ELEVATED ROAD-CUM-RAIL

CROSSING (ERR)
SYNOPSIS
Level crossings are locations of potential accident
& safety hazards. To achieve Zero accident target
we have to eliminate all U/M LC
Subways, outright closure & diverting the road
traffic to adjacent Subway/ROB/Manned LC are
being adopted as means to eliminate U/M LC &
ROB/RUB are constructed in lieu of manned LC.
an effort has been made to find an alternate to
eliminate U/M LCs by way of constructing low
cost ROB hereby termed as Elevated Road-
cum-Rail Crossing (ERR).
 Thickness of
Sl. Grade of
No concrete Slab Wall

1 M 30 550 550
2 M 35 500 500
PRELUDE

High Level Safety Review Committee Report Feb

2012, has recommended total elimination of all LC
within 5 years at an estimated cost of Rs. 50,000
crores.
The amount will get recovered over 7- 8 years due
to saving in operation and maintenance costs and
improved train operation.

Available alternate means to eliminate LC are not

adequate to achieve the gigantic task due to site
conditions.
This Elevated Road cum Rail crossing is very much
suitable where the height of bank is less (say 1m)
 EACH METHOD OF ELIMINATION OF LC
HAVE SOME DRAWBACK AS
OUTLINED BELOW
1. Manning:
It further requires gatekeeper, inter-locking, height gauges,
co-operation with other departments & periodical
maintenance.
i.More manned LCs
a) are costlier make train operations complex and
restrict line capacity
b) involve huge recurring expenditure in
maintenance.
c) results Train Loco Pilot has to face more
number of Gate signals which affects his
concentration on train running.
d) lead to increase in Punctuality loss of train in
case of Gate failure
 2.Subways (LUS/LHS)
Subway is a good concept but could not be
implemented at number of LC mainly because of
refusal by the State Government and site conditions.

Obtaining District Collectors approval for

closure of U/M LCs is an arduous task.
Drainage has been found one of the major
problem. Even if collection well is provided,
pumping out the water is becoming an issue as
local panchayat are not coming forward for the
same.

continued
3. DIVERTING THE ROAD THROUGH
ADJACENT MANNED LC/ SUBWAY:

4. DIRECT CLOSURE OF UNMANNED LC

(DUE TO LESS TRAFFIC):

Number of U/M LC located at ground level (or)

in cuttings could not be converted into
subways
Construction of ROBs will be un-economical

SOLUTION:
ERR crossing is more suitable for eliminating
both
manned & unmanned LCs located at shallow /
deep cuttings since necessity for longer
 ERR- RCC Box
Span width of RCC Box : 5.44m for single line.
Barrel length: 6.0m (app)
VC - Height of RCC Box: 7.0m (top of bottom slab to
bottom of top slab)
Thickness of bottom slab: 550mm.
Thickness of RCC Box wall & top slab: 500mm.
Leveling coarse & sand filling thickness below base
slab:150- 200mm.
Road work at approaches: Gravel filling, soling
200mm, sub-base course 150mm, base course
100mm, bituminous top 50mm.
Galvanized W Beam Crash Barrier at the approach
roads to act as parapet wall.
 1. RCC Tunnel Box proper
Prior to line block
i.Pre Casting of bottom slab of RCC box in segments of
width 1.272/1.90m
ii.Pre casting of box segments 1.272m in length and as
per the size/cross section
During line block
i.Dismantling of track to the required length
ii.Earth work excavation to the depth of 1.0m (app)
iii.Providing base course with sand filling for a depth of
150- 200mm
iv.Erection of precast RCC box bottom slabs in
segments & in staggered form
v.Erection of precast box segments by heavy duty cranes
With line blocks of short duration, the entire work can
be completed.
 2. Approach Road & Reinforced Earth
Retaining Structures
Steps involved:
i. Excavation (sub-clause 3103.1/MORT&H)
ii. Foundation Preparation (sub-clause
3103.2/MORT&H)
iii. Erection (sub-clause 3103.3/MORT&H)
iv. Facia Batter (sub-clause 3103.4/MORT&H)
v. Orientation of Soil reinforcing Element (sub-clause
3103.5/MORT&H)
vi. Backfill Placement (sub-clause 3103.6/MORT&H)
vii. Drainage (sub-clause 3103.7/MORT&H)
ADVANTAGE OF ERR (TUNNEL BOX TYPE)
1. No land acquisition is involved.
2. Wherever the embankment height is less,
provision of this elevated crossings (ERR) are
very much suitable.
3. Local authority may give consent readily.
4. Speedy construction at optimum cost.
5. No drainage problems.
6. No major equipments are required.
7. Duration of line block required may be less.
8. Widening of road, easing out road gradient etc., at
a future date is possible.
 DISADVANTAGE / CONSTRAINTS :

1. Construction of approaches beyond Railway

boundary may also be required to be carried out by
Railway & Further maintenance of approaches
beyond Railway limit is to be organized with State
Government.
2. Out of the total cost of about 3-4 crores, major works
involved in the construction are panel retaining wall
& galvanized W beam crash barrier.
3. More opt for single line sections and on D / E routes.
Hope that ERR
shall meet with
reasonably Good
success in IR.

Thank
you.!