ s /A where Ft is the tractive force (normal force × μf ), γ s is the slip (% difference in surface speeds between the rail and
wheel) and A is the contact area. It is the wear mode for which small-scale twin disc test results have been found to better replicate full-
scale tests, presumably due to a more accurate estimation of friction values [6,260]. The wear rates of type II are normally severe
ranging from 10− 6 to 10− 4 mm rev− 1 in twin disc setups [197]. It is possible within this mode to observe severe delamination, mild to
severe oxidation, or local melting. Delamination refers to the increased plastic shear strain below the contact surface, that nucleates
cracks, which then propagate parallel to the surface and eventually grow to the surface resulting in wear flakes [209] (Section 6).
Rosenfield [261] suggests that the energy required to create a new surface by wear is much higher than that for tensile cracking.
Contact temperatures can range from 200–300 ◦ C, resulting in a reduction in the strength of the locally heated region [259].
Type III involves a break-in period or shakedown that leads to the production of large debris particles (spalls) that cause gouging
abrasive wear at the surfaces in contact; such a mode is used to simulate unlubricated curved track with gauge face wear, and is
associated with catastrophic wear rates in excess of 10− 4 mm rev− 1 [6,262,197]. The number of running-in cycles during this regime is
inversely proportional to the slippage but directly proportional to the thickness of the contamination film on the rail [197]. According
to Welsh, the upper limit of this mode represents the minimum load at which frictional heating is maintained at a high enough level to
cause hardening,13 [263,264]. In Type III wear, it is possible that in some circumstances, the surface can be induced into localised
melting, with surface temperatures ranging from 1340–1580 ◦ C [265,266]. The energy required to create a new surface during severe
grooving deformation is negligible compared to the deformation energy, at least during single-pass abrasion tests [267].
Micrographs of the surface and profile of rails under the different wear regimes are presented in Fig. 32. It is worth noting that the

13
The hardening presumably occurs because the steel is locally austenitised and then cooled rapidly by the underlying material, resulting in
transformation products such as martensite.

31
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Table 5
Range of wear rates on Russian, American, British and German railways for different contact conditions. Wear rates are given as the change in
roller radius (in units of mm) per revolution W = Δr/n [197].
Wear rates Longitudinal contact Lateral contact Wheel skidding
− 8 − 7 − 7 − 6
Lubricated 10 to 10 10 to 10 4
7 6 6 5 ⩾10−
Not lubricated 10− to 10− 10− to 10−

Fig. 32. Wear modes at the surface of a rail-steel Fe-0.53C-1.07Mn-0.26Si wt%. (a) Type I, 1% creepage, P = 1050 MPa ↓, where the arrow indicates
the direction of the creepage force. (b) Type II, 7% creepage, 1050 MPa ↓. (c) Type III, 34% creepage, 1150 MPa →. (d-e) represent longitudinal
sections. (d) Type I, 2% creepage, 1075 MPa →. (e) Type II, 10% creepage, 1250 MPa →. (f) Type III, 30% creepage, 1250 MPa →. Creepage is
defined as 2(1.104D2 − D1 )/(D1 +1.104D2 ), where D1 and D2 are the top and bottom rollers diameters. The 1.104 is the ratio of the rotation speed of
the bottom shaft to the top shaft. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [195].

32
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

stresses and work-hardening behaviour during twin disc wear tests may not be representative of actual rail-wheel wear [222].
Due to the myriad of metallurgical and engineering parameters that are involved in the contact between wheels and rails such as
wheel load, track curvature14, track support system, track elevation, train suspension system, slip forces, friction, lubrication, oper­
ating temperature, humidity15, surface contamination, and material properties amongst other, a general empirical model can be very
complicated to produce [6]. Instead, Clayton advocates experiments that relate the wear rate to metallurgical factors, and investigation
of the strain accumulation per cycle during wear to outline the boundaries of the different regimes. However, it is worth considering
that most of those parameters, especially, surface roughness, hardness, and other microstructural parameters like volume fractions of
phases, strain hardening, and the scale of microstructure, will change throughout the life of the component making wear a dynamic
process that cannot be modelled based only on the initial values. The information can nevertheless be useful as the basis for alloy
design.
One option to simulate and predict wear in order to develop an optimal maintenance schedule that encompasses lubrication,
grinding, and wheel turning, was carried out by Jin et al. who combined twin disc experiments using the contact geometry and loads
used in service, three dimensional elasto-plastic finite element modelling to compute the contact stresses and locations, and
computation of a modified version of the Archard coefficient16 in an iterative process that recalculates the loads and mean slip ratio as
the profiles wear down, Fig. 33 [249]. The only parameters that required recalibration in the twin disc tests were the longitudinal slip
due to sizing effects and work hardening, which is 1.5–2 times greater in the laboratory than in real rail tracks.
Another dynamic ratcheting model for studying wear rate was developed by Kapoor and Franlkin by dividing the material in layers
across the depth and allowing each layer to accumulate plastic shear until the ductility is exhausted and is removed as wear debris
[268]. Later improvements allowed also the variation of properties through the plane represented by each layer in order to examine the
role of the microstructure in ratcheting wear.

4.1. Hardness

It is a common belief that for a given microstructure, an increase in hardness reduces the wear rate. However, parameters such as
the type of contact, slippage, load, and difference between rail, wheel, and total wear rates, indicate that there is no singular
dependence of wear rate on hardness [269,197,270]. Using a well-known Amsler-type machine, Markov proved that during longitu­
dinal contact, the slippages of the top and bottom rollers are different so their wear rates are not identical even at constant hardness; the
total wear rate decreased as the hardness of the wheel increased. However, when the friction coefficient was kept constant, as during
steady state contact, the wear rate of a roller was inversely proportional to its hardness, but proportional to the hardness of the counter-
roller. During lateral contact, the slippages of top and bottom rollers are the same, so at equal hardness (370 HV), their wear rates were
the same.
Therefore, increasing the hardness of one roller decreases its wear rate but at the same time increases that of the counter-roller;
increasing the hardness of both does reduce the total wear rate. Experiments by Jin et al. confirmed this during the early stages of
wear, but concluded that increased rail hardness can at the later stages reduce the wear on the wheel since the rail-gauge corner is
maintained longer [249]. Others support this but also point out that size of the contact patch is minimally changed if the hardness is
increased (Fig. 34a) [271,272], although variables such as the hardening response, friction coefficient, and residual stresses can also
influence the patch size. During skidding or pure sliding, increasing the hardness of one or both rollers causes reduction of the rail and
total wear rates. Also, the wear rate of the driving roller is inversely related to its own hardness and independent of the hardness of the
driven roller [197].
Rail tracks are in general harder than the wheels because the latter usually have a hypoeutectoid chemical composition. Therefore,
Fig. 34a would indicate that wheels wear at a greater rate than rails. However, this general conclusion fails if the microstructure is
engineered so that the rail becomes relatively innocuous in its contact with the wheel. In particular, carbide-free bainitic rails fare well
in this respect (Fig. 34b). In independent tests, it has been shown that the carbide-free bainitic steel has a wear rate ten times smaller
than a head-hardened pearlitic rail-steel [273]. The origin of the good properties of carbide-free bainite in the context of rail steels lies
in the absence of brittle cementite, the ability of the microstructure to undergo large surface-deformations without the creation of
excessive debris and the mechanically induced transformation of retained austenite into hard martensite [274],[p.436, 275].
Two regimes of hardness dependence are found as a function of slippage. Below 5% (mild wear), the total wear rate is independent
of the hardness due to the larger fatigue component that redistributes plastic deformation at the surface of the rollers. When slippage is
5–100% (severe wear) increasing the hardness of any of the rollers or both will decrease the total abrasive wear at the surfaces. These
observations lead the author to conclude that when working below 5% slippage, increasing the hardness of the wheel or rail has no
effect on wear, but at larger values of slippage, a higher hardness of rails is much encouraged [197]. Although the hardness of rollers
was varied, the compositions of the wheel (GOSTw, Table 4) and rail (GOSTr) were different and the microstructure was not indicated,

14
As angle of attack, used in twin disc tests to simulate curved tracks, increases or thrust load (lateral) is induced, the wear rate of the wheel flange
and rail gauge corner increase, whilst those of the wheel thread and rail head slightly decrease due to an larger slippage on the contact surface of the
rail gauge corner [249].
15
For example, humidity is responsible for varying the average wear rate from 1.26 × 10− 7 mm rev− 1 during winter down to 0.73×10− 7 in summer
[197]. Water lubrication can reduce the wear rate at the wheel flange by a factor of 65–80, but only by a factor of 7 at the rail gauge corner [249].
16
wear=ki σi δi L/Hi , where i is the distance from the gauge corner, k the wear coefficient, σ the contact stress, δ the mean value of the longitudinal
and lateral slip ratios, L the rolling distance, and H the hardness

33
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 33. Rail wear prediction procedure. Reproduced with the permission from Elsevier [249].

(a)

(b)

Fig. 34. (a) Map of the wheel and rail hardness ratio against wear of each component and the whole system. After [271] in [272], with permission
of Elsevier. (b) Wear data on a number of rail steels against the same wheel composition [21]. The yield strengths of the pearlitic, martensitic and
bainitic rails are 850, 950 and 800 MPa respectively, with the ultimate tensile strengths 1250, 1350 and 1350 MPa respectively.

34
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

so its influence and that of other metallurgical parameters is not clear.

At constant hardness, the wear rate is proportional to the load and independent of the apparent area of contact [247]. At small loads
(20–50 N), the influence of the original hardness on wear volumes is found to be small over a range of microstructures in a eutectoid
and a bearing type hypereutectoid steel containing 1.0 wt%C. If the load is increased (80 N) but kept constant, a decrease in hardness
actually leads to a slight decrease in wear volumes [270]. High-carbon specimens austenitised at the lowest possible temperature in the
γ +θ field and transformed to either to bainite (345–366 HV) or martensite (772 HV) with carbides and retained austenite, showed no
wear volume increase as hardness almost halved. This led to the suggestion that the thermal stability of the microstructure at the
operating temperature, is more important for wear resistance than the original hardness [270].
Pointner pointed out that newly installed rails develop a conformal profile with the passage of wheels, that increases the contact
area and hence diminishes the contact stresses [272]. Softer rails develop a conformal profile faster than the harder versions, thus
showing a smaller initial wear rate, but the advantage obviously diminishes with the progress of service. Therefore, comparisons
between different rails should be at the same stage of profile evolution. This is Rotthäuser’s explanation of why some decarburised
rails, with a softer and more easily worn ferritic surface, exhibit smaller fatigue crack growth rates [276]. However, it has been
suggested that decarburisation has a negligible effect on rail performance and that the Rotthäuger observations were attributable to the
faster removal of asperities from the soft ferrite, leading to a shorter duration of non-conformal contact stresses, and therefore a longer
time to ductility exhaustion needed to nucleate fatigue cracks [277,75]. In twin disc water-lubricated tests [75], greater decarbur­
isation was associated with much increased total and rail wear-rate. Some images of decarburisation and the microstructural change on
testing are illustrated in Fig. 35.17 This result is confirmed in wear studies of mixed ferritic-pearlitic steel as will be discussed in the next
section [154,279]. It seems nevertheless that the effects of decarburisation in real rails are likely to be minimal since its maximum
allowed depth, as regulated by the British Standards Institute, is 0.5 mm [277,280], necessitating only 25 Mt (∼1 year of service) for
the decarburised layer to wear away and for the ferrite remaining to work harden to a level consistent with the rest of the micro­
structure [281,75].

4.2. Microstructure

By varying the microstructure at constant composition, it has been shown that wear rates can be similar but the mechanisms
different [282,283]. During dry abrasive wear, hard, untempered martensite wore rapidly due to a higher degree of fragmentation or
flaking associated with a low fracture ductility [284], whereas nanostructured carbide-free bainite had the highest abrasion resistance
attributed to stress-induced martensite hardening at the surface, which also led to minimal pitting; fine pearlite showed extensive
pitting due to the stand-out of effect of cementite that halts the sliding motion of abrasive particles [283]. Although dry-abrasion
occurs only at the unlubricated gauge face of curved track or after any protective layer of rails has been removed due to high slip­
page, this study is effective at pointing out that wear depends not only on bulk hardness, but also on other microstructural parameters
which are phase dependent [285].
Consistent with these studies, Wang et al. compared the sliding wear behaviour of five different microstructures in a eutectoid
(1080) and hypereutectoid steel (52100), to reach the conclusion that during mild wear (P≲20 N) there is no significant difference in
wear volumes and the degradation mechanism is oxidational wear for all samples. However, for severe wear (P≳50 N), adhesion and
delamination were the dominant mechanisms so harder microstructures did not give better resistance to wear: lamellar pearlite was
the most resistant followed by ordinary-bainite,18 martensite, spheroidised cementite, and tempered martensite with retained
austenite [270]. Ductility at a microscopic level matters. Others have found the dry wear-rate of pearlite to be less than that of
ordinary-bainite or tempered-martensite, when all three microstructures were generated with the same hardness, in the same rail steel
[287]. Pearlite performed the best because of pronounced work hardening at the contact surface. It is interesting that the transition
between mild to severe wear modes depends more on testing conditions than microstructure, a conclusion that is difficult to reconcile
with notions of microstructural ductility or toughness [250]. Nevertheless, a change in the carbon concentration of steels does lead to a
change in the transition conditions between wear modes [263,264].

4.2.1. Pearlite
Cementite-ferrite interfaces in pearlite have a modicum of coherency, which is why the stress–strain curve does not show a Lüders
extension even after strain ageing [288,156,289]. The interfaces act as dislocation sources which under stress leads to dislocation pile-
ups against cementite lamellae, causing slip band formation. The smaller the slip distance, the more localised the plastic strain, making
crack initiation more difficult. This is why lamellar pearlite, which offers a smaller slip distance within the interlamellar ferrite, has a
greater sliding wear-resistance than spheroidised pearlite [290,291,270].
Microscopy suggest that cementite can sometimes be sheared at the intersection with the slip bands within the ferrite, Fig. 36 [288].

17
The depth of decarburisation is defined here as 98% of the bulk carbon content. In this study the carbon profile was estimated through a smart
metallographic approach. However, sequential X-ray diffraction measurements using electropolishing are routinely used in the bearing industry and
can provide a more precise determination of the carbon content as a function of depth [278].
18
The adjective ordinary is to distinguish cementite-containing bainite from the carbide-free version [286].

35
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)
Fig. 35. Decarburisation in: (a) R220 twin disc sample heat-treated in air at 1000 ◦ C for variable times and then ground to the black line. (b)
Deformed surface after twin disc testing at 1500 MPa. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [75].

Since dislocations pile up at the ferrite-cementite interface, the key to achieving a higher wear resistance in fully pearlitic steel is the
reduction of the mean free path of dislocation motion in ferrite, λ, which is achieved by reducing the interlamellar spacing19, SI
[10,279]. Reducing SI can be accomplished through chemical composition so that a greater undercooling can be achieved without
interference from other transformation products, by the addition of solutes such as chromium or manganese [293], or by employing
accelerated cooling from the austenitic state using compressed air or water mist 20[166].Heat-treated grades therefore refer to rails
subjected to accelerated cooling in which the hardness is a consequence of the heat treatment itself and therefore, a function of depth.
Fine interlamellar spacings of around 70 nm at the railhead surface have also been achieved through thermo-mechanical controlled
processing leading to high wear and RCF resistance [294,295].
A reduced interlamellar spacing has been shown to decrease the wear rate almost logarithmically [154], increase the flow stress
and work hardening rate [156,288] as well as the hardness (Fig. 37) and and yield strength, σ y , according to the Hall–Petch rela­
tionship [296–298,52,299,300,124]

σy = σi + kHP S−I 1/2 (13)

where σi is the friction stress in the ferrite and kHP is the Hall–Petch parameter, a measure of stress intensity needed at the tip of an
arrested slip band to stimulate slip in the adjacent grain [153,301]. The value of σ i depends slightly on solid solution strengthening but
should be about 128 MPa given the small carbon concentration expected within the ferrite and relatively small concentrations of
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
substitutional solutes; kHP ≃ 174 MPa μm [124].21
The role of cementite here is neglected other than in providing barriers to plasticity, since it is assumed that yielding must first
occur in the softer phase ferrite. Therefore, it is no surprise that an increased pearlite hardness, due to interlamellar refinement,
decreases the wear rate in a linear fashion with the slope reflecting the contact load and the slip [6,52]. Nevertheless, Perez-Unzueta
et al. emphasise that such a relationship is not necessarily linear anymore in the plastically deformed pearlite after wear testing [52].
Decreasing SI reduces the wear rate during dry rolling wear tests as shown by Das Bakshi et al. who produced nanostructured
pearlite (85 nm of interlamellar spacing) with a steel grade meant to form carbide-free nanostructured bainite, and it achieved less
wear roughly at the same hardness than some nanostructured bainite alloys [302] or similar wear than other nanobainitic grades but at
a lower hardness [303]. Despite a lower specific wear rate, the nanostructured pearlite showed three times as much surface roughness
after testing than the nanostructured bainite under the same loading conditions, which according to the authors can exaggerate
stresses, induce plastic deformation and hardening up to a depth of 50 μm, increase friction leading to deeper shearing inside the
material, and trigger some carbide dissolution as confirmed by X-ray analysis.
Another study performed on an actual nanostructured pearlitic grade with similar bulk hardness but with a much higher slip (20%

19
Since pearlite is a 3D microstructure of intervening layers of cementite surrounded by ferrite, often visualised as a lettuce (cementite) submerged
in water (ferrite), the measurement of distance in two-dimensional sections requires a stereographically correct method such as the mean true
interlamellar spacing defined by Underwood [292].
20
The implications in residual stress generation for each cooling method are discussed in more detail in Section 6.
21
The units of SI are assumed to be in micrometres.

36
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Fig. 36. Transmission electron micrographs of pearlite: (a) undeformed, (b) after deformation with lamellae aligned parallel to tensile axis, (c) after
deformation with lamellae aligned perpendicular to tensile axis, and (d) deformation of cementite plates by shear bands. Reproduced with the
permission of Elsevier [156].

cf. 5%) in order to simulate extreme wear showed no cementite dissolution, but a large reduction in interlamellar spacing (10-fold),
which doubled the hardness at the surface compared to the undeformed matrix [304]. The absence of cementite dissolution may be
inconsistent with the measured dissolution in another study [303] which used a fourth of the slip, half the load, a third of the cycles,
higher Si content, and the same temperature control during testing. In any case, the observations suggest that moderate wear first
realigns the ferrite and cementite lamellae towards the direction of strain and once this has happened, the cementite lamellae thin
down, which increases their ductility, permitting them to cope with intense plastic deformation before fracture [305,306]. MnS in­
clusions also deform and flatten, aiding the generation of flake-like wear particles [52,307,23]. Manganese sulphide is relatively soft,
and certainly influences rail performance, but harder inclusions such as alumina, are more harmful in initiating cracks [308], pre­
sumably because they do not deform in compliance with the surround steel.
In the context of abrasive wear, the resistance of the pearlite can be expressed as the base wear resistance of ferrite plus a
contribution from the cementite particles that is proportional to their volume fraction and inversely proportional to the inter-particle
distance [284]. Likewise, for a ferritic/hypoeutectoid steel, its abrasion wear resistance will no longer be related to the pearlitic
interlamellar spacing, but will be proportional to the abrasion resistance of the ferrite plus a contribution from the pearlite that is

37
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 37. Wear rate as volume loss per distance slid against initial bulk hardness and interlamellar spacing for different contact pressures and
creepage. Redrawn based on data from [52].

proportional to its volume fraction [309,284,299]. In a study of decarburised rails which consisted of ferrite and pearlite at the surface,
it was found that wear rates were very similar when the carbon content was above 0.5 wt% (with lower carbon meaning greater ferrite
content) making the authors conclude that above this limit, lower amounts of pro-eutectoid ferrite at the surface are unlikely to have a
better wear performance [75,50].
Other parameters such as the fracture stress σf and ultimate tensile stress σ UTS have been found to increase with decreasing
interlamellar spacing, whereas the fracture toughness, KIc , appears to decrease with decreasing interlamellar spacing down to around
170 nm, below which it increases for even finer pearlite [153]. The tensile strength increases with prior austenite grain size if the value
of interlamellar spacing is kept constant [293]. The dependence of ductility on interlamellar spacing is less certain or moderate
[10,293,153].
As mentioned earlier, the thermal stability of microstructures and their thermal conductivity (≈ 40 W m− 1K− 1, [310]) can be
important at large loads or slip when frictional heating becomes prominent, since properties such as hardness depend on temperature.
Data recorded using a thermal camera permitted the modelling of the frictional temperature field, which indicated that for high load/
slippage during pin-on-disc testing, pearlite can heat up to 620 ◦ C, martensite to 745 ◦ C and carbide containing tempered martensite
with retained austenite to 1340 ◦ C [257]. It is, however, unlikely that those temperatures are reached in normal rail contact22, but the
results are consistent with the thermal conductivity trends, with pearlite 51.9 W m− 1K− 1, martensite 29.3 W m− 1K− 1, and cementite
4.2 W m− 1K− 1, respectively. Knowing also that pearlite would only anneal if heated above 700 ◦ C compared to high-carbon martensite,
which begins tempering at ∼200 ◦ C, it makes sense that pearlite had the lowest wear volumes in that study. All the same, such theory is
questionable since a spheroidised structure displayed higher wear volumes than martensite despite having higher thermal conductivity
and thermal stability than the latter, which suggests that the existence of large and hard incoherent particles such as carbides that can
favour the formation of voids and cracks at their interfaces due to plastic flow [314] is a predominant factor for wear resistance than
thermal stability.
Niobium, an element commonly added to structural steels to control the austenite grain size and provide precipitation hardening
has been shown to increase the tensile strength of pearlite for a given interlamellar spacing, but for reasons that are not clear, it slightly
coarsens the interlamellar spacing for a given prior austenite grain size, effectively reducing the wear resistance [293]. However,
contradictory results have been reported in [315] where the niobium addition led to a refinement of SI and of the pearlite colony size.
The microalloying technology has been tested for heavy-haul rails in Brazil [316,317] where it is found that the microalloyed steel has
better properties than the one without niobium, and has good flash-butt and thermit welding capabilities. There are other in­
vestigations which show enhancements in rail properties and even full-scale rails produced on the normal production lines [318–320].
Unfortunately, there are no report of in service performance of microalloyed rails.
However, microalloying high-carbon rail-steels with niobium can be difficult because it is necessary to ensure that the niobium
does not segregate during solidification and form large (≃ 10 μm), primary carbides by precipitation from solute-enriched liquid [321].
The amount of niobium must be limited so that even the coarser particles can be taken into solution in austenite during a reasonable
reheating treatment. Indeed, adding in excess of 0.05Nb wt% has been proven to lead to a large deterioration in the toughness of
pearlitic rail-steel due to the precipitation of coarse NbC at high temperatures [320]. The concentration in rail steels should therefore
be limited to 0.01–0.02 wt% so that precipitation occurs at temperatures where hot-rolling into the rail profile is implemented. Using
this design philosophy, it has been possible to produce pancaked austenite grain structures in rails, with a significant improvement in

22
For normal rail contact, contact temperatures have been predicted theoretically to be between 204 ◦ C [311] and 230 ◦ C [312] and determined
experimentally to be 300 ◦ C [311,312], although other authors claim it to be up to 1300 ◦ C [313].

38
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

wear resistance [321].

4.2.2. Bainite
The ability of ordinary-bainite to resist wear is attributed to its high strain hardening rate and ductility, with the surface hardening
but not necessarily detaching which can create abrasive debris [10]. If retained austenite is mixed with the bainitic ferrite in the
carbide-free version, the work hardening derives from the strain-induced transformation of the austenite into untempered but very
refined martensite [3]. The role of dislocation accumulation at the surface layer during wear that can occasionally produce a cell-like
structure has been studied [322]; the cell size depends on factors such as the stacking fault energy, applied stress, and temperature. It
can influence the severity of wear and the size of wear particles or to the extent to which cementite dissolves in preference to carbon
locating at dislocations [323]. The cell structure is relevant to the discussion of white-etching layers, Section 6.10.
Initial studies concluded that the wear rate of bainitic rail-steels is higher that of the pearlitic counterparts despite their superior
strength [324,325]. Others have shown that mixed bainitic-pearlitic microstructures underperform against fully pearlitic steels,
presumably because of the greater work hardening capacity of the latter [326,287,327]. Since then, it has been shown that high-carbon
lower bainite can surpass the wear resistance of upper bainite [328], and that low carbon bainite can have comparable or even better
wear resistance than pearlite whilst exhibiting better ductility and toughness, making them useful for crossings that are subject to
impact erosion and fatigue [329,330]. In the automotive industry, spheroidal graphite cast iron gears transformed to bainite have even
shown a similar mass loss during lubricated wear to that of carburised steel during the steady state mode [331] in [282].
Many of the early studies on bainite neglected to consider experimental parameters such as the sliding/rolling ratio, and whether
specimens are the upper or lower ones in cylindrical roller testing. In a study that did include these parameters23, it was seen that a low
carbon (0.04 wt%) as-rolled carbide-free bainitic microstructure exhibited a greater wear resistance than pearlite, whereas the higher
carbon variants that had banded microstructures of bainite and martensite due to solidification-induced segregation, underperformed.
Failure occurred due to a concentration of iron borocarbides at the prior austenite grain boundaries where cracks nucleated and
propagated along the bands [10]. However, the low-carbon bainite has a worse wear resistance than pearlite under less severe contact
[332,3,6].
A different study that compared wear and rolling contact fatigue of pearlite against bainite at the same hardness, but without
mentioning any other experimental parameters, concluded that despite bainite (DOBAIN380 and 430) having approximately 2–3 times
less wear resistance than pearlite (R260)24, its RCF resistance was almost four times higher than pearlite, making bainite it a strong
candidate for low slip, medium radius curves (1200–1500 m) where RCF damage is enhanced [272].
Other examples exist that compare different types of bainite against each other or against martensite. For example, the wear of a
carbide-free bainite was shown to be 50% less than a lower bainite one at similar hardness using a dry 5% rolling/slide ratio,
attributable to its advantageous hardness-toughness combination [333]. When comparing it against martensite, bainite had a higher
wear resistance due to its higher toughness, work-hardening ability, and smaller hardness differences within the microstructure [270].

4.2.3. Martensite
When pearlite and tempered martensite of identical hardness are generated in the same rail steel, the pearlite is superior in wear,
presumably through the role of the cementite lamellae. In fact, for a hardness less than 350 HV, pearlite has a lower specific wear rate
than martensite at any given hardness, the difference vanishing for harder martensite [334]. On the other hand, the martensite is less
prone to cracking given the fine state of the carbide precipitates within the tempered microstructure [198,270,287]. The martensitic
steel always has a low carbon concentration to avoid the brittleness associated with carbon in solid solution, and the hardenability of
the steel may not be sufficient to achieve a uniform microstructure in large sections.
In fact, carbides, if they are detached from the martensite during sliding wear, can not only act as abrasives but also cause voids to
develop during plastic deformation because of the incompatibility in deformation rates between hard carbides and the softer matrix
[314,335]. This is particularly the case at large sliding speeds; in fact, at low speeds the wear resistance seems to be insensitive to the
carbide content [336,337]. For these reasons, martensitic steels destined for crossings and switches are based on fully austenitised
grades without primary or residual carbides [338].

4.3. Substitutional alloying

Some of the most common alloying elements of rail steel are silicon, manganese and chromium, whilst avoiding impurities such as
phosphorus, sulphur, hydrogen, and nitrogen. Silicon is added to carbide-free bainitic steel because it is most effective in suppressing
the precipitation of cementite from austenite but has a relatively limited effect during the tempering of supersaturated ferrite. These
effects are attributable to the negligible solubility of silicon in cementite; the driving force for precipitation from austenite is much
smaller than from ferrite, which is why the influence is much greater in the former case [339–341]. These observations are only
relevant when precipitation occurs at temperatures where substitutional solute diffusion is limited so the cementite is force to accept
silicon. At higher temperatures, such as during the formation of pearlite, the effect of silicon on transformation kinetics is very small.
Manganese, on the other hand, under equilibrium distributes preferentially to cementite and lowers the temperature at which it
forms, and it enhances hardenability so can reduce the amount of pro-eutectoid ferrite that might precipitate in hypoeutectoid steels,

23
35% slide/roll ratio
24
Although the wear rates of these bainitic grades were very similar to harder pearlites such as R350HT and R370CrHT[191].

39
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

thereby increasing the hardness [342]. Chromium works in a similar way. Cobalt has been shown to help refine the interlamellar
spacing of pearlite by increasing the driving force for pearlite formation from austenite [343]. However, it is probably too expensive in
the context of rail steels.
Molybdenum is used for two reasons, it enhances hardenability, but more importantly, it mitigates austenite grain boundary
embrittlement due to the segregation of impurities such as phosphorus. This kind of embrittlement is particularly important for
transformations that are displacive because bainite and martensite are limited to the grains in which they nucleate and hence leave
vestiges of the austenite grain boundaries, where impurities can continue to segregate [344,345]. Other solutes such as vanadium and
niobium have been added to experimental pearlitic rail-steels, primarily to attempt a refinement of the austenite grain size [346].

5. Rail breakage – human factors

Breakages develop from cracks that nucleate at weak spots for example at welds or at the foot of the rail when defects are present,
although such incidents should be rare due to inspection procedures, commonly using ultrasonics [347]. One of the major rail disasters
in the U.K. was the Hatfield crash where apart of the rail fragmented into some 300 pieces as the train passed, probably due to cracks
originating in rolling-contact fatigue. Such fatigue is well-known in the rail industry, but the official investigation found that the
maintenance contractor at the time failed to manage effectively the inspection and maintenance of the rail at the site of the accident,
and that the infrastructure controller at the time, failed to manage effectively the work [348,349].
If detection, for example at the foot, is difficult, cracks can grow unnoticed leading to breakages, assisted perhaps by residual
stresses created during heat treatment or track layout. As will be discussed in Section 6, off-line heat treatments and slab track offer
lower levels of tensile residual stress at the rail foot than in-line heat treated rails or ballasted track [166]. In the case of manual metal
arc weld deposition repairs, the welder’s competence and onsite conditions can lead to porosity or slag inclusions that initiate sub­
surface cracks that can merge with RCF surface initiated cracks leading to breakage [166].

6. Rolling contact fatigue

Bearing steels, which usually are hard and brittle, suffer from rolling contact fatigue with the cracks originating at surface ir­
regularities or from inclusions or microstructural damage below the contact surface [37,350–352]. The rolling elements of the bearing
usually are well lubricated and smooth. In contrast, although rolling contact is clearly a feature of rail traffic, deliberate lubrication is
absent, and the process involves some sliding; an interesting consequence of the sliding is that the location of the maximum shear stress
caused by the contact moves towards the surface. Fig. 38 shows calculations to illustrate how the location of the maximum shear stress
moves towards the surface with increasing sliding component.
Rails also have a much lower hardness than bearing elements. The fatigue cracks in rails nucleate at surface irregularities or as­
perities that create contact pressure peaks [355,230], sub-surface inclusions/defects [356,357], or at microstructural damage iden­
tified as “white-etching” [313]; initiation can also occur in an initially defect-free region when the plasticity in the vicinity of rail
surface becomes exhausted (Fig. 39) [198,205,358,206].
Other types of damage due to RCF include pits, squats or head-checks, which are closely spaced cracks, appearing mainly on the
rail’s running edge. Spalling can occur at the advanced stages of fatigue when bits of the rail fall off as the cracks become sufficiently
continuous to lead to detachment. Once “visible” on the rail surface, the cracks are found to penetrate at least 5 mm below the railhead
[359]. Therefore, the surface crack length can be used as an indication of crack depth by assuming a penetration crack angle [166].
However, caution needs to be exercised in the interpretation of such data because the direction of crack propagation can change with
depth; even ultrasonic measurements of crack depth have been shown to be unreliable when compared with measurements made by
sectioning the rail [360].
The life of a fatigue crack can be categorised into two periods: stage I, driven by shear stress, with initiation at the surface, and stage
II driven by shear decohesion at its tip in a plane normal to the maximum principal strain with crack growth parallel to the direction of
minimum principal strain [362]. This applies to rails as well, where most cracks initiate at the surface by mode II loading fracture
(Fig. 40) at an acute angle to the surface due to irregularities or Hertzian contact when elastic shakedown is exceeded, i.e. accumu­
lation of shear deformation due to repeated rolling contact loading. A high surface roughness will increase the stresses and deformation
at the surface [230], but a lubricated contact will reduce the friction coefficient locating the peak contact stresses below the surface, at
a depth of around 0.2 mm for twin-disc tests and 2 mm in the case of actual rails [221,363,364]. Therefore, cracks nucleated at the
surface need to propagate through a region of relatively low stress25, where the microstructure matters in controlling crack propa­
gation, before reaching the deeper peak stress regions. Depending on factors such as shakedown level, material thresholds, and wear
rate, newly formed cracks may not propagate if their size is between 10–20 μm. The observation of a low damage subsurface region in
gears and bearings under fatigue corresponds to a threshold stress intensity factor ΔK0, which is microstructure sensitive [362]. ΔK0
has been observed to be linearly inverse to the tensile yield strength, proportional to the cyclic yield stress, and independent of the

25
This region has been defined before as a quiescent zone or a relatively low shear stress region between the near surface asperity induced field and
the subsurface maximum stresses [365].

40
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

(c)
Fig. 38. Calculation according to [207,353] of shear stress τxz at depth z during rolling contact of two cylinders (each of radius 22.5 mm) pressing
together at a load of 200 N. The vertical scales for (a) and (b) are identical, as is the colour scheme. (a) Assuming perfect rolling, (b) roll-slide
parameter ξ = 0.95, which means that there is 5% sliding, i.e., marginal slip. Note that the vertical depth (z) and colour scales on (a,b) are
identical. (c) Assuming perfect sliding of rolling/sliding cylinders. After [354].

fracture toughness [366,367]. Therefore, crack-growth resistance can be improved by cyclic softening,26 coarsening the prior austenite
grain size (Section 6.7), and limiting impurity segregation at grain boundaries [368]. If cracks manage to propagate through the
quiescent zone, they can grow in mode I fracture, sometimes with the help of near-surface inclusions, in either a co-planar or branching
mode (normally at 70 ◦ to the initial orientation) [217].
In a pure dry-rolling scenario, RCF cracks have been observed to originate at the surface with a 30 ◦ orientation with the surface,
penetrate approximately 400 μm, branch or propagate parallel to the surface, and rise up again towards the surface creating a
macroscopic pit or flake [217]. This behaviour is also referred to as delamination in wear studies [268,209]. If lubrication is added,
wear is reduced and macroscopic pits appear after longer duration, but they may grow relatively rapidly [217,356]. Kaneta et al. link
the traction coefficient or friction to a particular crack propagation mode such that dry rolling promotes shear mode fatigue growth
into the core of the material, whereas lubricated rolling can lead to fluid entrapment at cracks, which decreases friction between the
crack faces and gives rise to a tensile growth mode that generates pits [369].
Others conclude that the selection of either of these mechanisms depends on the anisotropic accumulation of shear strain, such that
narrow regions of exhausted ductility surrounded by others which are less strained will be preferential sites for crack propagation into
the core of the material; uniformly strained regions simply produce wear debris [370]. The microstructural parameter responsible for
the anisotropic accumulation of strain is not clear since the modelling uses rectangular elements with assumed local properties. Su and
Clayton find that for lubricated rolling/sliding, the cracking behaviour during RCF depends more on the contact pressure and shear
yield stress than on the friction coefficient or microstructure [196]. This result is supported by the findings of Beynon et al. [50] who
found a critical contact stress of around 1500–1800 MPa for lubricated rail discs below which cracks formed networks and above which
they grew isolated and deep into the material (Fig. 41).
A factor often neglected in the analysis of fatigue cracks in the context of rails, is the influence of residual stresses due to heat

26
Cyclic softening can be induced by the rearrangement of the dislocation substructure and a reduction in dislocation density with alternating
load. The softening occurs because some of the plastic strain becomes reversible, similar to phenomena during the Bauschinger effect. It has a
noticeable beneficial effect on the threshold fatigue crack growth resistance.

41
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

(a) (b)

(c)
Fig. 39. Damage due to rolling-contact fatigue on rails. (a) Family of surface cracks at the gauge corner aligned normal to the resultant of the axial,
spin, and transverse creepage directions. (b) Matrix strain below the contact surface, illustrating a crack growing in the direction of plastic flow. (c)
Branched crack visible in a longitudinal section of a rail in a high-speed curve, also referred to as a squat defect. Reproduced with the permission of
Elsevier [361,50].

treatment and track layout. A ballast-less slab track, Fig. 42, where the rails are fastened onto rigid concrete slabs with some sort of
elasticity engineered into the system, exhibits a smaller subsurface crack growth rate, due the increased and continuous support that
reduces rail bending, when compared to the traditional ballasted track [166]. Data suggest that the ratio of sub-surface crack depth to
surface crack length is much lower for slab track than for the ballast equivalent, although it is noted that many of the slab track in­
stallations are located in tunnelled sections that are sheltered from the possible effects of fluid pressurisation in helping crack advance.
It is also argued [166] that an off-line heat treatment mitigates residual tensile stresses at the rail foot, leading to an increased
fatigue life. This is caused by the fact that off-line heat treated rails do not undergo roller straightening after their controlled forced air
cooling as opposed to in-line heat treated rails, which are cooled using water, air-mist or polymers after rolling. In-line heat treatment
would also give rise to a larger prior austenite grain size whereas the off-line process requires a shorter and lower temperature re-
austenitisation stage resulting in finer prior austenite grains, which can reduce hardenability, but increase the toughness.
There are two main approaches to the modelling of crack initiation:

1. a defect tolerant one in which the material is assumed to be inherently full of small cracks and it is the number of cycles to
propagation to a critical size that is calculated based on material parameters and crack growth data.
2. A total life one where the cycles to crack initiation in a defect-free material are considered either in a stress or strain based model
[235].

The material properties are then considered using a constitutive model, for example the Armstrong and Frederick nonlinear ki­
nematic hardening law for steady state ratcheting [371], the Lemaitre and Chaboche model for a more accurate description of low
cycle ratcheting [372], or the Jiang and Sehitoglu model for long term constant or decaying ratcheting rate and transient loading
[373,374]. A loading contact model, normally done using a finite element method, then needs to be added. Different fatigue prediction
approaches, reviewed carefully by Ringsberg [235] and compared by Ekh et al. [375], can be incorporated using concepts such as
equivalent strain, critical plane, energy and energy–density, combined energy–density and critical plane (recommended for rolling
contact fatigue), or empirical models. These theories can then help predict the most critical point and orientation for a crack to
nucleate due to ratcheting or low-cycle fatigue, grow according to fatigue damage calculations, and be compared against experimental
tests that calibrate the output. Since ratcheting leads to a change in the material parameters, plasticity models need to account for this
anisotropy evolution, which has been attempted before by splitting up the bulk of the material into elements designated “bricks”. Each
brick is assigned different properties such as initial shear yield stress and critical shear strain depending on depth, so each accumulates
plastic shear strain at varying rates and can fail individually when the threshold is reached and form wear debris or cracks [376,221].
RCF cracks can be partially or entirely eliminated by the wearing away of surface material, since rails are systems where wear and

42
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 40. Three modes of crack loading. Redrawn based on [362].

Fig. 41. Optical image of eutectoid grade showing: (a) isolated crack while tested at p0 = 1800 MPa and (b) fine crack network while tested at p0 =
1500 MPa. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [50].

rolling contact fatigue take part concurrently [377,221,378]. The competitive role between these two mechanisms has been simulated
[217] by calculating the depth of the wear per cycle and the Paris law propagation rate of fatigue cracks as shown in Fig. 43 such that
the higher curve dictates the prevalent mechanism. They also developed a ratcheting model based on Lemaitre and Chaboche [372]
that estimates RCF shear band crack formation in competition with wear, calibrated experimentally by extracting the hardness and

43
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 42. A ballast-less track between rail tunnels under a river in the Netherlands. Reproduced under CC BY-SA 3.0, [Link]
licenses/by-sa/3.0/[Link], courtesy of Hullie.

Fig. 43. Qualitative graph showing a scenario where a) wear is predominant so no surface crack failure can be expected and b) RCF is predominant
so wear does not manage to remove surface cracks that can ultimately lead to failure. Adapted and reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [217].

forward displacements along the depth of twin-disc samples and the thickness of the layer removed by wear [379]. The wear stabilises
the strain field at high cycles and during the steady state, crack length is almost constant due to wear removing the same thickness of
material as the distance advanced by the crack tip27.
Another model to simulate the competition between fatigue and wear is based on a graphical representation of a brick model, with a
black or white pixel for a failed or un-failed brick, respectively; cracks are then identified as a chain of black pixels, or wear debris if a
whole layer of bricks is black [370]. Although this does not predict cycles to wear initiation or rates observed experimentally [380] due
to the lack of microstructure and roughness simulation, the depth of RCF cracks was similar to experiments after 15,000 cycles but the
crack length was under-predicted, probably due to the neglect of stress concentrators at the tips of the cracks.
The wear rate of rails has decreased by over an order of magnitude over the past two decades due to a better understanding of
damage mechanisms and of microstructural tailoring, but with consequent increase in the occurrence of fatigue damage [252]. RCF
cracks can be removed by wear, but there is currently no quantitative description of what magnitudes of speed, load, creepage, and
cycles should be for wear to grind only the necessary amount of cracked rail surface (magic wear rate [378]), although Olofsson

27
The constant crack length was established to be 40 μm by Fletcher and Beynon in unlubricated tests [220].

44
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 44. High-speed lines made with grades R220 (as-rolled), R260 (as-rolled), and R350HT (head hardened through heat treatment) showing: a)
density, size, and spacing of head checks using magnetic particle inspection of the head surface near the gauge corner after 90 MGt (million gross
tonnes, 3 years) of service and b) angle (25 ◦ ) and depth of head checks in longitudinal micrographs after 85 MGt (2.5 years). Adapted and repro­
duced with the permission of Elsevier [54].

concluded that if the steel grade is too wear resistant 28, lubricants with friction modifiers (lithium-based grease with graphite) can
slow RCF crack propagation rates so they match removal by wear [381]. Recent efforts to model the process of RCF crack nucleation
and growth taking into account steel composition and wear by the UK’s Rail Safety and Standards Board, have been validated against
historical site data, allowing the optimisation of grinding schedules [382].

6.1. Hardness

It is well documented that a refined interlamellar spacing in pearlite increases its hardness and consequently, decreases its wear
rate [6,52,293,154]. Such dependence with hardness has not been studied as much in the case of RCF, but the most data certainly
originates from a large set of over 1200 laboratory twin disc tests performed at TATA Steel since 1976 covering a wide range of steel
grades that showed a linear dependence of hardness with RCF resistance measured as cycles to crack initiation despite the uncertainty
of accurately detecting crack initiation [166]. Since hardness is commonly achieved through a combination of adequate alloying and
accelerated cooling, it should be taken into account when assessing RCF resistance that hardness can vary along the length and depth,
and therefore with material loss through wear or maintenance grinding activities.
Fracture toughness has been observed to decrease with increasing hardness for the as-rolled rails, from ≈ 35 MPa m− 1/2 for R200
(220 HV) to 26 MPa m− 1/2 for R320Cr (340 HV). However, for the heat-treated grades (370–420 HV) the minimum mean values were
similar to those of R260 (280 HV), which is around 29 MPa m− 1/2 [166], suggesting an independent effect of interlamellar spacing
[166], perhaps because the cementite lamellae becomes thinner.
Fatigue crack growth rates are greater for harder steels, increasing from of ∼21 m Gcycle− 1 for a hardness of 230 HV to
∼35 m Gcycle− 1 for 370 HV [166]. Another study that compared as-rolled (240–280 HV) and heat treated rail steels (370 HV) in actual
wheel-rail conditions found that head the hardened rail showed not only the shortest head check cracks with the smallest distance
between cracks, but also a crack depth 3–6 times lower than the as-rolled rails (Fig. 44), meaning that harder rails do offer more RCF
resistance together with reduced wear [54]; this should not surprise because in ordinary push–pull tests, the fatigue limit correlates
well with hardness over a wide variety of steels and microstructures [383–385]; after all, the resistance to plastic deformation as
measured by hardness indentations, determines also the resistance to the plasticity required to initiate and propagate fatigue [386].
It follows that head-hardened rails require less maintenance by grinding, offering an improvement of 2–3 times in operating ef­
ficiency with respect to R260 [54]. Nevertheless, it is worth pointing out that the larger linear density of cracks in the hard heat-treated
rails and the short distance between cracks can increase the propensity of spalling or shelling as a result of cracks merging together

28
New pearlitic rail with a composition of 0.7C-1.0Mn-1.0Cr wt% and a UTS⩾1080 MPa installed in a 346 m curve which experienced speeds of
75 km h− 1 and an average traffic of 6 Mt year− 1.

45
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 45. Depth of RCF cracks as a function of track curve radii. The hardness values are 240 HV for R220, 280 HV for R260, 370 HV for R350HT, and
390 HV for R370CrHT. Adapted using data from [272] based on [387].

under the surface [166]. A similar dependence with hardness was found by Beynon et al. who varied the contact pressure and creepage
in a twin disc machine concluding that a head hardened eutectoid pearlite (0.76 wt% C) had the best resistance to RCF followed by an
as-rolled eutectoid grade (0.78 wt% C) with a similar composition to STD, and last came a low strength BS11 grade with only 0.55 wt%
C [50].
When including also the track curve radius in the analysis, it was found not only that harder rails form shallower head check cracks
irrespective of curve radii, but also that the maximum condition of RCF damage in terms of deeper cracks occurs in curves of
1200–1500 m in radius (Fig. 45) [272,387].

6.2. Single empirical parameters

Rolling contact fatigue is a function many parameters including surface roughness, load, rolling speed, steel cleanliness, heat
treatment, chemical composition, and response to thermomechanical deformation. The influence of each of these can be quantified by
direct measurement [194]. Using such data, attempts have been made to rationalise clusters of variables into a single empirical
parameter, e.g., the shelling index that in some respects accounts for inclusions and hardness, to allow comparison of RCF performance
between alloys [388]:
{ }
oxide volume fraction × stringer length
shell index = ln (14)
hardness2

A shell is a bit that falls off a rail because of a fatigue-initiated crack, often referred to as a spall; Eq. 1o clearly does not have a physical
basis, but is consistent with the discussion in the previous section that in general, a greater hardness offers better fatigue resistance,
since the tendency for shelling has been shown to be smallest when the shell index is smallest [388]. The shell index is probably less
relevant for modern rail steels which have a high cleanliness level due to, for example, vacuum degassing and continuous casting [389]
or calcium treatment [390], Fig. 46.
Some have tried to include other variables, such as the volume fraction and size of alumina particles, the austenite grain size, degree
of structural homogeneity, intensity of thermomechanical deformation, and carbide volume fraction [194]. However, the degree of
empiricism increases and it may then be better to use neural network analysis [392].
Other attempts to use a single parameter for rolling contact fatigue analysis, such as the Smith-Watson-Topper method [393],
designed originally to help estimate the fatigue life during uniaxial loading in push–pull tests, involves a damage parameter SWT =
σmax ∊a that is the product of the maximum tensile stress and the strain amplitude. The idea is that fatigue failure under different mean
stresses and range all can be rationalised as a monotonic function of the parameter; the original work [393] demonstrated this vividly
for a wide range of data. In the context of rails, finite element analysis is used to estimate the location of crack nucleation and the
direction of its growth under multiaxial cyclic loading based on a phenomenological approach considering the maximum normal stress
component σmax in a specified direction, and Δ∊ is the difference of the maximum and minimum normal strain compoents in the same
direction:
Δ∊
SWT = σmax .
2

SWT is therefore a function of position in space and is assumed to be constant for a given life. Using this in a scenario to estimate fatigue
life under three-dimensional cyclic loading requires the calculation to be performed over a whole structure and to find the location of
the maximum SWT max value that would correspond to the location of crack initiation making this method computationally intensive for
large sections of rail [394]. However, one of the strengths of this approach is that it can predict if crack initiation occurs in the

46
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 46. A comparison of the volume fractions of oxides in rail steels used to derive equation 1o [388] and a large number of modern rail-steels
sourced from Russia, Japan, France, Austria and Poland [391].

subsurface of the rail head. Nevertheless, still the most common way of assessing rolling contact fatigue resistance is to test samples
under standardised conditions such as load and speed until the first signs of damage are evident and the test is stopped for
characterisation.

6.3. Contact pressure and creepage

In general, RCF life increases with decreasing contact pressure but the exact relationship these two variables follow was initially
thought to be linear using standard pearlitic steels in twin-disc laboratory tests [395,396,50]. Instead, increasing creepage up to 3%
was found to increase the RCF life in hypoeutectoid and as-rolled eutectoid pearlites [50].
When using a broader range of lubricated contact pressures from 850–2300 MPa, it was observed by Su et al. that a more accurate
description would be a power law (RCF life=Apb0 ), where A and b are empirical constants. Nonetheless, microstructural characteri­
sation in that study revealed two different failure modes: low RCF lives and shear band cracks in loading cases above the theoretical
shakedown limit or branched cracks that originate from an apparently undeformed material when loaded below the shakedown limit
allowing a longer RCF life. These modes suggests a bimodal distribution based on the normalised values of contact pressure p0 /k where
√̅̅̅
k, the shear yield stress, is σ 0.2 / 3 [196]. In either case, the initial failure mechanism is shear flow at the surface that leads to work
hardening, exhaustion of ductility, and eventual crack formation and orientation along the flow lines. However, a shear band cracking
mode would require different aspects to be addressed such as the ratcheting strain rate to avoid crack nucleation, whereas the branch
cracking mode could be mitigated via austenite grain size refinement or by increasing wear resistance if these branched cracks are the
early stages of delamination flakes.
The contact pressure at the tip of RCF cracks can be exacerbated by the presence of lubricant inside the cracks. Under constant
lubrication, the traction coefficient decreases giving a slower build-up of ratcheting damage so the time to crack initiation is longer
[221]. However, normal rail-wheel contact is not constantly lubricated but is a combination of dry and wet contact depending on the
weather. If cracks have been formed during a dry stage and lubrication is then applied, it is believed that liquid can enter the crack
mouth cavity creating mode I crack propagation, reducing the friction between faces, and accelerating the crack growth rate; this
known as the hydraulic pressure penetration effect [356,217,397,369]. Upon loading, the liquid can also escape the crack mouth and
lubricate the crack faces causing mode II propagation [398,206]. By using such model and measuring the effective dry cycles Neff that a
sample sees once the shakedown limit is reached and the friction coefficient raises above 0.25, but before lubrication is applied, and
then calculating the load above the ratcheting limit Pr , it is possible to calculate the decrease in RCF life according to [206]:

%drop in RCF = 2.74Pr N0.5

eff . (15)

Its is worth mentioning that this hydraulic pressurisation effect is inversely related to the liquid viscosity and directly proportional to
the crack length [217]. Other models available to simulate such phenomenon include quasi-static two dimensional approaches where
lubrication seepage was found to be proportional to increasing surface traction and crack inclination with respect to movement [369],
3D models (used to determine relations to approximate 2D to 3D cracks such as a stiffening reduction factor and a growth rate
reduction factor)[399], and models that couple internal and external pressure applied by internal fluid flow and external contact load
[400].
Although many authors talk about fluid penetration at cracks and its essential role in RCF crack propagation [401], the actual
mechanism by which fluid enters those shallow angle 3D thin RCF cracks is not entirely understood. In order to corroborate a common
assumption that water gets sucked into newly formed RCF cracks during the first cycle due to a sub-atmospheric internal pressure,
Bogdanski coupled a Hertzian 2D FEM model of a surface-breaking shallow-angle crack and a one-dimensional Reynolds squeeze film
fluid model for pressure dependent viscosity liquids [400]. He showed that for the liquid to get sucked in, the liquid layer needs to be
continuous, but already train speeds above 0.9 m s− 1 will break it suggesting that other mechanisms may be more plausible expla­
nations for this phenomenon, such as slow capillary flow after the cracked faces have been eroded due to friction. Nevertheless, crack

47
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 47. Rolling contact fatigue dependance on (a) interphase surface of pearlite (lamellar vs spheroidised), (b) austenite grain size, (c) carbon
content and (d) hardness of a low carbon martensite vs a high carbon fine pearlite, The exact definition of the contact fatigue limiting stress is not
clear from [194] but may relate to the maximum contact stress during roller-roller tests necessary to achieve a determined number of cycles without
crack initiation, as described in [406]. Similarly, the definition of austenite grain diameter is not specified in the original work. Data from [194].

propagation due to entrapped fluid seems to be negligible knowing that the continuous passage of trains pushes the entrapped fluid out
due to the contact pressure ahead of the crack making refilling very difficult in busy routes [402].

6.4. Microstructure

6.4.1. Pearlite
By using grade R260Mn (Table 4) and and applying different cooling rates to achieve different grades of pearlite from lamellar to
globular, Shur et al. concluded that lamellar structures, as opposed to spheroidised ones have a higher RCF resistance, Fig. 47a, because
of the ability of such microstructure to strain harden to relatively large depths, thus spreading the deformation and reducing the
gradient of mechanical properties from the surface to the subsurface [194,403]. This ability comes from the ease of dislocation
generation at the carbide lamellae that can then create a fine ferritic cell substructure, a mechanism well-established in studies of
heavily drawn pearlitic wires [404,405].
The same conclusion that lamellar pearlite is more RCF resistant than a spheroidised one was also reached whilst simulating high
speed train conditions in wheel steel (500 km h− 1) despite the fact that the spheroidised structure had a 30% greater yield strength and
5% higher ultimate tensile strength at the same hardness than the lamellar pearlite [407]. It is important to point out that the
degradation mechanisms of each structure were quite different with the spheroidised pearlite showing a higher weight loss but a
smoother surface with some deep pits, whereas the lamellar one had shallower flake pits but a more fragmented surface due to cracks
propagating along the direction of plastic flow, formed presumably when plasticity is exhausted, as depicted in Fig. 39b.
In an evaluation of the effects of microstructural variations on the mechanical properties of eutectoid rail steels, it was concluded
that fatigue crack initiation was dependent on the interlamellar spacing, making coarse pearlite more susceptible to cracking, but with
little or no effect during the propagation stage [293]. Since most cracks in rails are not initiated by a process of fatigue but rolling
contact fatigue through plastic shakedown, ratcheting, or squats, it can be then said that refining the interlamellar spacing will not
necessarily improve its rolling contact fatigue properties, as it can its wear resistance [279,154,6,52,10].

6.4.2. Bainite
In a study that compared standard (STD) and head hardened (HH) pearlitic steels against three different bainitic steels: EBS-4,
carbide free with some granular bainite, EBS-5, lower bainite, and EBS-6, granular bainite (Table 4), it was seen that EBS-4 showed
the largest RCF resistance. This was attributed to its higher hardness, leading to the conclusion that RCF resistance increases with
strength irrespective of microstructure or work-hardening capacity [196]. The slip-roll ratio was not varied, which could highlight the

48
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

role of microstructure on rolling contact fatigue. Other studies have shown conflicting results, where not only the hardness but the size
and morphology of the bainite were strongly related to RCF since coarse/granular bainite provided less resistance to crack initiation
than the acicular type due to its high angle boundaries [408].
In full scale tests using commercial pearlitic and bainitic grades at specific points of the German railway network, bainitic grades
(DOBAIN380 and 430) showed as few head-check cracking as heat treated pearlitic steels (R350HT or 370LHT) in a 1300–1500 m
radius curve and the same wear rates, but in a heavy-haul track or at tight curves, the bainitic DOBAIN430 track showed no head-check
cracks, whereas R350HT exhibited such cracks even after 70 MGt, proving the superior resistance of the bainitic grades not only in RCF
but also by matching the wear properties of head-hardened pearlite [191].

6.5. Mixed microstructures

Mixed microstructures can be achieved either intentionally through heat treatment or accidentally due to chemical segregation,
stress-induced transformations, or localised temperature spikes due to friction that can induce tempering, recrystallisation, or even
partial reaustenitisation [313]. In most cases the unintentional creation of additional phases compromises the RCF resistance [194],
but the focus here is on intentional mixed microstructures.
In one study, grade 450HT (Table 4) was heat treated in different ways to achieve either a mixture of martensite and fine lamellar-
pearlite (the latter in amounts from 5–50%) or a fully martensitic state, adequately tempered to achieve the same hardness as the
mixed phase samples. The RCF resistance abruptly decreased as the amount of fine pearlite increased, inferring that mixed micro­
structures perform worse than those that are homogenous [194], presumably because deformation becomes focused in the softer
phase.
As a comparison, mixed microstructures have performed well as bearing steels, where fully nanobainitic structures are not hard
enough29 to provide enough dimensional stability, but a mixed microstructure containing martensite, residual carbides, retained
austenite, and 0.21 volume fraction of nanobainite (average hardness 825 HV) had a greater impact toughness (12 J) than the fully
bainitic steel (3 J), leading to a fivefold increase in the RCF life [411]. The reason for these differences between rail and bearing steels is
not clear, but the production scale in the former case is much larger, meaning that the heterogeneities are likely to be on larger length
scales, for example, as banding, rather than as a uniform mixture of phases.

6.6. Damage in wheels

Some of the most prevalent types of rolling contact fatigue damage in freight car wheels include spalling, shelling, and thread
cracking [218,412]. Spalling occurs when heavy braking/gross sliding raises the surface temperature above austenitisation giving rise
to martensite layers of 0.1–1.2 mm thick upon cooling, which can then fracture and spall. These spalls are normally caused by defective
brakes or due to inadequate lubricant use. Thread cracking refers to fine, angled surface cracks nucleated at the circumference of the
wheel thread as a result of ratcheting, which can develop into spalls (Fig. 48a).
Finally, thread shelling (Fig. 48b) resulting in craters ≈ 5 mm deep, with characteristic fatigue rings initiated at inclusions
[218,413]. By modelling the contact geometries of new and used wheels and rails, it was found that increasing the friction coefficient
proportionally increases the longitudinal and lateral maximum shear stresses and shifts the region of plastic flow from below the
surface (4 mm deep) to the surface, whereas changing the creepage alters the size and position of the contact patch [218]. The
particular combination of parameters that gives rise to these defects is, however, not established.
In order to investigate the qualitative influence of different parameters such as wheel diameter, radius of rail, residual stresses, and
vertical and horizontal loads on the rolling contact fatigue damage of wheels without tread braking, Ekberg constructed an equivalent
stress criterion model that evaluates the magnitude of the local shear stress, compares this against the fatigue limit of the material in
pure shear to dictate if damage occurs, quantifies damage as the number of cycles to failure for the current magnitude of stress, and
applies it to a failure criterion [414]. Results confirmed an increased damage for increasing load, decreasing wheel diameter, and
decreasing rail radius, as well as confirmation of the well-known [415,416] beneficial influence of compressive residual stresses, the
detrimental role of tensile residual stress, and the displacement of subsurface shear stress damage towards the surface for increasing
horizontal load. These parameters indicate that faster/heavy-haul trains as well as rail grinding (if it increases rail radius) increase the
propensity of wheel fatigue failure over wear.

6.7. Austenite grain size and pro-eutectoid phases

Using rail grade R260Mn (Table 4) heat treated to fine and spheroidised pearlitic microstructures with different austenite grain
sizes, R350HT, and a variation of R450HT containing Zr, V, Nb, and Ce (detailed composition not specified) but similar tensile strength
and hardness, it has been shown that smaller austenite grain sizes lead to a higher contact fatigue limit, as long as large carbide clusters
are absent [417,194,418,419], as illustrated on Fig. 47b. The mechanism for this improvement of the RCF performance is not
explained.
Other studies in a different context indicate that the austenite grain size has a minimal or no effect on rolling contact fatigue or the

29
maximum of 670 HV [409] compared to the minimum required 690 HV [410]

49
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 48. Wheel damage in the form of (a) spalls caused by advanced thread cracking and (b) thread shell (no scale in original source). Reproduced
with permission of Elsevier [218].

Fig. 49. Intergranular rolling contact fatigue cracking along prior austenite grain boundaries due to the presence of pro-eutectoid cementite.
Reproduced from [342] with permission of Elsevier.

time for crack initiation if the wear rate is so low so that cracks are not worn away [408]. RCF cracks can begin at the prior austenite
grain boundaries and then propagate intergranularly to a depth greater than the plastically deformed layers, suggesting that the
toughness at grain boundariesis important. This study was performed using cast bainitic grades intended for back-up rolls in hot rolling
mills.
In a study that characterised the microstructure of thirteen different premium rails from a variety of manufacturers, over a period of
five years, and numerically modelled the influence of microstructural features on mechanical performance, it was found that a smaller
( )
austenite grain size Lγ has a lesser effect in improving the yield strength and rolling contact fatigue resistance than solid solution
strengthening, pearlite colony size and interlamellar spacing [342]. In fact, it was not Lγ but the presence of pro-eutectoid cementite
( θ )
V V ≈ 0.05 along prior austenite grain boundaries, as seen in Fig. 49, that was most detrimental to RCF performance, fracture
toughness, elongation and wear resistance. Lowering the carbon concentration whilst keeping a slow cooling rate or increasing the
cooling rate from the hot-deformation temperature, as done for bearing steels [420], can suppress pro-eutectoid cementite with the
excess carbon leading to a greater fraction of cementite within the pearlite. If the pro-eutectoid cementite does form, one option is to
spheroidise the cementite at temperatures ranging from ∼600–700 ◦ C, in the case of plain eutectoid steels. Such process can be
accelerated by applying concurrent deformation, since the vacancy generation that aids lamellar fragmentation, rounding off, and
coarsening was shown to be proportional to the applied strain rate [421] – but this may not in practice correspond to the

50
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 50. Micrographs of pro-eutectoid ferrite in: a) untested rail sample, b) sample tested with a twin disc machine at 1500 MPa and 1% slippage
after 14013 cycles showing crack propagation along flattened pro-eutectoid ferrite regions, c) rail sample after 33 years of service exhibiting (1)
surface crack initiation at a pro-eutectoid ferrite band, (2) oxide filled RCF crack propagating along a ferrite band, (3) cracks propagating along
flattened MnS inclusions, and (4) cracks at fine angular brittle inclusions; and d) detail of surface crack initiation at pro-eutectoid containing prior
austenite grain boundaries and stifling when it reaches the pearlite front. Reproduced with the permission of Elsevier [361,423].

microstructure needed.
These studies suggest that it is not Lγ itself but embrittlement due to pro-eutectoid cementite formation that adversely affects rolling
contact fatigue life in rails. As an illustration, the negative influence of carbide networks at prior austenite grain boundaries that can
reduce the rolling contact fatigue life to half compared to spheroidised samples has been known for many years in the bearing steel
industry [422].
In the absence of pro-eutectoid cementite or severely flattened ductile MnS inclusions just below the surface, RCF cracks have been
observed to originate along strained prior austenite grain boundaries and not propagate beyond the length of a single grain (50 μm in
R220), at least until 55% of the ‘average RCF life’, based on numerous twin disc tests in which failure in the form of flake cracks was
monitored through an eddy current twin probe. The crack is stifled when it reaches a less favourably aligned grain boundary [423]. It
was concluded therefore, that the first half of the average RCF life is influenced by the microstructure, whereas the second half which is
driven by strain fields that propagate the crack to a length several times Lγ and can make neighbouring stifled cracks join up or ‘jump’
across thinned pearlite zones in order to comply with the strain, sometimes with the help of bridging inclusions, Fig. 50b [423,424]. In
fact, the size and shape of surface flakes was related to the dimensions of favourably aligned prior austenite grains of the surface after a
series of compression and unidirectional tractive stresses, Fig. 51. A somewhat similar observation was made by authors studying
mixed ferrite-pearlite microstructures who concluded that crack growth is dominated by the applied stress system and only influenced
to a lesser extent by microstructural features since cracks not always propagated along the softer ferrite on the boundaries [75].

51
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 51. Optical image of the cross section and SEM image of the surface of R220 at 45% of its RCF life, displaying a relationship between the early
crack flake size and the prior austenite grain size. The X, Y and Z correspond to the circumferential/horizontal direction, the horizontal/track width
direction and the vertical direction normal to the surface, respectively. Reproduced from [423] with permission of Elsevier.

Crack propagation in pearlite can occur in a cleavage fracture mode defined in terms of the fracture stress σf , which is that required
to initiate unstable fracture at a finite location, which was shown to be independent of Lγ , but increase with smaller interlamellar
spacings [153,425]. With regards to the tensile strength of pearlite, it sometimes is claimed to be independent of Lγ [153] and at other
times proportional to Lγ for a given interlamellar spacing [293]. However, Lγ is a coarse microstructural feature when compared with
interlamellar spacing, so it may not have a determining influence on strength. Instead, the tensile ductility δ, which is the strain
necessary to develop a critical-sized microcrack and to propagate it in an unstable cleavage mode, seems to decrease significantly with
increasing austenite grain size [153,293]. Nevertheless, such property is not precisely relevant in rolling contact fatigue but more in
the case of bending forming processes, for example, where the material initially is crack-free. In the case of the plane strain fracture
toughness30 KIc is independent of Lγ since the fracture plastic zone is much smaller [153]. However, the Charpy impact toughness is
inversely related to Lγ since fracture occurs at regions of common crystallographic orientation called cleavage facets or nodules so
having more of them in a fine grained austenite would provide more resistance to crack propagation [426,300,427]. Another property
that seems to have an inverse relationship with Lγ is the fatigue crack growth rate [428]. During RCF it is likely that cracks propagate
along embrittled grain boundaries as shown in Fig. 49 than in a cleavage (pure tension) mode since longitudinal wheel-rail contact is
after all a sequence of tension, shear and compression.
Proeutectoid ferrite at the austenite grain boundaries can accelerate RCF failure, either by aiding crack initiation or providing an
easy path for propagation, Fig. 50 [361,221,423]. The ferrite is soft so plastic strain within it is exaggerated [429,430,423]. This allows
the nucleation of short surface cracks that propagate along the direction of plastic flow and the pro-eutectoid ferrite bands Fig. 39a.
These cracks grow until they hit a pearlitic front or if the pro-eutectoid ferrite extends along a path that is not the most favourable for
crack growth [423]. The amount of strain hardening of the ferrite depends on its size, shape, and orientation with respect to the
straining direction [221]. When the volume percentage of pro-eutectoid ferrite was reduced from 5.8 to 2 wt% by cooling rapidly from
the austenitisation temperature, surface cracks instead originated at inclusions [431]. In no cases, either with high31 or low amounts of
pro-eutectoid ferrite32, were cracks seen to nucleate at the subsurface, most likely due to the plastic deformation and compressive

30
Macroscopic criterion for the unstable propagation of a pre-existing crack in an elastically loaded sample [153]. According to Pointner, KIc
cannot be used to estimage RCF crack growth rates, since it describes only high cyclic stress intensity factors valid for long cracks (>few mm) [272].
31
11 wt%; this content was maximised by cooling down slowly (4 h) from the austenitisation temperature to 610 ◦ C. The amount of this phase was
quantified through image analysis.
32
Rapidly cooled from the austenitising temperature to room temperature in 0.5 h

52
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

residual stresses introduced during cyclic loading [361]. The modelling of weakening due to the ferrite indicates that the observation
of enhanced RCF when the ferrite thickness is reduced could be explained if the pearlite then constrains it from excess strain [221].

6.8. Inclusions

We have seen that pro-eutectoid ferrite can be responsible for the initiation of cracks at the surface, whilst pro-eutectoid cementite
networks can provide a path for the propagation of cracks deep into the rail. In the absence of proeutectoid phases, strain flattened MnS
and other inclusions sometimes become prominent initiators of RCF cracks [361]. Earlier work indicated that the role of MnS was
especially important at high contact stresses and creepages, and that hard oxide inclusions also contributed to crack initiation [50].
These experiments were stopped as soon as an eddy current probe detected a crack, so the possibility of MnS inclusions or primary
ferrite initiating cracks later in the process cannot be categorically excluded [432].
The manganese sulphides in particular can occur in clusters often described as strings of defects, which under loading during track
service can lead to the formation of highly affected regions between individual defects with large strain gradients. The effect is
magnified if there happen to be instances of overloads [433,434]. The overloads can arise, for example, from structural vibrations on
bridges [435], high train-speed leading to dynamic overloads [436], or compromised vertical stiffness due to ballasting [437].
Non-metallic inclusions can be detected and quantified through different methods depending on the scale and resolution such as
local X-ray spectrometry, metallography and automated image analysis, or fractional gas analysis that measures the evolution of
oxygen during linear heating of the samples. Regarding the nature of inclusions, observations show that alumina inclusions are more
detrimental to RCF than silica or calcium oxide [194]; the Mohs’ hardness of alumina, silica and calcium oxide are 9, 6–7 and 3
respectively.
The general perception is that inclusions will be most damaging in fatigue rather than wear. However, parameters such as volume
fraction, size, elongation, orientation, elastic modulus relative to the matrix, bonding strength etc. must be taken into account. It has
been shown that the fatigue limit33 is only affected by the inclusion content when stringer inclusions (sulphides) are oriented parallel
to the stress axis, but not when they are aligned perpendicularly [438,439,406]. During bend tests on four different pearlitic steels, the
fatigue limit was particularly reduced by elongated or brittle inclusions rather than by their average size or the interlamellar spacing of
the pearlite [406]. In other words, the steel with longest, more brittle inclusions (spheroidal alumina silicates) had a lower fatigue limit
despite having a similar inclusion distribution and the finest interlamellar spacing of the samples studied (120 nm) [433]. This is in
spite of the fact that interlamellar spacing is inversely proportional to yield strength and yield strength is linearly related to the fatigue
limit [298,440]. The three types of crack initiation mechanisms observed in that study, i.e., microcrack initiation, interfacial
debonding, or inclusion fracture, highlight the complexity of the problem [406,441].

6.9. Carbon concentration

The explanation for why the contact fatigue limit in general increases with the carbon concentration of the steel is simple, that the
steel becomes stronger, Fig. 47c. Interstitial solid solution strengthening of ferrite by carbon is more potent than precipitate hardening
through cementite. Low-carbon martensite performs worse than pearlite of similar hardnesses during rolling contact fatigue [442], as
illustrated in Fig. 47d. With a martensitic microstructure, it may be difficult to retain the carbon in solution over the service life [433],
an effect well established in bearing steel [37]. The pearlite structure is in this sense much more stable than that of untempered
martensite.
The loss of carbon from the surface regions during heat treatment (decarburisation) creates a layer of ferrite on the rails, which
causes an increase of the rate of shear strain accumulation below the surface (∼225 μm deep), an increase of hardening rate, and almost
doubles the RCF crack growth rates due to the low hardness of ferrite [75]. The RCF cracks were initiated at the ferrite/pearlite
interface due to ductility exhaustion from the high contact stresses arising from asperity contact. However, since the depth of the
decarburised layer in real rails (0.5 mm) does not coincide with that from the maximum subsurface shear stresses (2 mm) [280,221]
and the ferrite strain hardens during rolling contact bringing down the crack growth rate to normal levels (55 nm cycle− 1) after the
initial cycles, it is likely that the contribution of decarburisation to RCF, at least on the wheel tread and railhead, is minimal and
unlikely to have a long-term effect [75].

6.10. White-etching layers

The description “white-etching layer” (WEL) comes from the fact that the structure within is so fine that it is attacked relatively
mildly by etchants when compared with the coarser, ordinary structure of rail, Fig. 52a. The very first high-resolution study of the
structure of WEL [443] revealed a highly deformed ferrite structure containing carbon in solution (e.g., Fig. 52b), with evidence that
the material in the layer was not a consequence of reaustenitisation followed by quenching by the bulk substrate to generate
martensite. Other results confirm this general conclusion. For example, the WEL is obtained after multiple traverses of the train to
accumulate the deformation, whereas the heating would be apparent after a single traverse [444].
However, not everyone agrees with this, largely because martensite-like structures have been observed in the WEL [445] or because

33
Fatigue limit defined in this case as the maximum possible stress so samples reach 107 cycles without crack initiation, as detected through
acoustic emission.

53
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

Fig. 52. (a) White-etching layer on R260Mn rail that had been in service between 1989–2007 on straight track. Reproduced and adapted from
[448] under CC BY 4.0 license. (b) Nanostructured carbon-supersaturated ferrite in white-etching region of a eutectoid steel rail that served for two
years on a 5◦ curve with an accumulated tonnage of 271 MGt. The inset shows an electron diffraction ring-pattern showing a large range of grain
orientations typical of such structures. Reproduced from [444] with the permission of Elsevier.

simulations relying on dynamic friction coefficients indicate that a temperature might be reached to induce austenite formation
[313,446]. White-etching layers also form during rail-grinding operations where there is likely to be substantial localised heating
[447], where the thickness, distribution and length of the WEL’s has been shown to depend on the grade of the rail that is ground. The
thickness is found to decrease substantially in the order R260, R350HT and R400HT, from 15 μm, 11 μm and 7 μm respectively
although the hardness of the layer is similar in all cases, in excess of 1000 HV. The surface temperatures reached have been estimated to
be well into the austenite phase field for all three rails.
It is possible that both types of explanations of white-etching layers are reasonable, depending on the details of the loading on the
rails.
The relatively soft (650 HV) white-etching layer formed at the top of low carbon steels (0.45 wt%) seems not to affect the rolling
contact fatigue properties but harder (1000 HV) layers that are associated with higher carbon steels can reduce the RCF life by 30%
[194]. The is because of the larger gradient of material properties that cause the layer to crack at its interface with the matrix; in some
cases the flaking is so ubiquitous that the WEL was completely eliminated.
The strengthening due to a higher carbon concentration will on the one hand increase the rolling contact fatigue resistance,
Fig. 47d, but on the other hand, increase the sensitivity of the steel to develop hard -and damaging- white-etching layers [194]. This
result matches what has been observed in bearing steels, where a quenched and tempered 1C-1.5Cr wt% steel (52100) readily
developed hard white-etching matter around cracks due of the rubbing action of their surfaces during cyclic loading that refines the
structure and enriches it with carbon via the dissolution of carbides [449]. No such structure was observed in a lower carbon (0.8 wt%)
carbide-free nanostructured bainitic steel tested under the same conditions of Hertzian pressure and cycles, mainly due to the lack of
carbides to go into solution [450]. If the white-etching matter forms in such a steel, then its hardness would be attributed to just the
refined size of the ferrite but not to carbon enrichment, suggesting that as in the case of the rail study presented above, this low
hardness of the white matter would have a lesser effect on the rolling contact fatigue life [451].

6.11. Environmental factors

One of the main interpretations of the effect of water on the RCF behaviour of rails is that it enter relatively benign cracks and under
the influence of rolling contact, act as an high-pressure wedge that dramatically raises the stress at the crack tip, causing it to advance
deeper than the deformation affected steel at the surface. The pressure pulses create tensile stresses at the crack front, or the reduction
of crack-face friction allows a shear mode crack growth [398]. A similar phenomenon can be observed in bearings where surface
breaking cracks fill up with lubricant, which transmits the contact load to the crack tip [278]. Full-scale rails that had been subjected to
traffic, were removed into a test facility where they were exposed to further traffic while covered with water-based marker fluid [216].
The experiments provided excellent evidence of fluid penetration into the cracks.
There is a review focusing on the role of moisture, on the development of cracks that are initiated on rails by rolling-contact fatigue
[452]; useful comparisons were made against rolling contact fatigue phenomena in bearings.
It is interesting that no signs of RCF were observed in rails tested dry or unlubricated, but occurred readily in the presence of
lubricants, such as water or grease, were later applied [453,198]. This is consistent with the appearance of pitting cracks appeared
after lubricant was added to a dry test on bearing steel [356]. There appear to be three further mechanisms by which water can affect
the development of fatigue damage on rails [452]:

1. if the water acts as a lubricant, there will be a reduction in the wear rate of the rail. This may in turn cause the persistence of surface-
initiated fatigue cracks which otherwise would be worn away. These cracks could then grow to sizes that are intolerable.
2. If water causes a decrease in adhesion, resulting in increased creepage, then the damage rate would increase.

54
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

3. The water participates in electrochemical reactions that lead to crack branching akin to stress-corrosion cracks. The reactions
would also introduce nascent hydrogen in the steel, which is well known to cause embrittlement. In bearings, the formation of
white-etching matter is greatly accelerated if the steel is charged with hydrogen [37]. Minute traces of water in the lubricant used in
bearings [454,455], just 100 ppmw of water dissolved in organic lubricant is detrimental. The water condenses from solution
within the oil, in surface microcracks and in this way becomes a potent supplier of corrosion–induced hydrogen at the crack tips
[456]. Water created through chemical reactions [457], or exposure to hydrogen sources through other corrosion reactions, can
lead to a reduction in bearing life. It has long been known that operating bearings in a hydrogen atmosphere leads to hydrogen
embrittlement and extensive surface pitting and flaking [458]. Indeed, hydrogen present in the atmosphere around a ball bearing
can be mechanically squeezed into the steel [459]. Hydrogen sulphide (H2 S) has a similar effect to hydrogen because it inhibits the
recombination of hydrogen atoms at the metal surface [460].

It is emphasised that the hydrogen embrittlement of rails is not in general a feature that controls the life or fabrication of rail steels.
Academic studies in which the rail steels are electrolytically charged with hydrogen, not surprisingly, exhibit embrittlement as would
most steels [30]. But reports of hydrogen-induced failures of modern rails are difficult to find.
Experiments have been reported on the use of dry, solid lubricants applied by rubbing against the railway wheel [461]. The ”solid
friction-modifier” is made by compacting polytetrafluoroethylene, molybdenum disulphide, talcum powder, all three are well-known
lubricants, together with carbon fibre, presumably acting as a binder. However, this does not seem to be a practical solution if a train
has to move over differently inclined terrains, and because the retention of the lubricant on the wheel lasts for a limited time especially
when slippage occurs.
The effect of temperature on rolling-contact fatigue damage is defined with respect to a neutral temperature TN , at which the rail is
neither in tension or compression. Deviations from this makes the stress within the rail go into compression when T < TN and vice
versa. Therefore, damage intensifies at low temperatures but has no significant effect for T > TN because any crack faces created are
then compressed together due to rail thermal-expansion [7].

7. Machine learning of rail steels

Machine learning is a powerful empirical method for the quantitative interpretation of complex data, with arbitrary non-linearity
[e.g., 462,392]. But in the context of rails steel metallurgy, which is the topic of this review, there are two important caveats:

• The method relies entirely on the availability of data that include all of the important variables.
• It requires a sufficient quantity of data, the sufficiency determined by the magnitude of the modelling uncertainty which will not be
constant in the data domain. The modelling uncertainty arises because many different models can be fitted adequately to sparse
data, each of which behaves differently when extrapolated or interpolated.
• A model needs to be assessed to see if it reveals new phenomena. It is not good to assess its utility by comparing against data used to
train it, because the networks are sufficiently flexible to model any dataset. It is the behaviour in extrapolation that matters.

A case in hand is a model based on limited inputs (hardness of rail and wheel, C, Mn, Si, Cr, V, pearlite interlamellar spacing) which
led to such great uncertainties when testing the effect of silicon concentration that it is impossible to extract useful information, Fig. 53
[463]. In another study, it is claimed that the machine learning on rail steel wear is validated against laboratory data but only on the
data used to create the model [464].
The conclusion has to be that a long-term data collection exercise that includes an array of assessed input variables and a variety of
outputs would reap benefits to machine learning models capable of creating new technologies.

Fig. 53. Estimates of the rolling contact fatigue life as a function of the silicon concentration of a rail steel. The uncertainties come from a Bayesian
interpretation of modelling uncertainty, so a large uncertainty indicates a lack of adequate interpretable information [463].

55
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

8. Summary

Steels in general offer a very wide range of mechanical properties and at the same time can be manufactured on a large scale at a
reasonable cost. Steels for rails are no exception – it has routinely been possible to manufacture rails with hardness in the range
260–400 HV to provide an optimum combination of wear and fatigue resistance that is appropriate for particular track configurations.
Rolling-contact fatigue and wear are the predominant factors in determining the maintenance-schedules and the useful life of rails.
The majority of rail steels have a fully-pearlitic microstructure, the interlamellar spacing of which can be manipulated to control
the final properties. This ‘manipulation’ relies on the cooling conditions from the austenitic state, with a secondary role played by the
substitutional solute content of the steel. The metallurgy of pearlite is well-understood and has been applied thoroughly to rail steels,
with some exceptions. For example, there have been no attempts to introduce pearlite that is strengthened by fine, interphase pre­
cipitation of both the cementite and ferritic phases [465,466]. Copper also can precipitate in pearlite [467], although the role of copper
in the context of possible problems during hot-processing would need to be looked at in detail. The use of thermomechanical control
processing has not been explored much as a tool to achieve fine microstructures with only one study focusing on getting the austenite
grain structure in a rail steel into a pancaked shape prior to its transformation into pearlite as a means to obtaining a finer ultimate
microstructure [321] and another using it to achieve very fine pearlite for high wear resistance, but neither the role of microalloying
additions nor the state of the austenite prior to the pearlite transformation are explained [294].
In contrast, bainitic steels, particularly the carbide-free bainitic steels, have had limited applications, presumably because those
based on pearlite serve the industry rather well. However, there is no doubt that they exhibit superior rolling contact fatigue resistance.
One problem, for which there is a dirth of published data, is that flash butt welding results in a region within the heat-affected zone
where the retained austenite may decompose, the consequences of which are not documented.
In terms of welding, both using the thermit process and friction butt welding, it is the production of a soft zone within the
microstructure in the heat-affected zone (whether that microstructure is pearlitic or bainitic) that seems to cause concern, especially if
the zone is wide. There are preliminary academic studies on the laser welding of rails, with the aim of reducing the total heat input and
hence inducing a narrow heat-affected zone; however, the cooling rates associated with the process can result in transformation into
martensite, so some form of preheating may be necessary [162].

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

Acknowledgements

Several productive discussions with Jai Jaiswal of ARR Rail Solutions Limited, and Peter Mutton of the Monash University, Institute
of Railway Technology are gratefully acknowledged. Their direct experience of the rail industry matters a lot in deciding what is
important and in need of attention.

References

[1] Ishizaka K, Lewis SR, Lewis R. The low adhesion problem due to leaf contamination in the wheel/rail contact: Bonding and low adhesion mechanisms. Wear
2017;378:183–97.
[2] Garnham J, Davis C. Rail materials. In: Wheel-rail interface handbook. Elsevier; 2009. p. 125–71.
[3] Bhadeshia HKDH. Steels for rails. In: Encyclopedia of Materials Science, Pergamon Press, Oxford, Elsevier Science; 2007. p. 1–7.
[4] Porfir’ev MA, Ivanov YF, Popova NA, Gromov VE, Shlyarova YA. Strain hardening of rail steel. Russ Metall (Metally) 2023;2023:485–91.
[5] Athukorala AC, De Pellegrin DV, Kourousis KI. Characterisation of head-hardened rail steel in terms of cyclic plasticity response and microstructure for
improved material modelling. Wear 2016;366:416–24.
[6] Clayton P. Predicting the wear of rails on curves from laboratory data. Wear 1995;181:11–9.
[7] Ghodrati M, Ahmadian M, Mirzaeifar R. Modeling of rolling contact fatigue in rails at the microstructural level. Wear 2018;406:205–17.
[8] Xu W, Zhang B, Deng Y, Wang Z, Jiang Q, Yang L, Zhang J. Corrosion of rail tracks and their protection. Corros Rev 2021;39:1–13.
[9] Schafer DH, Barkan CP. A prediction model for broken rails and an analysis of their economic impact; 2008. [Link]
2909025.
[10] Devanathan R, Clayton P. Rolling-sliding wear of three bainitic steels. Wear 1991;151:255–67.
[11] Bauri LF, Alves LH, Pereira HB, Tschiptschin AP, Goldenstein H. The role of welding parameters on the control of the microstructure and mechanical properties
of rails welded using fbw. J Mater Res Technol 2020;9:8058–73.
[12] Babachenko OI, Kononenko HA, Podolskyi RV, Safronova OA. Steel for railroad rails with improved operating properties. Mater Sci 2021;56:814–9.
[13] Wood N. A Practical Treatise on Rail-roads, and Interior Communication in General. London U.K.: Longman, Orme, Brown, Green, & Longmans; 1838. 3rd
Edition.
[14] Smith RA. Hatfield memorial lecture 2007 railways and materials: synergetic progress. Ironmaking Steelmaking 2008;35:505–13.
[15] Brooke D. The advent of the steel rail, 1857–1914. J Transp History 1986;7:18–31.
[16] Walsh WJ. The history of steel railway rails, Bachelor of Science thesis. University of Illinois; 1909.
[17] Osborn FM. The story of the Mushets. Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd; 1952.

56
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[18] Jaiswal J. Designing rail composition based on the understanding of rail degradation mechanisms, Tech. rep., Corus Rail, Track Engineering and Technologies;
2015.
[19] Solano-Alvarez W, Peet MJ, Pickering EJ, Jaiswal J, Bevan A, Bhadeshia HKDH. Synchrotron and neural network analysis of the influence of composition and
heat treatment on the rolling contact fatigue of hypereutectoid pearlitic steels. Mater Sci Eng A 2017;707:259–69.
[20] Solano-Alvarez W, Gonzalez LF, Bhadeshia HKDH. The effect of vanadium alloying on the wear resistance of pearlitic rails. Wear 2019;436–437:203004.
[21] Yates JK. Innovation in rail steel. Sci Parliament 1996;53:2–3.
[22] Chard AE. Deformation of inclusions in rail steel due to rolling contact. Ph.D. thesis. Birmingham, U.K.: University of Birmingham; 2012.
[23] Garnham J, Ding R-G, Davis C. Ductile inclusions in rail, subject to compressive rolling–sliding contact. Wear 2010;269:733–46.
[24] Song P, Li Y, Ren Q, Ren Y, Zhang L. Effect of Al2O3 content in inclusions on the precipitation of MnS during cooling of a heavy rail steel. Metall Mater Trans B
2023;54:1–15.
[25] Dudley CB. The chemical composition and physical properties of steel rails. J Franklin Inst 1878;106:361–90.
[26] Chang LC. Bainite transformation and novel bainitic rail steels ([Link] Cambridge, U.K: University
of Cambridge; 1995. Ph.D. thesis.
[27] Johnson WH. On some remarkable changes produced in iron and steel by the action of hydrogen and acids. Proc Roy Soc London 1875;23:168–79.
[28] Bhadeshia HKDH. Prevention of hydrogen embrittlement in steels. ISIJ Int 2016;56:24–36.
[29] Knupp GG, Chidley WH, Glove JL, Hartman HH, Morris GF, Taylor CW. A review of the manufacture, processing, and use of rail steels in north america- a
report of aisi technical subcommittee on rails and accessories, in. In: Rail Steels–developments, Processing, and Use: A Symposium, Vol. 644. ASTM
International; 1976. p. 7.
[30] Moon AP, Balasubramaniam R, Panda B. Hydrogen embrittlement of microalloyed rail steels. Mater Sci Eng A 2010;527:3259–63.
[31] Stock R, Pippan R. RCF and wear in theory and practice – the influence of rail grade on wear and RCF. Wear 2011;271:125–33.
[32] Pumpyanskiy DA, Tyutuunik SV, Kolokolov KA, Mescheryachenko AA, Murzin IS, Emel’yanov VV, Belonozhko SS, Arsenkin AM. Production of high-quality
wheel steel. Part 2. Nonmetallic inclusion composition and morphology. Metallurgist 2021;65:153–9.
[33] Wang Y, Zhang Y, Zhang L, Liu N, Ren Y. Effect of total calcium in heavy rail steels on the transformation of inclusions during heat treatment at 1473 K. Steel
Res Int 2021;92:2000605.
[34] Liu N, Zhang L, Chu Y, Ren Y. Effect of slag basicity on non-metallic inclusions in a heavy rail steel. In: Symposium on high-temperature metallurgical
processing. Berlin, Germany: Springer/TMS; 2022. p. 513–20.
[35] Jerebtsov D, Mikhailov G. Phase diagram of CaO-Al2O3 system. Ceram Int 2001;27:25–8.
[36] Koh SU, Jung HG, Kang KB. Effect of non-metallic inclusions and hot rolling process parameters on hydrogen induced cracking of linepipe steels. Korean J
Metals Mater 2008;46(4):257–66.
[37] Bhadeshia HKDH. Steels for bearings. Prog Mater Sci 2012;57:268–435.
[38] Cramb AW. Impurities in Engineering Materials: impact, reliability and control, Marcel Dekker AG, Basel, Switzerland (ed. C.L. Briant); 1999.
[39] Liu Y, Wu W, Liu L, Liu M, Li Y. Thermodynamics behavior of titanium for BOF smelting bearing steel. J Iron Steel Res, Int 2006;13:74–8.
[40] Bauri LF, Alves L, Pereira HB, Tschiptschin AP, Goldenstein H. The role of welding parameters on the control of the microstructure and mechanical properties
of rails welded using fbw. J Mater Res Technol 2020;9:8058–73.
[41] Grigor’ev AM, Kuznetsov MS, Shepelev DS, Alekseev EM, Grigorivich KV. Optimization of the continuous rail steel casting technology aiming to improve non-
metallic inclusion cleanliness. Steels Transl 2021;51:302–7.
[42] Micheletto A, Cookson J, Pang Y, Chen B, Mutton P. The structural integrity of flash-butt welded premium rail steel – evaluation of strength, microstructure
and defects. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2021;235:1006–12.
[43] Kabo E, Ekberg A, Maglio M. Rolling contact fatigue assessment of repair rail welds. Wear 2019;436–437:203030.
[44] Korpanec I, Rebeyrotte E, Guigon M, Tordai L. Increasing axle load in Europe: state of the art and perspectives. In: Proceedings of 8th International Heavy Haul
Conference, International Heavy Haul Association, Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2005. p. 227–235.
[45] Girsch G, Keichel J, Gehrmann R, Zlatnik A, Frank N. Advanced rail steels for heavy haul application – track performance and weldability. In: Proceedings of
the Ninth International Heavy Haul Conference, 2009, Shanghai, International Heavy Haul Association, China Railway Publishing House, Beijing, China; 2009.
p. 171–179.
[46] Board II. Train derailment at hatfield: A final report, Tech. rep., Office of Rail and Road, London, UK; 2006.
[47] Jack I. The crash that stopped Britain. London, U.K.: Granta Books; 2001.
[48] Zhang X, Zhang L, Yang W, Dong Y. Characterization of mns particles in heavy railsteels using different methods. Steel Res Int 2016;88:1600080.
[49] Smallwood R, Sinclair JC, Sawley KJ. An optimization technique to minimize rail contact stresses. Wear 1991;144:373–84.
[50] Beynon JH, Garnham JE, Sawley KJ. Rolling contact fatigue of three pearlitic rail steels. Wear 1996;192:94–111.
[51] Dudley CB. Does the wearing power of steel rails increase with the hardness of the steel? J Franklin Inst 1879;107:10–3.
[52] Perez-Unzueta AJ, Beynon JH. Microstructure and wear resistance of pearlitic rail steels. Wear 1993;162–163:173–82.
[53] Ueda M, Matsuda K. Effects of carbon content and hardness on rolling contact fatigue resistance in heavily loaded pearlitic rail steels. Wear 2020;444:203120.
[54] Heyder R, Girsch G. Testing of HSH® rails in high-speed tracks to minimise rail damage. Wear 2005;258:1014–21.
[55] Dhua S, Ray A, Sen S, Prasad M, Mishra K, Jha S. Influence of nonmetallic inclusion characteristics on the mechanical properties of rail steel. J Mater Eng
Perform 2000;9:700–9.
[56] Khourshid A, Gan Y, Aglan H. Microstructure origin of strength and toughness of a premium rail steel. J Mater Eng Perform 2001;10:331–6.
[57] Yu F, Jar PYB, Hendry MT, Jar C, Nishanth K. Fracture toughness estimation for high-strength rail steels using indentation test. Eng Fract Mech 2018;204:
469–81.
[58] Ochi Y, McEvily A. An evaluation of the fatigue crack growth and fracture toughness characteristics of rail steels. Eng Fract Mech 1988;29:159–72.
[59] L.P. Moreira, T.G. Viana, L.B. Godefroid, G.L. de Faria, L.C. Cândido, Effect of microstructure on fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth resistance of
pearlitic steels for railroad application. In: Proceedings of 23rd ABCM International Congress of Mechanical Engineering, ABCM, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2015.
p. 1–8.
[60] Sajuri Z, Alang NA, Razak NAA, Aziman M. Fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth behavior of rail track material. Key Eng Mater 2011;462:1109–14.
[61] Seo JW, Kwon SJ, Jun HK, Lee DH. Evaluation of fatigue and fracture characteristics of high-speed rail material, Journal of the Korean Society for. Precis Eng
2017;34:861–6.
[62] Aglan HA, Fateh M. Fatigue crack growth and fracture behavior of bainitic rail steels. J Mech Mater Struct 2007;2:335–46.
[63] Bhadeshia HKDH. Pearlite in steels. Florida, USA: Taylor & Francis (CRC Press, Routledge); 2024. ISBN 978-1-032-63192-9.
[64] Jaiswal J. Private communication to H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, elongation in rails; February 2024.
[65] Bandula-Heva T, Dhanasekar M. Failure of discontinuous railhead edges due to plastic strain accumulation. Eng Fail Anal 2014;44:110–24.
[66] Boonsukachote P, Kingklang S, Uthaisangsuk V. Modelling of mechanical properties of pearlitic rail steel. Key Eng Mater 2019;798:3–8.
[67] Liu P, Quan Y, Ding G. Dynamic mechanical characteristics and constitutive modeling of rail steel over a wide range of temperatures and strain rates. Adv
Mater Sci Eng 2019;2019:6862391.
[68] Iwafuchi K, Satoh Y, Toi Y, Hirose S. Fatigue property analysis of rail steel based on damage mechanics. Quart Rep RTRI 2004;45:203–9.
[69] Kapoor A, Beynon JH, Fletcher D, Loo-Morrey M. Computer simulation of strain accumulation and hardening for pearlitic rail steel undergoing repeated
contact, The. J Strain Anal Eng Des 2004;39:383–96.
[70] Panda B, Balasubramaniam R, Moon A. Microstructure and mechanical properties of novel rail steels. Mater Sci Technol 2009;25:1375–82.
[71] Lan Y, Zhao G, Xu Y, Ye C, Zhang S. Effects of quenching temperature and cooling rate on the microstructure and mechanical properties of U75V rail steel.
Metallogr Microstruct, Anal 2019;8:249–55.
[72] Scutti J, Pelloux R, Fuquen-Moleno R. Fatigue behavior of a rail steel. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater Struct 1984;7:121–35.

57
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[73] Yu F, Jar P-YB, Hendry M. Effect of temperature on deformation and fracture behaviour of high strength rail steel. Eng Fract Mech 2015;146:41–55.
[74] Aglan H, Gan Y. Fatigue crack growth analysis of a premium rail steel. J Mater Sci 2001;36:389–97.
[75] Carroll RI, Beynon JH. Decarburisation and rolling contact fatigue of a rail steel. Wear 2006;260:523–37.
[76] Cui L, Lei X, Zhang L, Yang W, Gao Y, Liu Y, Liu N. Three-dimensional characterization of defects in continuous casting blooms of heavy rail steel using X-ray
computed tomography. Metall Mater Trans A 2021;52:2327–40.
[77] Srimani SL, Basu J. An investigation for control of residual stress in roller-straightened rails. J Strain Anal 2003;38:261–8.
[78] Chen L, Yang M, Xu Y, Zhang Z, Li Z, Zhang F. Effects of cooling on bending process of heavy rail steel after hot rolling. Metallogr, Microstruct, Anal 2016;5:
196–206.
[79] Ringsberg JW, Lindbäck T. Rolling contact fatigue analysis of rails inculding numerical simulations of the rail manufacturing process and repeated wheel-rail
contact loads. Int J Fatigue 2003;25:547–58.
[80] Kang C, Wenner M, Marx S. Experimental investigation on the rail residual stress distribution and its influence on the bending fatigue resistance of rails. Constr
Build Mater 2021;284:122856.
[81] Wineman SJ, McClintock FA. Rail web fracture in the presence of residual stresses. Theoret Appl Fract Mech 1987;8:87–99.
[82] Wineman SJ, McClintock FA. In: Orringer O, Orkisz J, Świderski Z, editors. Residual stress in rails, Engineering applications of fracture mechanics, Vol. 12–13.
Dordrecht, Germany: Springer; 1992. p. 1–22. Ch. Residual stresses and web fracture in roller-straightened rail.
[83] Moser A, Pointner P. Head-hardened rails produced from rolling heat. Transp Res Rec 1992;1341:70–4.
[84] Webster PJ, Wang X, Mills G, Webster GA. Residual stress changes in railway rails. Phys B 1992;180–181:1029–31.
[85] Kuchuk-Yatsenko S, Didkovsky A, Shvets V, Rudenko P, Antipin E. Flash-butt welding of high-strength rails of nowadays production. Paton Weld J No. 5–6
2016:4–12.
[86] Prokof’iev O, Gubatyuk R, Rymar S, Sydorets V, Kostin V. Inductor for uniform bulk heat treatment of welded butt joints of railway rails. Solid State Phenom
2021;313:72–81.
[87] Weingrill L, Krutzler J, Enzinger N. Temperature field evolution during flash butt welding of railway rails. Mater Sci Forum 2017;879:2088–93.
[88] Enzinger N, Weingrill L. Private communication to H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, flash butt welding; January 2024.
[89] NPL, MTDATA, Software, National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, U.K; 2006.
[90] Farhangi H, Mousavizadeh SM. Horizontal split-web fractures of flash butt welded rails. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Fracture Conference, Vol. 7,
Yildiz Technical University Istanbul, Yildiz Technical University Istanbul, Istanbul, Turkey; 2007. p. 509–517.
[91] Procaro RR, Faria GL, Godefroid LB, Apolonio GR, Gândido LC, Pinto ES. Microstructure and mechanical properties of a flash butt welded pearlitic rail. J Mater
Process Technol 2019;270:20–7.
[92] Pereira HB, Echeverri EAA, Alves LHD, Goldstein H. Evaluation of the effect of heat input and cooling rate of rail flash-butt welding using finite element
method simulation. Soldagen & Inspeção 2022;27:e2701.
[93] Voronin NN, Seydakhmetov NB, Rezanov VA. Development of the combined flashing method in welding of rails. Weld Int 2017;31:984–7.
[94] Goldschmidt H. Process for the manufacture of metals or alloys of the same, Imperial Patent No. 96317, Germany; 1895.
[95] Messel R. Progress in industrial chemistry. Industr Eng Chem 1912;4:767–71.
[96] Shepard ER. Modern practice in the construction and maintenance of rail joints and bonds in electric railways, no. 62 in Technologic papers of the Bureau of
Standards, US Government Printing Office; 1920.
[97] de Souza KM, de Lemos MJS, Kawachi EY. Thermodynamics of thermite reactions for a new thermal plug and abandonment process. Continuum Mech
Thermodyn 2022;34:259–71.
[98] Mutton PJ, Alvarez EF. Failure modes in aluminothermic rail welds under high axle load conditions. Eng Fail Anal 2004;11:151–66.
[99] Mutton P. Private communication to H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, soft zone in welded rails; August 2022.
[100] Shira S. Linear friction welding for constructing and repairing rail for high speed and intercity passenger service rail, Tech. Rep. DOT/FRA/ORD-16/32, United
States. Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Research, Development, and Technology, Washington, D.C., USA; 2016.
[101] Bhamji I, Preuss M, Threadgill PL, Addison A. Solid state joining of metals by linear friction welding: a literature review. Mater Sci Technol 2011;27:2–12.
[102] Brouzoulis J, Josefson BL, Faes K, Andersson T, Maglio M, Jackman S, Janssens A. Orbital friction welding of steel bars – heat generation and process
modelling. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part L: J Mater: Des Appl 2023:1715–24.
[103] Shtrikman M. Linear friction welding. Weld Int 2010;24:563–9.
[104] Tan J, Gao Z, Ren S, Xu Q, Wang K, Zeng Q. Improving the microstructures and mechanical properties of u71mn rail steel liner friction welded joint by
normalizing treatment. Mater Today Commun 2024;38:107736.
[105] Andersson J, Ek J, Elfving F, Hæg J. Linear friction welding of rail materials. Sweden: Chalmers University; 2019. Tech. Rep. TME131.
[106] Mutton P, Cookson J, Qiu C, Welsby D. Microstructural characterisation of rolling contact fatigue damage in flashbutt welds. Wear 2016;366:368–77.
[107] Wahlstedt I. Fe modeling of orbital friction welding. Sweden: Chalmers University of Technology; 2016. Master’s thesis.
[108] Thomas WM, Nicholas ED, Needham JC, Murch MG, Temple-Smith P, Dawes CJ. Friction stir butt welding. International Patent Application December 1991;
no. PCT/GB92/02203.
[109] Dawes CJ, Thomas WM. Friction stir process welds aluminium alloys. Weld J 1996;73:41–5.
[110] Thomas WM, Dolby RE. Friction stir welding developments. In: David SA, DebRoy T, Lippold JC, Smartt HB, Vitek JM, editors. 6th Int. Trends in Welding
Research. Materials Park, Ohio, USA: ASM International; 2003. p. 203–11.
[111] Nandan R, DebRoy T, Bhadeshia HKDH. Recent advances in friction-stir welding – Process, weldment structure and properties. Prog Mater Sci 2008;53:
980–1023.
[112] DebRoy T, Bhadeshia HKDH. Innovations in Everyday Engineering Materials. Switzerland: Springer Nature; 2021.
[113] Masithulela F. Conceptual design of a friction stir welding machine for joining rails. South Africa: University of the Witwatersrand; 2009. Master’s thesis.
[114] Threadgill PL, Leonard AJ, Shercliff HR, Withers PJ. Friction stir welding of aluminium alloys. Int Mater Rev 2009;54:49–93.
[115] Bhadeshia HKDH, DebRoy T. Critical assessment: Friction stir welding of steels. Sci Technol Weld Join 2009;14:193–6.
[116] De A, Bhadeshia HKDH, DebRoy T. Friction stir welding of mild steel: tool durability and steel microstructure. Mater Sci Technol 2014;30:1050–6.
[117] Forsman O. Undersökning av rymdstrukturen hos ett kolstal av hypereutektoid sammansättning. Jernkontorets Annaler 1918;102:1–30.
[118] Darken LS, Fisher RM. Some observations on the growth of pearlite. In: Zackay VF, Aaronson HI, editors. Decomposition of austenite by diffusional processes.
Interscience publishers; 1962. p. 249–94.
[119] Hillert M. The formation of pearlite. In: Zackay VF, Aaronson HI, editors. Decomposition of Austenite by Diffusional Processes. New York, USA: Interscience;
1962. p. 197–237.
[120] Adachi Y, Morooka S, Nakajima K, Sugimoto Y. Computer-aided three-dimensional visualization of twisted cementite lamellae in eutectoid steel. Acta Mater
2008;56:5995–6002.
[121] Mintz B. Role of silicon in influencing strength and impact behaviour of ferrite and its likely influence at ultrafine grain size. Mater Sci Technol 2000;16:
1282–6.
[122] Zeng D, Lu L, Gong Y, Zhang Y, Zhang J. Influence of solid solution strengthening on spalling behavior of railway wheel steel. Wear 2017;372–373:158–68.
[123] Masoumi M, Echeverri EAA, Tschiptschin AP, Goldstein H. Improvement of wear resistance in a pearlitic rail steel via quenching and partitioning processing.
Scient Rep 2019;9:7454.
[124] Bhadeshia HKDH, Chintha AR. Critical assessment: the strength of undeformed pearlite. Mater Sci Technol 2022;38:1291–9.
[125] Ferreira VM, Mecozzi MG, Petrov RH, Sietsma J. Microstructure development of pearlitic railway steels subjected to fast heating. Mater Des 2022;221:110989.
[126] Leslie WC. Iron and its dilute substitutional solid solutions. Metall. Trans. A 1972;3:5–23.
[127] Bhadeshia HKDH. Cementite. Int Mater Rev 2020;65:1–27.
[128] Tewari SK, Sharma RC. The effect of alloying elements on pearlite growth. Metall Trans. A 1985;16:597–603.

58
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[129] Sahay S, Mohapatra G, Totten G. Overview of pearlitic rail steel: accelerated cooling, quenching, microstructure, and mechanical properties. J ASTM Int 2009;
6:1–26.
[130] Wang J, Zhang F, Yang Z. Effects of alloying elements and cooling rates on the high-strength pearlite steels. Mater Sci Technol 2017;33:1673–80.
[131] Bhadeshia HKDH. Theory of Transformations in Steels. Taylor and Francis Group, London, U.K.: CRC Press; 2021.
[132] Shilov VA SE, Shvarts DL. Aspects of the rolling of long rails on a universal rail-beam mill. Metallurgist 2016;60: 260–66.
[133] Nesterov D, Razin’kova N, Chernyakova L, Kisil B. Structure and mechanical properties of rails type r65 bulk-hardened in oil. Met Sci Heat Treat 1991;33:
331–6.
[134] Jabłońska M, Lewandowski F, Chmiela B, Gronostajski Z. Advanced heat treatment of pearlitic rail steel. Materials 2023;16:6430.
[135] Sinel’nikov V, Filippov G. Technological aspects of improving the quality and service properties of railroad rails. Metallurgist 2001;45:403–7.
[136] Bramfitt BL. Accelerated cooling of rail. Iron & Steelmaker 1991;18:33–41.
[137] Rodrigues KF, ao GMMM, Faria GL. Kinetics of isothermal phase transformations in premium and standard rail steels. Steel Res Int 2021;92:2000306.
[138] Yuryev A, Kozyrev N, Shevchenko R, Mikhno A, Gutak O. Phase transformations occurring during the formation of a welded joint from rail steel. In: E3S Web of
Conferences, Vol. 330. France: EDP Sciences; 2021. p. 02007.
[139] Kawulok R, Schindler I, Mizera J, Kawulok P, Rusz S, Opěla P, Podolinskỳ P, Čmiel KM, Mališ M. Transformation diagrams of selected steel grades with
consideration of deformation effect. Arch Metall Mater 2018;63:55–60.
[140] Chen P, Chen L, Xu J, Huang S, Xia Z. Formation mechanism of pearlite during thermal cycling in U75V steel rail repaired by laser directed energy deposition.
J Laser Appl 2021;33:101–6.
[141] Strife JR, Carr MJ, Ansell GS. Effect of austenite prestrain above the Md temperature on the Ms temperature in Fe-Ni-Cr-C alloys. Metall Trans A 1977;8A:
1471–84.
[142] Maki T, Tamura I. Microstructure and mechanical properties of martensite formed from work-hardened austenite. In: International Conference on Physical
Metallurgy of Thermomechanical Processing of Steels and Other Metals. THERMEC-88, Vol. 2. Tokyo, Japan: The Iron and Steel Institute of Japan; 1988.
p. 458–66.
[143] Christian JW, Mahajan S. Deformation twinning. Prog Mater Sci 1995;39:1–157.
[144] Chatterjee S, Wang HS, Yang JR, Bhadeshia HKDH. Mechanical stabilisation of austenite. Mater Sci Technol 2006;22:641–4.
[145] Belaiew NT. The inner structure of the pearlite grain. J Iron Steel Inst 1922;105:201–27.
[146] Hultgren A. Isothermal transformation of austenite. Trans Am Soc Met 1947;39:915–1005.
[147] Olivares RO, Garcia CI, DeArdo A, Kalay S, Hernández FCR. Advanced metallurgical alloy design and thermomechanical processing for rails steels for North
American heavy haul use. Wear 2011;271:364–73.
[148] Han K, Edmonds DV, Smith GDW. Optimization of mechanical properties of high-carbon pearlitic steels with Si and V additions. Metall Mater Trans A 2001;32:
1313–23.
[149] Ordonez R, Garcia CI, DeArdo AJ. Effect of thermomechanical processing and cooling rate conditions on the austenite decomposition behavior in
hypereutectoid steels. In: Austenite Formation and Decomposition IV, Vol. 10, Materials Science and Technology Conference and Exhibition, Texas, USA; 2010.
p. 1327–1335.
[150] Andrews KW. Empirical formulae for the calculation of some transformation temperatures. J Iron Steel Inst 1965;203:721–7.
[151] Schneider H. Investment casting of high hot-strength 12% chrome steel. Found Trade J 1960;108:562–3.
[152] Takahashi M. Reaustenitisation from bainite in steels. University of Cambridge; 1992. Ph.D. thesis, [Link]
html#Takahashi.
[153] Kavishe FPL, Baker TJ. Effect of prior austenite grain size and pearlite interlamellar spacing on strength and fracture toughness of a eutectoid rail steel. Mater
Sci Technol 1986;2:816–22.
[154] Clayton P, Danks D. Effect of interlamellar spacing on the wear resistatnce of eutectoid steels under rolling-sliding conditions. Wear 1990;135:369–89.
[155] Reed-Hill RE. Physical Metallurgy Principles. 2nd Edition. Boston, USA: PWS Publishers; 1973.
[156] Dollar M, Bernstein IM, Thompson AW. Influence of deformation substructure on flow and fracture of fully pearlitic steel. Acta Metall 1988;36:311–20.
[157] Li Y, Bushby AJ, Dunstan DJ. The Hall-Petch effect as a manifestation of the general size effect. Proc Roy Soc A 2016;472:20150890.
[158] Sugden AAB, Bhadeshia HKDH. A model for the strength of the as-deposited regions of steel weld metals. Metall Trans A 1988;19A:1597–602.
[159] E. 13674-1, Railway applications-track-rail-part 1: Vignole railway rails 46 kg/m and above, Tech. rep., National Standards Authority of Ireland, Dublin, Eire
(2011).
[160] Li H, Sun J, Zhao G. Research on rail wear of small radius curve in EMU depot. Railway Sci 2022;1:16–39.
[161] Lu P, Lewis SR, Fretwell-Smith S, Engleberg DL, Fletcher DI, Lewis R. Laser cladding of rail; the effects of depositing material on lower rail grades. Wear 2019;
438–439:203045.
[162] van Velsen S. Laser welding on rails. Delft, The Netherlands: Delft University of Technology; 2017. Master’s thesis.
[163] Basu J, Srimani SL, Gupta DS. Rail behaviour during cooling after hot rolling. J Strain Anal 2004;39:15–24.
[164] K. Mädler, A. Zoll, R. Heyder, M. Brehmer, Rail materials - alternatives and limits. In: Proceedings of the 8th World Congress on Railway Research, UNION
INTERNATIONALE DES CHEMINS DE FER, France; 2008. p. 18–22.
[165] Pointner P, Hierg A, Jaiswal J. Definitive guidelines on the use of different rail grades. Sweden: D4.1.5GL, Chalmers University; 2006. Tech. Rep. TIP5-CT-
2006-031415.
[166] Jaiswal PSJ. Crossrail rcf and wear study: literature review and data gathering. University of Huddersfield; 2016. Tech. Rep. IRR 184/14.
[167] Pang Y, Grilli N, Su H, Liu W, Ma J, Yu SF. Experimental investigation on microstructures and mechanical properties of PG4 flash-butt rail welds. Eng Fail Anal
2022;141:106650.
[168] Su H, Pun CL, Mutton P, Kan Q, Kang G, Yan W. Numerical study on the ratcheting performance of rail flash butt welds in heavy haul operations. Int J Mech Sci
2021;199:106434.
[169] Pawan A, Salleh Z, Zulkefli AH, Talib YM, Alsibramulsi A, Masdek NR. Tensile properties of the reclaimed steel rail flash butt joint. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng
2019;628:012008.
[170] Hao K, Di W, Zhao X-M. Surface temperature change of U75V 60 kg/m heavy rail during heat treatment. J Iron Steel Res, Int 2013;20:33–67.
[171] Wu H, Huang S, Li Z, Chen P, Tan H, Xia Z. Optimization of microstructure and properties in U75V steel rail cladding layers manufactured by laser melting
deposition and laser shock peening. Opt Laser Technol 2023;163:109436.
[172] Bkowski H, Piwnik J. Quantitative and qualitative comparison of tribological properties of railway rails with and without heat treatment. Arch Metall Mater
2016;16:469–474.
[173] Nesterov D, Sapozhkov V, Levchenko N, Dubrov V. Heat treatment of rail steel using induction heating. Met Sci Heat Treat 1990;32:589–94.
[174] Saeki K, Iwano K. Progress and prospects of rail for railroads, Tech. Rep. 105, Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Technical Report, Japan; 2013.
[175] Clare AT, Oyelola O, Abioye TE, Farayibi PK. Laser cladding of rail steel with Co-Cr. Surf Eng 2013;29:731–6.
[176] Rasmussen CJ, Fæster SF, Dhar S, Quaade JV, Bini M, Danielsen HK. Surface crack formation on rails at grinding induced martensite white etching layers. Wear
2017;384–385:8–14.
[177] Ekberg A, Paulsson B. INNOTRACK: Concluding technical report, Tech. rep., International Union of Railways (UIC); 2010.
[178] Pointner P, Joerg A, Jaiswal J. Deliverable D4.1.5, definitive guidelines on the use of different rail grades. Innotrack Project; 2009. Tech. rep.
[179] Li J, Han Z, Zhao H. Optimization of heat treatment process for high strength steel rail R400HT. Heat Treat Met 2023;48(6):101–6.
[180] R. Carroll, H.M. Smith, S. Jaiswal, U.S. Patent No. 8,430,976: Rail steel with an excellent combination of wear properties and rolling contact fatigue resistance,
Tech. rep., U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Washington, DC; 2013.
[181] A. Bevan, J. Jaiswal, A. Smith, M. Ojeda Cabral, Judicious selection of available rail steels to reduce life-cycle costs, Proceedings of the Institution of
Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of rail and rapid transit 234 (2020) 257–275.

59
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[182] H. Pereira, E. Ariza, D. Centeno, S. Souza, H. Goldenstein, L. Alves, A. Wilson, S. Lewis, Superior wear resistance of novel HP335 rail steel, in: Proceedings of
International Heavy Haul Conference, Brazil; 2023. p. 1–5.
[183] Wilby A, Corteen J, Lewis S, Lewis R, Fletcher D. Nano and micro-indentation driven characterisation of asperity and bulk plasticity at the surface of modern
premium rail steels. Wear 2023;530–531:205004.
[184] Woodhead DH. Investigating the performance of rail steels. J Huddersfield Student Res 2021;7:1–15.
[185] Secrodel P, Jaiswal J. Private communication to H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, performance of carbide-free bainitic rail; 2020.
[186] Anonymous, Bainitic low fatigue, [Link] 2022.
[187] Cristofari F. Moving points on high speed rail system, moving points on high speed rail system; 2022.
[188] Jaiswal J. Private communication to H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia, moveable point crossings; August 2022.
[189] Sysyn M, Kluge F, Gruen D, Kovalchuk V, Nabochenko O. Experimental analysis of rail contact fatigue damage on frog rail of fixed common crossing 1:12.
J Fail Anal Prev 2019;19:1077–92.
[190] Sun X, Wang P, Chen J, Hao C, Xu J. Analytical representations of inherent structural irregularities in turnout crossing with moveable point. Vehicle Syst
Dynam ahead-of-print 2022. [Link]
[191] Girsch G, Heyder R. Advanced pearlitic and bainitic high strength rails promise to improve rolling contact fatigue resistance. In: in: 7th World Congress on
Railway Research (WCRR2006). Montréal, Canada: World Congress for Railway Research; 2006. p. 2–10.
[192] A. Bevan, J. Jaiswal, A. Smith, M.O. Cabral, Judicious selection of available rail steels to reduce life-cycle costs, Proceedings of IMechE Part F: Journal of Rail
and Rapid Transit 234 (2018) 257–275.
[193] Turan ME, Ozcelik S, Sun Y, Ahlatci H, Cetin M. Residual stress measurement in R260 and R260MN quality rails. In: International Symposium on Railway
Systems Engineering, Karabük Üniversitesi, Karabuk, Turkey; 2016. p. 372–8.
[194] Shur EA, Bychkova NY, Trushevsky SM. Physical metallurgy aspects of rolling contact fatigue of rail steels. Wear 2005;258:1165–71.
[195] Bolton PJ, Clayton P. Rolling-sliding wear damage in rail and tyre steels. Wear 1984;93:145–65.
[196] Su X, Clayton P. Surface-initiated rolling contact fatigue of pearlitic and low carbon bainitic steels. Wear 1996;197:137–44.
[197] Markov D. Laboratory tests for wear of rail and wheel steels. Wear 1995;181:678–86.
[198] Sato M, Anderson PM, Rigney DA. Rolling-sliding behaviour of rail steels. Wear 1993;162–164:159–72.
[199] Bayer RJ. Mechanical Wear Fundamentals and Testing, revised and expanded. New York, USA: CRC Press; 2004.
[200] Wong JY. Theory of ground vehicles. USA: John Wiley & Sons; 2022.
[201] Six K, Meierhofer A, Trummer G, Bernsteiner C, Marte C, Müller G, Luber B, Dietmaier P, Rosenberger M. Plasticity in wheel – rail contact and its implications
on vehicle – track interaction. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2017;231:558–69.
[202] Vollebregt E, Six K, Polach O. Challenges and progress in the understanding and modelling of the wheel–rail creep forces. Vehicle Syst Dynam 2021;59:
1026–68.
[203] Chen H, Zhang C, Liu W, Li Q, Chen H, Yang Z, Weng Y. Microstructure evolution of a hypereutectoid pearlite steel under rolling-sliding contact loading. Mater
Sci Eng: A 2016;655:50–9.
[204] Trummer G, Marte C, Scheriau S, Dietmaier P, Sommitsch C, Six K. Modeling wear and rolling contact fatigue: Parametric study and experimental results. Wear
2016;366:71–7.
[205] Bower AF, Johnson KL. Plastic flow and shakedown of the rail surface in repeated wheel-rail contact. Wear 1991;144:1–18.
[206] Tyfour WR, Beynon JH, Kapoor A. Deterioration of rolling contact fatigue life of pearlitic rail steel due to dry-wet rolling-sliding line contact. Wear 1996;197:
255–65.
[207] Johnson KL. Contact Mechanics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press; 1985.
[208] Su X, Clayton P. Ratchetting strain experiments with a pearlitic steel under rolling/sliding contact. Wear 1997;205:137–43.
[209] Suh NP. The delamination theory of wear. Wear 1973;25:111–24.
[210] Makino T, Kato T, Hirakawa K. The effect of slip ratio on the rolling contact fatigue property of railway wheel steel. Int J Fatigue 2012;36:68–79.
[211] Ohyama T. Fundamental adhesion phenomena between wheel and rail at high speeds, some experiments with a high speed rolling test machine under water.
Quart Rep Railway Tech Res Inst Japan 1985;26:135–40.
[212] Trummer G, Lee ZS, Lewis R, Six K. Modelling of frictional conditions in the wheel-rail interface due to application of top-of-rail products. Lubricants 2021;9:
100.
[213] Suhr B, Butcher T, Lewis R, Six K. Friction and wear in railway ballast stone interfaces. Tribol Int 2020;151:106498.
[214] Carter FW. On the action of a locomotive driving wheel. Proc Roy Soc London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 1926;112: 151–7.
[215] Maya-Johnson S, Felipe Santa J, Toro A. Dry and lubricated wear of rail steel under rolling contact fatigue - wear mechanisms and crack growth. Wear 2017;
380–381:240–50.
[216] Fletcher DI, Hyde P, Kapoor A. Investigating fluid penetration of rolling contact fatigue cracks in rails using a newly developed full-scale test facility. J Rail
Rapid Transit 2007;221:35–44.
[217] Donzella G, Faccoli M, Ghidini A, Mazzu A, Roberti R. The competitive role of wear and RCF in a rail steel. Eng Fract Mech 2005;72:287–308.
[218] Zakharov S, Goryacheva IG. Rolling contact fatigue defects in freight car wheel. Wear 2005;258:1142–7.
[219] Fletcher DI. The influence of lubrication on the fatigue of pearlitic rail steel, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering. University of Sheffield; 1999.
[220] Fletcher DI, Beynon JH. Equilibrium of crack growth and wear rates during unlubricated rolling-sliding contact of pearlitic rail steel. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part
F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2000;214:93–105.
[221] Franklin FJ, Garnham JE, Fletcher DI, Davis CL, Kapoor A. Modelling rail steel microstructure and its effect on crack initiation. Wear 2008;265:1332–41.
[222] Deters L, Proksch M. Friction and wear testing of rail and wheel material. Wear 2005;258:981–91.
[223] Zhang W, Chen J, Wu X, Jin X. Wheel/rail adhesion and analysis by using full scale roller rig. Wear 2002;253:82–8.
[224] Gallardo-Hernandez EA, Lewis R. Twin disc assessment of wheel/rail adhesion. Wear 2008;265:1309–16.
[225] Olofsson U, Sundvall K. Influence of leaf, humidity and applied lubrication on friction in the wheel-rail contact: pin-on-disc experiments. Proc Inst Mech Eng,
Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2004;218:235–42.
[226] Lewis R, Trummer G, Six K, Stow J, Alturbeh H, Bryce B, Shackleton P, Johnstone LB. Leaves on the line: Characterising leaf based low adhesion on railway
rails. Tribol Int 2023;185:108529.
[227] Chen H, Kimura S, Ikoma K, Ishizaka K, Suzumura J, Hibino S. Evaluation test of tangential force coefficient under different types of fallen leaves. Wear 2023;
532–533:205072.
[228] Chen H, Ban T, Ishida M, Nakahara T. Experimental investigation of influential factors on adhesion between wheel and rail under wet conditions. Wear 2008;
265:1504–11.
[229] Chen H, Ishida M, Nakahara T. Analysis of adhesion under wet conditions for three-dimensional contact considering surface roughness. Wear 2005;258:
1209–16.
[230] Kapoor A, Franklin FJ, Wong SK, Ishida M. Surface roughness and plastic flow in rail wheel contact. Wear 2002;253:257–64.
[231] Johnson KL. The strength of surfaces in rolling contact. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Journal of Mechanical Engineering
Science 1989;Vol. 203. p. 151–63.
[232] Nowell D, Hills DA. Hertzian contact of ground surfaces. J Tribol 1989;111:175–9.
[233] Ishida M, Abe N. Experimental study on rolling contact fatigue from the aspect of residual stress. Wear 1996;191:65–71.
[234] Ponter ARS, Hearle AD, Johnson KL. Application of the kinematical shakedown theorem to rolling and sliding point contacts. J Mech Phys Solid 1985;33:
339–62.
[235] Ringsberg JW. Life prediction of rolling contact fatigue crack initiation. Int J Fatigue 2001;23:575–86.
[236] Manolov N. Acoustical method of investigation of contact of solids. Bulgaria: Report of Sofia Technical University; 1970. Tech. rep.

60
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[237] Manolov N. Acoustical method of investigation of contact of solids. Ph.D. thesis. USSR: Moscow State University; 1970.
[238] Krolikowski J, Szczepek J. Phase shift of the reflection coefficient of ultrasonic waves in the study of the contact interface. Wear 1992;157:51–64.
[239] Pau M, Aymerich F, Ginesu F. Distribution of contact pressure in wheel–rail contact area. Wear 2002;253:265–74.
[240] K. Kendall, D. Tabor, An ultrasonic study of the area of contact between stationary and sliding surfaces, Proc Roy Soc London A: Mathematical, Physical and
Engineering Sciences 323 (1971) 321–340.
[241] Haines DJ, Ollerton E. Contact stress distributions on elliptical contact surfaces subjected to radial and tangential forces. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1963;177:95–114.
[242] Woo KL, Thomas TR. Contact of rough surfaces: a review of experimental work. Wear 1980;58:331–40.
[243] van Dokkum J, Khajeh Salehani M, Irani N, Nicola L. On the proportionality between area and load in line contacts. Tribol Lett 2018;66:115.
[244] Müser MH. On the linearity of contact area and reduced pressure. Tribol Lett 2017;65:129.
[245] Paggi M, Ciavarella M. The coefficient of proportionality κ between real contact area and load, with new asperity models. Wear 2010;268:1020–9.
[246] Archard JF. Friction between metal surfaces. Wear 1986;113:3–16.
[247] Archard J. Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J Appl Phys 1953;24:981–8.
[248] Rigney DA. Viewpoint set on materials aspects of wear-introdection. Scripta Mater 1990;24:799–803.
[249] Jin Y, Ishida M, Namura A. Experimental simulation and prediction of wear of wheel flange and rail gauge corner. Wear 2011;271:259–67.
[250] Wang Y, Lei T, Liu J. Tribo-metallographic behavior of high carbon steels in dry sliding: I. Wear mechanisms and their transition. Wear 1999;231:1–11.
[251] Zakharov S, Komarovsky I, Zharov I. Wheel flange/rail head wear simulation. Wear 1998;215:18–24.
[252] Lewis R, Olofsson U. Mapping rail wear regimes and transitions. Wear 2004;257:721–9.
[253] Ashby MF, Lim SC. Wear-mechanism maps. Scr Metall Mater 1990;24:805–10.
[254] Lim SC, Ashby MF. Overview no. 55 wear-mechanism maps. Acta Metall 1987;35:1–24.
[255] Lim SC, Ashby MF, Brunton JH. Wear-rate transitions and their relationship to wear mechanisms. Acta Metall 1987;35:1343–8.
[256] Akagaki T, Kato K. Wear mode diagram in lubricated sliding friction of carbon steel. Wear 1989;129:303–17.
[257] Wang Y, Lei T, Yan M, Gao C. Frictional temperature field and its relationship to the transition of wear mechanisms of steel 51200. J Phys D: Appl Phys 1992;
25:A165.
[258] Fischer FD, Daves W, Werner EA. On the temperature in the wheel–rail rolling contact. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater Struct 2003;26:999–1006.
[259] Lewis R, Dwyer-Joyce RS. Wear mechanisms and transitions in railway wheel steels. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part J: J Eng Tribol 2004;218:467–78.
[260] McEwen IJ, Harvey RF. Full-scale wheel-on-rail wear testing: comparisons with service wear and a developing theoretical predictive method. Lubr Eng 1985;
41:80–8.
[261] Rosenfield AR. Wear and fracture mechanics: Are they related. Scr Metall Mater 1990;24:811–4.
[262] Danks D, Clayton P. Comparison of the wear process for eutectoid rail steels: Field and laboratory tests. Wear 1987;120:233–50.
[263] Welsh NC. The dry wear of steels I. The general pattern of behaviour. Philos Trans Roy Soc London A 1965;257:31–50.
[264] Welsh NC. The dry wear of steels II. Interpretation and special features. Philos Trans Roy Soc London A 1965;257:51–70.
[265] Wang Y, Li XD, Feng Z. The relationship between the product of load and sliding speed with friction temperature and sliding wear of a 52100 steel. Scr Metall
Mater 1995;33:1163–8.
[266] Wang Y, Gao CQ, Lei TC, Lu HX. Amorphous structure of worn surface in 52100 steel. Scr Metall 1988;22:1251–4.
[267] Vingsbo O, Hogmark S. Single-pass pendulum grooving – a technique for abrasive testing. Wear 1984;100:489–502.
[268] Kapoor A, Franklin FJ. Tribological layers and the wear of ductile materials. Wear 2000;245:204–15.
[269] Sasada T. Wear research in Japan: Trends and future directions. Wear 1984;100:561–77.
[270] Wang Y, Lei T, Liu J. Tribo-metallographic behavior of high carbon steels in dry sliding: Ii. microstructure and wear. Wear 1999;231:12–9.
[271] Steele RK, Reiff RP. Rail: Its behaviour and relationship to total system wear. In: Proceedings of the Second International Heavy Haul Railway Conference,
Colorado, USA; 1982. p. 115–64.
[272] Pointner P. High strength rail steels – the importance of material properties in contact mechanics problems. Wear 2008;265:1373–9.
[273] Sawley K, Kristan J. Development of bainitic rail steels with potential resistance to rolling contact fatigue. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater Struct 2003;26:1019–29.
[274] Chang LC. The rolling/sliding wear performance of high silicon carbide-free bainitic steels. Wear 2005;258:730–43.
[275] Bhadeshia HKDH. Bainite in Steels: Theory and Practice. 3rd Edition. Leeds, U.K.: Maney Publishing; 2015.
[276] Rotthäuser N, Muders L, Grohmann HD. Influence of surface-decarburisation area of the rail on rolling contact fatigue. Eisenbahningenieur 2001;52:62–5.
[277] Boulanger D. Rail metallurgical developments to address the changing needs of the railway, in. In: Proceedings of the World Congress of Rail Research; 2003.
p. 932–9.
[278] Voskamp AP. Microstructural changes during rolling contact fatigue. Ph.D. thesis. Technical University of Delft; 1996.
[279] Clayton P. The relations between wear behaviour and basic material properties for pearlitic steels. Wear 1980;60:75–93.
[280] B.E. 13674–1:2011, Railway applications. track. rail. vignole railway rails 46 kg/m and above, Tech. rep., British Standards Institute, London, U.K; 2011.
[281] Purbrick MC. The use of rail on british railways. In: Second International Heavy Haul Conference, International Heavy Haul Association, Virginia, USA; 1982.
p. 380–7.
[282] Gahr KHZ. Microstructure and wear of materials, Vol. 10. North-Holland: Elsevier; 1987.
[283] Bakshi SD, Shipway PH, Bhadeshia HKDH. Three-body abrasive wear of fine pearlite, nano-structured bainite and martensite. Wear 2013;308:46–53.
[284] Larsen-Basse J. Role of microstructure and mechanical properties in abrasion. Scr Metall Mater 1990;24:821–6.
[285] Moore MA. The relationship between the abrasive wear resistance, hardness and microstrcuture of ferritic materials. Wear 1974;28:59–68.
[286] Bhadeshia HKDH, Honeycombe RWK. Steels – structure, properties and design. 5th Edition. London, U.K.: Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann; 2024.
[287] Kalousek J, Fegredo DM, Laufer EE. Wear resistance and worn metallography of pearlite, bainite and tempered martensite rail steel microstructures. Wear
1985;105:199–222.
[288] Takahashi T, Nagumo M. Flow stress and work-hardening of pearlitic steel. Trans JIM 1970;11:113–9.
[289] Wang Y, Tomota Y, Ohmura T, Gong W, Harjo S, Tanaka M. Continuous and discontinuous yielding behaviors in ferrite-cementite steels. Acta Mater 2020;196:
565–75.
[290] Bhattacharyya S. Wear and friction in steel, aluminum and magnesium alloys I. Pearlitic and spheroidized steels. Wear 1980;61:133–41.
[291] Fegredo DM, Kalousek J, Shehata MT. The effect of progressive minor spheroidization on the dry-wear rates of a standard carbon and a Cr-Mo alloy rail steel.
Wear 1993;161:29–40.
[292] Underwood EE. Quantitative Stereology. Addison-Wesley Publication Company; 1970.
[293] da Fonseca Gomes GM, de Almeida LH, Gomes LCF, May IL. Effects of microstructural parameters on the mechanical properties of eutectoid rail steels. Mater
Charact 1997;39:1–14.
[294] Kimura T, Takemasa M, Honjo M. Development of SP3 rail with high wear resistance and rolling contact fatigue resistance for heavy haul railways. JFE Techn
Rep 2011;16:32–7.
[295] K. Tokunaga, T. Arimura, M. Yamaguchi, H. Fukuda, M. Honjo, R. Matsuoka, M. Takemasa, Development of SP4 rail with high wear resistance for heavy haul
railways, Tech. rep., JFE steel.
[296] Hall EO. The deformation and ageing of mild steel: III discussion of results. Proc Phys Soc B 1951;64:747–53.
[297] Petch NJ. The cleavage strength of polycrystals. J Iron Steel Inst 1953;174:25–8.
[298] Alexander DJ, Bernstein IM. Microstructural control of flow and fracture in pearlitic steels. In: Marder AR, Goldstein JI, editors. Phase Transformations in
Ferrous Alloys. Pennsylvania, USA: The Metallurgical Society of AIME; 1984. p. 243–58.
[299] Ray KK, Mondal D. Effect of interlamellar spacing on strength of pearlite in annealed eutectoid and hypoeutectoid plain carbon steels. Acta Metall Mater 1991;
39:2201–8.
[300] Hyzak JM, Bernstein IM. The role of microstructure on the strength and toughness of fully pearlitic steels. Metall Trans A 1976;7:1217–21.

61
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[301] Honeycombe RWK, Bhadeshia HKDH. Steels: microstructure and properties. 2nd Edition. London, U.K.: Edward Arnold; 1995.
[302] Sourmail T, Caballero FG, Garcia-Mateo C, Smanio V, Ziegler C, Kuntz M, Elvira R, Leiro A, Vuorinen E, Teeri T. Evaluation of potential of high Si high C steel
nanostructured bainite for wear and fatigue applications. Mater Sci Technol 2013;29:1166–73.
[303] Bakshi SD, Leiro A, Prakash B, Bhadeshia HKDH. Dry rolling/sliding wear of nanostructured pearlite. Mater Sci Technol 2015;31:1735–44.
[304] Takahashi J, Kobayashi Y, Ueda M, Miyazaki T, Kawakami K. Nanoscale characterisation of rolling contact wear surface of pearlitic steel. Mater Sci Technol
2013;29:1212–8.
[305] Langford G. Deformation of pearlite. Metall Trans A 1977;8:861–75.
[306] Gil-Sevillano J. Room temperature plastic deformation of pearlitic cementite. Mater Sci Eng 1975;21:221–5.
[307] Fegredo D, Shehata M, Palmer A, Kalousek J. The effect of sulphide and oxide inclusions on the wear rates of a standard c-mn and a cr-mo alloy rail steel. Wear
1988;126:285–306.
[308] Hernández FCR, Demas NG, Gonzales K, Polycarpou AA. Correlation between laboratory ball-on-disk and full-scale rail performance tests. Wear 2011;270:
479–91.
[309] Larsen-Badse J, Mathew KG. Influence of structure on the abrasion resistance of a 1040 steel. Wear 1969;14:199–205.
[310] Sarychev V, Molotkov S, Kormyshev V, Nevskii S, Polevoi E. Simulation of differentiated thermal processing of railway rails by compressed air. Steel Transl
2020;50:848–54.
[311] Baumann G. Formation of white-etching layers on rail treads. Wear 1996;191:133–40.
[312] Lojkowski W, Djahanbakhsh M, Bürkle G, Gierlotka S, Zielinski W, Fecht HJ. Nanostructure formation on the surface of railway tracks. Mater Sci Eng A 2001;
303:197–208.
[313] Takahashi J, Kawakami K, Ueda M. Atom probe tomography analysis of the white etching layer in a rail track surface. Acta Mater 2010;58:3602–12.
[314] Jahanmir S, Suh NP. Mechanics of subsurface void nucleation in delamination wear. Wear 1977;44:17–38.
[315] Cornell HH. Improvement in carbon rail steels by the addition of niobium. Can Metall Q 1983;22:347–51.
[316] Nalasco CA, Bordignon PJP, Oliveira EQ. Trilho niobraś 200 elevada resistêracia mecânica e ao desgaste para ferrovias de frafego infensoepesado (Niobrás 200
trail of high resistance mechanical and degassing strength for light and heavy freight railways). In: Alguns resultados da pesquisa technoógica na CSN, CSN,
Brazil; 1976. p. 7–13.
[317] Nolasco CA, Oliveira EQ, Leonardos G, Bordignon PJB. Niobium Si-Mn rail steel. In: Niobium ’81, TMS-AIME, Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA; 1984. p.
1041–1060.
[318] Feifei J. Performance and research of rail steel by added micro-alloy element niobium and vanadium. J Shandong Univ Build Mater 2001;15:364–6.
[319] Singh U, Singh R, Jha S. Influence of microalloying on fracture toughness and wear resistance of rail steel. Scand J Metall 1995;24:180–6.
[320] Liu C, Huang Y, Liu H, Jiang M. Effects and mechanisms of niobium on the fracture toughness of heavy rail steel. Adv Mater Res 2011;163:110–6.
[321] Ray A. Niobium microalloying in rail steels. Mater Sci Technol 2017;33:1584–600.
[322] Rigney DA, Glaeser WA. The significance of near surface microstructure in the wear process. Wear 1978;46:241–50.
[323] Li YJ, Choi P, Borchers C, Westerkamp S, Goto S, Raabe D, Kirchheim R. Atomic-scale mechanisms of deformation-induced cementite decomposition in
pearlite. Acta Mater 2011;59:3965–77.
[324] Heller W, Schweitzer R. Hardness, microstructure and wear behaviour of rail steels. In: 2nd Int. Conf. Heavy Haul Railways, Colorado Springs, USA; 1982. p.
282–6.
[325] H. Ichinose, J. Takehara, M. Ueda, High strength rails produced by two-stage flame heating and slack-quenching, in: 2nd Int. Conf. on Heavy Haul Railways,
Colorado Springs, USA, 1982, pp. 178–182.
[326] Fegredo DM, Kalousek J. The effects of mixed microstructures on wear. In: Proc. 2nd Int. Symp. on Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems.
Waterloo, Canada: University of Waterloo Press; 1987. p. 289–313.
[327] Ghonem H, Kalousek J, Stone D, Fracture and wear characterisitics of Cr-Mo bainitic steel, speciality steels and hard materials. In: Speciality Steels and Hard
Materials, Pergamon Press, Oxford, Pretoria, South Africa; 1982. p. 259–65.
[328] Clayton P, Devanathan R. Rolling/sliding wear behavior of a chromium-molybdenum rail steel in pearlitic and bainitic conditions. Wear 1992;156:121–31.
[329] Callender WR. Bainitic transformation and novel bainitic rails steels. Ph.D. thesis. University of Sheffield; 1983.
[330] Clayton P, Devanathan R, Dikshit V, Christensen DE, Danks D, Steele RK. Recent research on wear, deformation and fatigue of steels in rolling contact. In:
Proceedings of the international symposium on: rail steels-developments, manufacturing and performance. USA: Association for Iron & Steel Technology;
1992. p. 161–74.
[331] Mannes W, Hornung K, Rettig H. Testing of gears made of bainitic cast iron with spheroidal graphite. experiences with unalloyed spherical graphite cast
qualities. Antriebstechnik 1984;23:49–55.
[332] Garnham JE, Beynon JH. Dry rolling-sliding wear of bainitic and pearlitic steels. Wear 1992;157:81–109.
[333] Leiro A, Vuorinen E, Sundin KG, Prakash B, Sourmail T, Smanio V, Caballero FG, Gracia-Mateo C, Elvira R. Wear of nano-structured carbide-free bainitic steels
under dry rolling-sliding conditions. Wear 2013;298–299:42–7.
[334] Hodgson WH, Preston RR. Rails for the 1990s. Bull Canad Inst Min Metall 1988;81:95–101.
[335] Gahr KHZ. Influence of thermal treatments on abrasive wear resistance of tool steels. Zeitschrift für Metallkunde 1977;68:783–92.
[336] Hogmark S, Vingsbo O, Fridström S. Mechanisms of dry wear of some martensitic steels. Wear 1975;31:39–61.
[337] Vingsbo O, Hogmark S. Wear of Steels. Materials Park, Ohio, USA: ASM International; 1981.
[338] Schilke M. Degradation of railway rails from a materials point of view. Ph.D. thesis. Gothenburg, Sweden: Chalmers University of Technology; 2013.
[339] Ghosh G, Olson GB. Precipitation of paraequilibrium cementite: experiments, thermodynamic and kinetic modelling. Acta Mater 2002;50:2099–119.
[340] Kozeschnik E, Bhadeshia HKDH. Influence of silicon on cementite precipitation in steels. Mater Sci Technol 2008;24:343–7.
[341] Bhadeshia HKDH. Bainite in Steels. 2nd Edition. London, U.K.: Institute of Materials; 2001.
[342] Ordóñez-Olivares R, García CI, DeArdo A, Kalay S, Robles-Hernández FC. Advanced metallurgical alloy design and thermomechanical processing for rails steels
for North American heavy haul use. Wear 2011;271:364–73.
[343] Wu KM, Bhadeshia HKDH. Extremely fine pearlite by continuous cooling transformation. Scripta Mater 2012;67:53–6.
[344] McMahon Jr CJ, Cianelli AK, Feng HC. The influence of Mo on P-lnduced temper embrittlement in Ni-Cr steel. Metall Trans A 1977;8:1055–7.
[345] Bhadeshia HKDH, Honeycombe RWK. Steels: Microstructure and Properties. 4th Edition. Elsevier; 2017.
[346] Krauss G. Steels: processing, structure and performance. Metals Park, Ohio, USA: ASM International; 2005.
[347] L. Lianxiu, Z. Dongmin, X. Xiaolan, Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, Vol. 18A, Springer, US, 1999, Ch. A Study on Ultrasonic
Detection of Flaws in Welds of Rails, pp. 2115–2120.
[348] Independent Investigation Board, Train derailment at Hatfield: A final report by the independent investigation board, Tech. rep., Office of Rail Regulation; July
2006.
[349] Kemp R. Revisiting the causes of the hatfield rail crash, Tech. rep., Royal Academy of Engineering, London, U.K. (≈; 2022).
[350] Nierlich W, Gegner J, Bruckner M. X-ray diffraction in failure analysis of rolling bearings. Mater Sci Forum 2006;524–525:147–52.
[351] Coelho L, Dias A, Lieurade HP, Maitournam H. Experimental and numerical rolling contact fatigue study on the 32CrMoV13 steel. Fatigue Fract Eng Mater
Struct 2004;27:811–23.
[352] Lankford J, Kusenberger FN. Initiation of fatigue cracks in 4340 steel. Metall Trans 1973;4:553–9.
[353] WenTao L, Zhang Y, ZhiJing F, JingShan Z. Effects of stick-slip on stress intensity factors for subsurface short cracks in rolling contact. Sci China Technol Sci
2013;56:2413–21.
[354] Bakshi SD, Leiro A, Prakash B, Bhadeshia HKDH. Dry rolling/sliding wear of nanostructured bainite. Wear 2014;316:70–8.
[355] Seabra J, Berthe D. Influence of surface waviness and roughness on the normal pressure distribution in the hertzian contact. J Tribol 1987;3:462–9.
[356] Way S. Pitting due to rolling contact. ASME J Appl Mech 1935;2:A49–58.

62
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[357] Dawson PH. Rolling contact fatigue crack initiation in a 0.3 per cent carbon steel. Proc Inst Mech Eng 1968;183:75–86.
[358] Clayton JQ, Knott JF. Phosphorus segregation in austenite in Ni-Cr and Ni-Cr-Mn steels, Metal. Science 1982;16:145–52.
[359] Railtrack-plc, Rolling contact fatigue in rails: a guide to current understanding and practice, Birmingham, UK; 2001.
[360] Dirks B, Enblom R, Ekberg A, Berg M. The development of a crack propagation model for railway wheels andrails. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater Struct 2015;38:
1478–91.
[361] Garnham JE, Davis CL. The role of deformed rail microstructure on rolling contact fatigue initiation. Wear 2008;265:1363–72.
[362] K.J. Miller, The three thresholds for fatigue crack propagation, Vol. 27, ASTM special technical publication, eds R.S. Piascik and J.C. Newman and N.E.
Dowling, 1997, Ch. Fatigue and Fracture Mechanics, pp. 267–286.
[363] Vásquez-Chacón IA, Gallardo-Hernández EA, Moreno-Ríos M, Vite-Torres M. Influence of surface roughness and contact temperature on the performance of a
railway lubricant grease. Mater Lett 2021;285:129040.
[364] Bachchhav B, Bagchi H. Effect of surface roughness on friction and lubrication regimes, Materials Today: Proceedings 2021;38: 169–173.
[365] Tallian TE, Chiu YP, Amerongen EV. Prediction of traction and microgeometry effects on rolling contact fatigue life. ASME J Lubricat Technol 1978;100:
156–65.
[366] G.R. Miller, L.M. Keer, H.S. Cheng, On the mechanics of fatigue crack growth due to contact loading, Proc Roy Soc London A: Mathematical, Physical and
Engineering Sciences 1985;397: 197–209.
[367] Mackay TL, Alperin BJ, Bhatt DD. Near-threshold fatigue crack propagation of several high strength steels. Eng Fract Mech 1983;18:403–16.
[368] Ritchie RO. Influence of microstructure on near-threshold fatigue crack propagation in ultra high strength steel, Metal. Science 1977;11:368–81.
[369] Kaneta M, Yatsuzuka H, Murakami Y. Mechanism of crack growth in lubricated rolling/ sliding contact. Trans Am Soc Lubricat Eng 1985;28:407–14.
[370] Fletcher DI, Franklin FJ, Kapoor A. Image analysis to reveal crack development using a computer simulation of wear and rolling contact fatigue. Fatigue &
Fract Eng Mater Struct 2003;26:957–67.
[371] Frederick CO, Armstrong PJ. A mathematical representation of the multiaxial bauschinger effect. Mater High Temp 2007;24:1–26.
[372] Chaboche JL. Constitutive equations for cyclic plasticity and cyclic viscoplasticity. Int J Plast 1989;5:247–302.
[373] Jiang Y, Kurath P. Characteristics of the armstrong-frederick type plasticity models. Int J Plast 1996;12:387–415.
[374] Jiang Y, Sehitoglu H. Modeling of cyclic ratchetting plasticity, part i: development of constitutive relations. J Appl Mech 1996;63:720–5.
[375] Ekh M, Johansson A, Thorberntsson H, Josefson BL. Models for cyclic ratchetting plasticity – integration and calibration. J Eng Mater Technologyngineering
Mater Technol 2000;122:49–55.
[376] Franklin FJ, Widiyarta I, Kapoor A. Computer simulation of wear and rolling contact fatigue. Wear 2001;251:949–55.
[377] Sosnovskiy LA. Tribo-fatigue: wear-fatigue damage and its prediction. Springer Science and Business Media; 2010.
[378] Kalousek J, Magel E. Achieving a balance: the magic wear rate. Railway Track & Struct 1997;93:50–2.
[379] G. Donzella, F. M, A. Mazzù, C. Petrogalli, R. Roberti, Progressive damage assessment in the near-surface layer of railway wheel–rail couple under cyclic
contact, Wear 271 (2011) 408–416.
[380] Tyfour WR, Beynon JH, Kapoor A. The steady state wear behaviour of pearlitic rail steel under dry rolling-sliding contact conditions. Wear 1995;180:79–89.
[381] Olofsson U, Nilsson R. Surface cracks and wear of rail: A full-scale test on a commuter train track. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part F: J Rail Rapid Transit 2002;216:
249–64.
[382] RSSB, Management and understanding of rolling contact fatigue: Mechanisms of crack growth (t355 report), Tech. rep., Rail Safety and Standards Board,
London, U.K; 2007.
[383] Garwood MF, Zurburg HH, Erickson MA. Correlation of Laboratory Tests and Service Performance: Interpretation of tests and correlation with service, ASM.
Ch. 1951;1:1–77.
[384] Nishiyama S. Statistical analysis of fatigue test data. J Soc Mater Sci, Japan 1980;29:24–9.
[385] Peet MJ, Hill P, Rawson M, Wood S, Bhadeshia HKDH. Fatigue of extremely fine bainite. Mater Sci Technol 2011;27:119–23.
[386] G. Chalant, B.M. Suyitno, Effects of microstructure on low and high cycle fatigue behaviour of a micro-alloyed steel, in: M. Jono, T. Inoue (Eds.), Proceedings of
the 6th International Conference on Mechical Behaviour of Materials, Vol. VI, Pergamon Press, Oxford, Elsevier Science, Kyoto, Japan, 1991, pp. 511–516.
[387] G. Girsch, N. Frank, P. Pointner, New rail grades - a technical performance overview. In: 8th International Heavy Haul Conference, Vol. Safety, Environment
and Productivity, International Heavy Haul Association, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2005. p. 731–8.
[388] Clayton P, Brave G. Fatigue origination and growth experiment, FRA/ORD 91/18, US Department of Transportation; 1991.
[389] Ranjha SA. Effect of head wear on rail underhead radius stresses and fracture under high axle load conditions. Ph.D. thesis. Melbourne, Australia: Swinburne
University of Technology; 2013.
[390] Garber AK, Arsenkin AM, Grigorovich KV, Shibaev SS, Kushnarev AV, Petrenko YP. Analysis of various versions of the deoxidation of rail steel at OAO NTMK.
Elektrometallurgiya 2008;10:2–9.
[391] Grigorovich KV, Trushnikova AS, Arsenkin AM, Shibaev SS, Garber AK. Structure and metallurgical quality of rail steels produced by various manufacturers.
Metally 2006;5:72–87.
[392] Bhadeshia HKDH. Neural networks in materials science. ISIJ Int 1999;39:966–79.
[393] Smith KN, Watson P, Topper TH. Stress-strain function for the fatigue of metals. J Mater 1970;5:767–78.
[394] Pun CL, Kan Q, Mutton PJ, Kang G, Yan W. A single parameter to evaluate stress state in rail head for rolling contact fatigue analysis. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater
Struct 2014;37:909–19.
[395] Qiu X. Rolling contact fatigue behavior of three eutectoid rail steels. Ph.D. thesis. Oregon, USA: Oregon Health and Science University; 1987.
[396] Dikshit V. Rolling contact fatigue behavior of pearlitic rail steels. Ph.D. thesis. Oregon, USA: Oregon Health and Science University; 1992.
[397] Fletcher DI, Hyde P, Kapoor A. Modelling and full-scale trials to investigate fluid pressurisation of rolling contact fatigue cracks. Wear 2008;265:1317–24.
[398] Bower AF. The influence of crack face friction and trapped fluid on surface initiated rolling contact fatigue cracks. J Tribol 1988;110:704–11.
[399] Bogdaǹski S, Lewicki P. 3D model of liquid entrapment mechanism for rolling contact fatigue cracks in rails. Wear 2008;265:1356–62.
[400] Bogdaǹski S. Liquid–solid interaction at opening in rolling contact fatigue cracks. Wear 2005;258:1273–9.
[401] Hanson MT, Keer LM. An analytical life prediction model for the crack propagation occurring in contact fatigue failure. Tribol Trans 1992;35:451–61.
[402] Bogdaǹski S. A rolling contact fatigue crack driven by squeeze fluid film. Fatigue & Fract Eng Mater Struct 2002;25:1061–71.
[403] Karlsson B, Linden G. Plastic deformation of ferrite–pearlite structures in steel. Mater Sci Eng 1975;17:209–19.
[404] Ivanisenko Y, Lojkowski W, Valiev RZ, Fecht HJ. The mechanism of formation of nanostructure and dissolution of cementite in a pearlitic steel during high
pressure torsion. Acta Mater 2003;51:5555–70.
[405] Sauvage X, Copreaux J, Danoix F, Blavette D. Atomic-scale observation and modelling of cementite dissolution in heavily deformed pearlitic steels. Philos Mag
A 2000;80:781–96.
[406] Liu CD, Bassim MN, Lawrence SS. Management and understanding of rolling contact fatigue. Eng Fract Mech 1995;50:301–7.
[407] Li X, Ma X, Subramanian SV. EBSD characterization of secondary microcracks in the heat affected zone of a X100 pipeline steel weld joint. Int J Fract? 2015.
[Link]
[408] Green MR, Rainforth WM, Frolish MF, Beynon JH. The effect of microstructure and composition on the rolling contact fatigue behaviour of cast bainitic steels.
Wear 2007;263:756–65.
[409] Caballero FG, Bhadeshia HKDH. Very strong bainite. Curr Opin Solid State Mater Sci 2004;8:251–7.
[410] Zaretsky EV. Rolling bearing steels – a technical and historical perspective. Mater Sci Technol 2012;28:58–69.
[411] Liu H, Sun J, Jiang T, Guo S, Liu Y. Improved rolling contact fatigue life for an ultrahigh carbon steel with nanobainitic microstructure. Scripta Mater 2014;90:
17–20.
[412] Bevan A, Molyneux-Berry P, Eickhoff B, Burstow M. Development and validation of a wheel wear and rolling contact fatigue damage model. Wear 2013;307:
100–11.

63
W. Solano-Alvarez and H.K.D.H. Bhadeshia Progress in Materials Science 146 (2024) 101313

[413] Guzowski S, Michnej M, Zajac G. Tribological wear of wheel rims in rail vehicles in operating conditions. Tribologia 2016;268:91–9.
[414] Ekberg A. Rolling contact fatigue of railway wheels—a parametric study. Wear 1997;211:280–8.
[415] Cordiano HV. Effect of residual stress on the low cycle fatigue life of large scale weldments in high strength steel. J Eng Industry, A.S.M.E. 1970;92:86–92.
[416] Guo YB, Warren AW, Hashimoto F. The basic relationships between residual stress, white layer, and fatigue life of hard turned and ground surfaces in rolling
contact. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 2010;2:129–34.
[417] Segade V. Reliability growth of cementite steel, Mashinostroenie 216.
[418] Pan A, Dobuzhskaya A, Shur E, Galitsin G. Structure and properties of rail steel, microalloyed vanadium and titanium. Steel (Stal’) 2001;10:55–7.
[419] Vorozhishchev V, Devyatkin Y, Shur E, Kozirev N, Gulyaeva T. Quality of rails of dispersion-hardened steel. Steel (Stal’) 2003;8:64–70.
[420] P. Gembalova, J. Boruta, E. Grycz, K.M. Cmiel, Hot forming parameters research of bearing steel, Archives of Civil and Mechanical Engineering 721–28.
[421] Chattopadhyay S, Sellars CM. Kinetics of pearlite spheroidisation during static annealing and during hot deformation. Acta Metall 1982;30:157–70.
[422] Anonymous, The effect of carbide network on the life of AISI 52100 in rolling contact fatigue, Tech. Rep. May 6, Federal-Mogul Corporation, Derbyshire, U.K;
1982.
[423] Garnham JE, Davis CL. Very early stage rolling contact fatigue crack growth in pearlitic rail steels. Wear 2011;271:100–12.
[424] J.E. Garnham, D.I. Fletcher, C.L. Davis, F.J. Franklin, Visualization and modelling to understand rail rolling contact fatigue cracks in three dimensions, in:
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit, Vol. 225, 2011, pp. 165–178.
[425] Lewandowski JJ, Thompson AW. Microstructural effects on the cleavage fracture stress of fully pearlitic eutectoid stee. Metall Mater Trans A 1986;17:1769–86.
[426] Park YJ, Bernstein IM. The process of crack initiation and effective grain size for cleavage fracture in pearlitic eutectoid steel. Metall Trans A 1979;10:1653–64.
[427] Marder AR, Bramfitt BL. The effect of morphology on the strength of pearlite. Metall Trans A 1976;7:365–72.
[428] Gray GT, Thompson AW, Williams JC, Stone DH. The effect of microstructure on fatigue crack propagation in pearlitic eutectoid steels. Can Metall Q 1982;21:
73–8.
[429] Suh DW, Bae JH, Cho JY, Oh KH, Lee HC. Fem modeling of flow curves for ferrite/pearlite two-phase steels. ISIJ Int 2001;41:782–7.
[430] Eden HC, Garnham JE, Davis CL. Influential microstructural changes on rolling contact fatigue crack initiation in pearlitic rail steels. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2005;
21:623–9.
[431] Gray III GT, Thompson AW, Williams JC. Influence of microstructure on fatigue crack initiation in fully pearlitic steels. Metall. Trans. A 1985;16:753–60.
[432] Garnham JE, Beynon JH. The early detection of rolling-sliding contact fatigue cracks. Wear 1991;144:103–16.
[433] Kabo E. Material defects in rolling contact fatigue – influence of overloads and defect clusters. Int. J. Fatigue 2002;24:887–94.
[434] Li YD, Liu CB, Xu N, Wu XF, Guo WM, Shi JB. A failure study of the railway rail serviced for heavy cargo trains. Case Stud Eng Fail Anal 2013;1:243–8.
[435] Hai DT. Current status of existing railway bridges in vietnam: An overview of steel deficiencies. J Constr Steel Res 2006;62:987–94.
[436] Sol-Sánchez M, Moreno-Navarro F, Rubio-Gámez MC. The use of elastic elements in railway tracks: A state of the art review. Constr Build Mater 2015;75:
293–305.
[437] I. Gallego, J.M. noz, A. Rivas, S. Sánchez-Cambronero, Vertical track stiffness as a new parameter involved in designing high-speed railway infrastructure,
Journal of transportation engineering 137 (2011) 971–979.
[438] G.J. Fowler, A.S. Tetelman, Stress concentration effect of nonmetallic inclusions and its effect on fatigue crack initiation in rail steel, in: Proceedings of the 77th
Annual Technical Conference, Vol. 79, AREA, 1978, pp. 1–447.
[439] Ransom JT. The effect of inclusions on the fatigue strength of sae-4340 steels. Trans ASM 1954;46:1254–69.
[440] Nishijima S, Tanaka K, Sumiyoshi H. The defect size determining the fatigue limits of steels. In: Proc 6th Int Conf Fracture (ICF6), Vol. 3; 1984. p. 1719–26.
[441] Liu CD, Bassim MN, Lawrence SS. Evaluation of fatigue-crack initiation at inclusions in fully pearlitic steels. Mater Sci Eng, A 1993;167:107–13.
[442] Safonova KE, Velikanov AV, Vinokurov IY, Rabinovich DM, Ravzin YR. The composition of steel for high strength rails. Vestnik VNIIZT 1974;1:45–9.
[443] Newcomb SB, Stobbs WM. A transmission electron microscope study of the white etching layer on a rail head. Mater Sci Eng A 1984;66:195–204.
[444] Zhang HW, Ohsaki S, Mitao S, Ohnuma M, Hono K. Microstructural investigation of white etching layer on pearlite steel rail. Mater Sci Eng A 2006;421:191–9.
[445] Wu J, Petrov RH, Kölling S, Koenraad P, Malet L, Godet S, Sietsma J. Micro and nanoscale characterization of complex multilayer – structured white etching
layer in rails. Metals 2018;8:8100749.
[446] Bernsteiner C, Müller G, Meierhofer A, Six K, Künstner D, Dietmaier P. Development of white etching layers on rails: simulations and experiments. Wear 2016;
366–367:116–22.
[447] Bedoya-Zapata AD, León-Henao H, Mesaritis M, Molina LF, Palacio M, Santa JF, Ruda JS, Toro A, Lewis R. White etching layer (WEL) formation in different rail
grades after grinding operations in the field. Wear 2022;502:204371.
[448] Xu W, Zhang W. An investigation of the crystallography of pearlites nucleated on the proeutectoid cementite. Acta Metall Sin 2018;55:496–510.
[449] Solano-Alvarez W, Bhadeshia HKDH. White-etching matter in bearing steel: Part II: distinguishing cause and effect in bearing steel failure. Metall Mater Trans
A 2014;45:4916–31.
[450] Solano-Alvarez W, Pickering EJ, Bhadeshia HKDH. Degradation of nanostructured bainitic steel under rolling contact fatigue. Mater Sci Eng A 2014;617:
156–64.
[451] Bhadeshia HKDH. Anomalies in carbon concentration determinations from nanostructured bainite. Mater Sci Technol 2015;31:758–63.
[452] Cookson JM, Mutton PJ. The role of the environment in the rolling contact fatigue cracking of rails. Wear 2011;271:113–9.
[453] Sugino K, Kageyama H, Sato M. Effect of wheel and rail profiles on wear and fatigue behavior of rail. In: Contact Mechanics and Wear of Rail/Wheel Systems.
University of Waterloo Press; 1986. p. 435–50.
[454] Grunberg L, Jamieson DT, Scott D. Hydrogen penetration in water-accelerated fatigue of rolling surfaces. Phil Mag 1963;8:1553–68.
[455] Tamada K, Tanaka H. Occurrence of brittle flaking on bearings used for automotive electrical instruments and auxiliary devices. Wear 1996;199:245–52.
[456] Schatzberg P, Felsen IM. Effect of water and oxygen during rolling contact lubrication. Wear 1968;12:331–42.
[457] Imran T, Jacobson B, Shariff A. Quantifying diffused hydrogen in AISI-52100 bearing steel and in silver steel under tribo-mechanical action: Pure rotating
bending, sliding-rotating bending, rolling-rotating bending and uni-axial tensile loading. Wear 2006;261:86–95.
[458] Irving R, Scarlett NA. Wear problems associated with lubrication in inert atmospheres. Wear 1964;7:244–54.
[459] Deulin EA, Nevshupa RA. Deuterium penetration into the bulk of a steel ball of a ball bearing due to its rotation in vacuum. Appl Surf Sci 1999;144–145:283–6.
[460] Ciruna JA, Szieleit HJ. The effect of hydrogen on the rolling contact fatigue life of AISI 52100 and 440C steel balls. Wear 1973;24:107–18.
[461] Song J, Shi L, Ding H, Galas R, Omasta M, Wang W, Guo J, Liu Q, Hartl M. Effects of solid friction modifier on friction and rolling contact fatigue damage of
wheel-rail surfaces. Friction 2022;10:597–607.
[462] MacKay DJC. Information theory, inference, and learning algorithms. Cambridge University Press; 2003.
[463] Solano-Alvarez W, Peet M, Pickering E, Jaiswal J, Bevan A, Bhadeshia H. Synchrotron and neural network analysis of the influence of composition and heat
treatment on the rolling contact fatigue of hypereutectoid pearlitic steels. Mater Sci Eng: A 2017;707:259–69.
[464] Shebani A, Iwnicki S. Prediction of wheel and rail wear under different contact conditions using artificial neural networks. Wear 2018;406:173–84.
[465] Khalid FA, Edmonds DV. Interphase precipitation in microalloyed engineering steels and model alloy. Mater Sci Technol 1993;9:384–96.
[466] Khalid FA, Edmonds DV. Effect of vanadium on the grain boundary carbide nucleation of pearlite in high-carbon steels. Scr Metall Mater 1994;30:1251–5.
[467] Chairuangsri T, Edmonds DV. The precipitation of copper in abnormal ferrite and pearlite in hyper-eutectoid steels. Acta Mater 2000;48:3931–49.

64