US395149A - Oswald f - Google Patents

Description

0. F. JORDAN RAILWAY FROG.

Patented Dec. 25, 1888.

UNITED STATES arnnr rricE.

OSIVALD F. JORDAN, OF ST. THOMAS, ONTARIO, CANADA.

RAILWAY-=FROG.

SPECIFICATION forming part of Letters Patent No. 395,149, dated December 25, 1888.

Application filed septcmber 3, 1888. $erial No. 284,386. (No model.)

To all whom it may concern:

Be it known that I, OsWALD F. JORDAN, a subject of the Queen of Great Britain, residing at St. Thomas, county of Elgin, Province of Ontario, Canada, have invent-ed a certain new and useful Improvement in Railway- Frogs; and I do declare the following to be a full, clear, and exact description of the invention, such as will enable others skilled in the art to which it appertains to make and use the same, reference being had to the accompanying drawings, which form a part of this specification, and in which- Figure 1 represents a plan view of a section of railway-track, showing my improved frog. Fig. 2 is a sectional view of the block used between the end of the spring-rail and the track. v

My invention relates to that class of railway-frogs known as spring-frogs, in which a spring-rail is adapted to yieldingly hug the track-rail.

As is well known, the spring-frogs now in use have the end of the spring-rail loose, and it has been found that this loose end was the cause of much annoyance and many accidents, as, for instance, the wheels striking the loose rounded end will soon wear a groove therein, and light ears are apt to run up on this spring-rail and thus derail the car. So, also, should any brake-gear be dragging, the loose end is apt to catch it and tear the gear from the car or the gear tear the loose end up, in either case causing accident. In my construction, however, this spring-rail is lengthened somewhat and the end rigidly secured at a short distance laterally from the trackrail and at a slightly lower level than the latter, as will be hereinafter shown, thus dispensing with the objectionable loose end of the spring-rail.

In the drawings, A is the main-track rail, B the side-track rail, and a the frog or point of intersection of the two rails. O is the spring-rail, which is rigidly fastened at c, and from that point to the point 0 forms the maintrack rail. At the point 0 this spring-rail has the flange so dressed off that it will hug the frog through a short distance back from its point. At its end it is fastened to the track rail B and held at a distance of some four inches, more or less, from said traclcrail by a block, D, through which one or more bolts, 61, pass, thus holding the spring-rail firmly in place at this end. The springa'ail is thus fastened at both ends and the spring of the rail itself will keep it close to the frog-point except when the flanges of the wheels of a passing car spring it laterally. Should the spring in the rail be insufficient, an additional spring, E, may be employed to ire-enforce it, although ordinarily the elasticity of the rail itself will SlllIlCG to keep it adjacent to the frog-point. The spring-rail C may also be given a greater or less amount of elasticity by shortening or lengthening the distance between the point of contact with the frog-point and the block by which it is fastened to the rail B, or by giving the rail more or less curvature and not move the block.

The block D, used in fastening the end of the spring-rail, may be so shaped, as shown 111 Fig. 2, that the end of the said rail maybe kept at a slightly lower level than the trackrail, thus preventing this end from having any up-and-down motion and causing accidents.

The many advantages of my improvement will now be understood. Heretofore, the end of the spring-rail being loose and a train approaching and striking this end quickly, gives it a sharp lateral motion that has oftentimes broken the rail at the portion where the flange was dressed off, since the flange on the opposite side acts as a leverage to break the rail, whereas with my improvement, the end being fastened, the lateral pressure on the middle of the rail reversed and there is no flangeleverage to break the rail. So, also, by fastening the spring-rail at both ends it is prevented from being moved by the creeping of the rails.

Another advantage derived is the formation of an effective foot-guard by the block used in fastening the end of the spring-rail.

Still another advantage is the increased length of the spring-rail, thus enabling the rear truck of one car to keep the spring-rail open until the forward truck of the next car catches it.

IVhat I claim is- 1. In a railwayafrog mechanism, the combination, with the mainand side track rails, of

a spring-rail rigidly fastened to and forming a part of the main rail atone end and rigidly fastened at the other by means of the block D, substantially as described.

2. In a railway-frog mechanism, the combination, With the main and side track rails, of a spring-rail fastened against horizontal movement at both ends and adapted to have alateral motion toward the frog-point, and a reenforcing spring or springs, E, substantially as described.

3. In a railway-frog mechanism, the combination, With the main and side track rails, of a spring-rail rigidly fastened to and forming a part of the main rail at one end and rigidly fastened at the other at a lower level than the track-rail, substantially as described.

In testimony whereof I sign this specification in the presence of two Witnesses.

OSWVALD F. JORDAN.

Witnesses: l

W. HORTON, WAIT HUNSINGER.

Images