-- - ---- '

. 7.,'1--\
"
f) 4J3.~.I
-"' ...
c... FAX NO. :--23860286 22 Apr . 2 015 5:22PM P2

.. ... -"" Northern Railway

Office of the
Chief Admn.Officer
Udhamplll"-S rina gar- Baram ulln
Rail Link Project
Satyam Resort Complex, Trikuta Nagar
Jrunmt1

No.Jef;C-1!/Chenab/Pt .XXI Dated: 22.04.2016

Lordiriating HOD
Konkan Railway Corpor~tion Ltd.
Satyam Resort Complex
Jammu

Sub :- Design a.nd Construction of Special Bridge across the Ri.vcr

Chenab at Km 50/800 on Katra-Laole section of Udhampur-Srinagar-
Baramulla Rail Link Project - Submission of ITP for HSFG Bolts, Nuts'
and Washers.

Ref; E-mail received on .20.-0-4:201 Q.

..~, ..
'; : . . : ~:~ ......

Reference above, the ITP/~ubmitted by y~~. has been studied, examined. by

this office and the observations are
as follows: '
l. The ITP does nott contain the item about 'coating on the HSFG Bo.Its,
Nu ts and Washer~.' It see his that till" date KHCL is undeci sive about the
type of coating to b~ used. Kindiy conf~ the type of coating to be done
on HSFG Bolts, Nuts.: and Washers an.Ct .i ncopotate the same in the ITP
it.self. .. . _.,...
2. As per the ITP submittedi.- eice.p(fue identification of source (Ra\V
materia l inspection), items such as visual and dimensional check ,
mechimical testin.g, the approval is to be accorded by KRCL. 1t needs to
be changed a s be~g th~ important items, the approval will be given by
Northern Railway.
3 . At some locations, "Property class 10 grade" is to be rewritten as
"Proper ty class l0.9 gm.de".
4. As per the ITP, lS codes have been followed but the proof consultant
M/s Flint and Neil advises and its comment n.o. l is being reproduced
in ve rbatim a s: "BS 5400-3 is the design standard and HSFG bolts are
to be supplied to BS 4395-2. The proposal is to supply bolts to IS 3757,
which refers to IS 1367, which is the Indian equivalent of ISO 898. It
s~1ould _ be clarified that ISO 898 will not provide the required
chm en s.:ons for the HSFG bolts as ISO 898 nut dimensions are not
~uitab~e fo r this application - the thinner nut thicknesse~ may cause
the nut to fail during assembly or the bolt threads to fail in the nut~
ri,,,. , <:P a? l nf J:t~ ~N ld .~QQ_l r-
.cinpf'nP.<> that th" n11t hP;aht mn<:t hr
FROM FAX NO. : --23860286 22 Apr. 2016 5:23PM P3

.. .
It clearly odviscs- for the use of BS EN 14399 instead of Indian standard
codes. So ITP ner-ds to be revised.
5. As per Flint & Neil's comment no. 4 in verbatim as: u Using BS 4395-2

'grade 2' bolts up to and including M24 diameter does not provide any
advantage over BS 4395-1 'general grade' bolts as a redu ction factor of
0.85 is applied - see Clause 14.5.4.3 of BS 5400-3. The designer sh01.t ld
confirm this is the case for their design and whether there is any reason
why general grade (8.8) bolts cannot be used in lieu of grade 10.9 bolts
for diameters up to M24. Using general grade bolts will mean that a
wider choice of tightening methods including part-tum will be
available." The comments from designer M/s LAP and M/s WSP are to
be taken in this regard and forwarded to NR for better appreciation.
o. The tightening method of the bolts $hould also be clearly mentioned
and incorporated in the ITP.
7. It is not known who has signed the ITP. Names and designations should
be indicated.
8. ITP is shown as revision R4 dated 21.03.2016. The earlier versions may
be provided.
9. Proof consultant h!='S indicated . incomplete information regarding PTFE
coating. Full details of PTF'E coating and its life and properties of HSFG
bolts using Pl'FE be obtained for proper evaluation from manufacturer
and paint consultants. ,. -- . ~.:. ~- .......
10. Earlier galvanised HSFG bolts were a1$0 being discussed. What would
be assur;nce of corrosion protection of .tioJts assembly depending only
upon the in-situ pb.int or Geomet plus in~situ paint?
l l. Copy of original l.e tter/e-mail of t"N Ref 1471 be provided.
12. Kindly reference to note no. 6 of FN Ref 1471, the range of k value for
each coating are not available to consultant.
13. Kindly reference. to . note no. 7 of : FN Ref 1471, consultant has I
indicated incomplete data regarding tlie protection time. This needs to I
be clarified to him .fo.r hm;,tojticige best solution.
.!
14. Details from other companies e.g. Sundaram Fasteners could also be
obtained. Other coating solutions such as Dacromet may a.lso be
commented upon.
15. If consultant js recommending Oeomet, why ITP is indicating Zinc .
phophate coating With oiling?

Your comments/ a ction ta.ken report should reach this office with in 7 days of
receipt of this letter.

{Sur~
CAO/USBRL