Legalize
Legalize / European Union / Regulation

Commission Regulation (EU) No 1299/2014 of 18 November 2014 on the technical specifications for interoperability relating to the ‘infrastructure’ subsystem of the rail system in the European Union Text with EEA relevance

Type Regulation
Publication 2014-12-12
Last updated 2023-09-28
State In force
Department European Commission
Source EUR-Lex
articles 13
Reform history JSON API
  • (3) For platforms where only passenger trains that are explicitly listed as excluded from the scope of Commission Regulation (EU) No 1302/2014 (‘TSI LOC&PAS’) ([^E0010]) in its point 1.1 are intended to stop in normal service, different provisions for the nominal platform height might apply.
  • (4) Instead of points (1) and (2), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system the nominal platform height shall be 200 mm or 550 mm above the running surface.  These values shall be considered with a tolerance of -10/+20 mm.
  • (5) Instead of points (1) and (2), for the 1 600  mm track gauge system the nominal platform height shall be 915 mm above the running surface.
4.2.9.3.   Platform offset
  • (1) The distance between the track centre and the platform edge parallel to the running plane (bq), as defined in the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [3], shall be set on the basis of the installation limit gauge (bqlim). The installation limit gauge shall be calculated on the basis of the gauge G1.
  • (2) The platform shall be built close to the gauge within a maximum tolerance of 50 mm. The value for bq shall therefore respond to: bqlim ≤ bq ≤ bqlim + 50 mm.
  • (3) Instead of points (1) and (2), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system the platform offset shall be:
  • (a) 1 920  mm for platforms with heights of 550 mm and
  • (b) 1 745  mm for platforms with height of 200 mm. These values shall be considered with a tolerance of -10/+10 mm.
  • (4) Instead of points (1) and (2), for the 1 600  mm track gauge system the platform offset shall be 1 560  mm.
4.2.9.4.   Track layout alongside platforms
  • (1) Track adjacent to the platforms for new lines shall preferably be straight, but shall nowhere have a radius of less than 300 m.
  • (2) No values are specified for an existing track alongside new, renewed or upgraded platforms.
4.2.10.   Health, safety and environment
4.2.10.1.   Maximum pressure variations in tunnels
  • (1)Any new tunnel or underground structure falling in the categories described in the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [14], has to provide that maximum pressure variation, caused by the passage of a train running at the maximum allowed speed in the tunnel, do not exceed 10 kPa during the time taken for the train to pass through the tunnel.
  • (2)The requirement of point (1) has to be fulfilled along the outside of any train complying with the TSI LOC&PAS.
  • (3)In the case of upgrading or renewal of the infrastructure subsystem, existing tunnel or underground structure intended to be operated at speeds greater than or equal to 200 km/h has to provide that maximum pressure variation, caused by the passage of a train running at the maximum allowed speed in the tunnel, do not exceed 10 kPa during the time taken for the train to pass through the tunnel. The assessment has to be performed in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [14], or in point 6.2.4.12(1) when it is not possible to apply a simplified conformity assessment.
4.2.10.2.   Effect of crosswinds
  • (1) A line is interoperable from the cross wind point of view if safety is ensured for a reference train running along that line under the most critical operational conditions.
  • (2) The rules for proving conformity shall take into account the characteristic wind curves of the reference trains defined in the LOC&PAS TSI.
  • (3) If safety cannot be achieved without mitigating measures, either due to the geographic situation or to other specific features of the line, the infrastructure manager shall take the necessary measures to maintain the safety, for example by:
  • — locally reducing train speeds, possibly temporarily during periods at risk of storms,
  • — installing equipment to protect the track section concerned from cross winds,
  • — other appropriate means.
  • (4) It shall be demonstrated that safety is achieved after measures taken.
4.2.10.3.   Aerodynamic effect on ballasted track
  • (1)The aerodynamic interaction between rolling stock and infrastructure may cause the lifting and further blowing away of ballast stones from the track bed in plain line and switches and crossings (Ballast pick up). This risk shall be mitigated.
  • (2)The requirements for the infrastructure subsystem aimed at mitigating the risk for ‘ballast pick up’ apply only to lines intended to be operated at speed greater than 250 km/h.
  • (3)The requirements of point (2) above are an open point.
4.2.11.   Provision for operation
4.2.11.1.   Location markers

Location markers shall be provided at nominal intervals along the track of not more than 1 000  m.

4.2.11.2.   Equivalent conicity in service
  • (1) If ride instability is reported, the railway undertaking and the infrastructure manager shall localise the section of the line in a joint investigation according paragraphs (2) and (3) hereafter. Note: This joint investigation is also specified in point 4.2.3.4.3.2 of TSI LOC & PAS for action on rolling stock.
  • (2) The infrastructure manager shall measure the track gauge and the railhead profiles at the site in question at a distance of approximate 10 m. The mean equivalent conicity over 100 m shall be calculated by modelling with the wheelsets (a) – (d) mentioned in paragraph 4.2.4.5(4) of this TSI in order to check for compliance, for the purpose of the joint investigation, with the limit equivalent conicity for the track specified in Table 14. Table 14 Equivalent conicity in service limit values for the track (for the purpose of joint investigation) Speed range [km/h] Maximum value of mean equivalent conicity over 100 m v ≤ 60 assessment not required 60 < v ≤ 120 0,40 120 < v ≤ 160 0,35 160 < v ≤ 230 0,30 v > 230 0,25
  • (3) If the mean equivalent conicity over 100 m complies with the limit values in Table 14, a joint investigation by the railway undertaking and the infrastructure manager shall be undertaken to specify the reason for the instability.
4.2.12.   Fixed installations for servicing trains
4.2.12.1.   General

This point 4.2.12 sets out the infrastructure elements of the maintenance subsystem required for servicing trains.

4.2.12.2.   Toilet discharge

Fixed installations for toilet discharge shall be compatible with the characteristics of the retention toilet system specified in the LOC & PAS TSI.

4.2.12.3.   Train external cleaning facilities
  • (1) Where a washing plant is provided it shall be able to clean the outer sides of single or double-deck trains between a height of:
  • (a) 500 to 3 500  mm for a single-deck train,
  • (b) 500 to 4 300  mm for double-deck trains.
  • (2) The washing plant shall be designed so that trains can be driven through it at any speed between 2 km/h and 5 km/h.
4.2.12.4.   Water restocking
  • (1) Fixed equipment for water restocking shall be compatible with the characteristics of the water system specified in the LOC & PAS TSI.
  • (2) Fixed equipment for the supply of water intended for human consumption shall be supplied with drinking water meeting the requirements of Directive (EU) 2020/2184 of the European Parliament and of the Council ([^E0011]).
  • (3) The materials used for the supply of water intended for human consumption to the rolling stock (e.g. tank, pump, piping, water tap and sealing material and quality) shall comply with the requirements applicable to water intended for human consumption.
4.2.12.5.   Refuelling

Refuelling equipment shall be compatible with the characteristics of the fuel system specified in the LOC & PAS TSI.

4.2.12.6.   Electrical shore supply

Where provided, electrical shore supply shall be by means of one or more of the power supply systems specified in the LOC & PAS TSI.

4.3.   Functional and technical specification of the interfaces

From the standpoint of technical compatibility, the interfaces of the infrastructure subsystem with the other subsystems are like described in the following points.

4.3.1.   Interfaces with the rolling stock subsystem
Table 15
Interfaces with the subsystem ‘Rolling stock – locomotives and passenger rolling stock’
Interface Reference in TSI INF Reference in TSI LOC&PAS
Track gauge 4.2.4.1  Nominal track gauge 4.2.5.1  Design geometry of switches and crossings 4.2.8.6  The immediate action limits for switches and crossings 4.2.3.5.2.1  Mechanical and geometrical characteristics of wheelset 4.2.3.5.2.3  Variable gauge wheelsets
Gauge 4.2.3.1  Structure gauge 4.2.3.2  Distance between track centres 4.2.3.5  Minimum radius of vertical curve 4.2.9.3  Platform offset 4.2.3.1  Gauging
Axle load and axle spacing 4.2.6.1  Track resistance to vertical loads 4.2.6.3  Lateral track resistance 4.2.7.1  Resistance of new bridges to traffic loads 4.2.7.2  Equivalent vertical loading for new earthworks and earth pressure effects imposed on new structures 4.2.7.4  Resistance of existing bridges and earthworks to traffic loads 4.2.2.10  Load conditions and weighed mass 4.2.3.2.1  Axle load parameter
Running characteristics 4.2.6.1  Track resistance to vertical loads 4.2.6.3  Lateral track resistance 4.2.7.1.4  Nosing forces 4.2.3.4.2.1  Limit values for running safely 4.2.3.4.2.2  Track loading limit values
Ride stability 4.2.4.4  Equivalent conicity 4.2.4.6  Railhead profile for plain line 4.2.11.2  Equivalent conicity in service 4.2.3.4.3  Equivalent conicity 4.2.3.5.2.2  Mechanical and geometrical characteristics of wheels
Longitudinal actions 4.2.6.2  Longitudinal track resistance 4.2.7.1.5  Actions due to traction and braking (longitudinal loads) 4.2.4.5  Braking performance
Minimum horizontal curve radius 4.2.3.4  Minimum radius of horizontal curve 4.2.3.6  Minimum curve radius Annex A, A.1 Buffers
Running dynamic behaviour 4.2.4.3  Cant deficiency 4.2.3.4.2  Running dynamic behaviour
Maximum deceleration 4.2.6.2  Longitudinal track resistance 4.2.7.1.5  Actions due to traction and braking 4.2.4.5  Braking performance
Aerodynamic effect 4.2.3.2  Distance between track centres 4.2.7.3  Resistance of new structures over or adjacent to tracks 4.2.10.1  Maximum pressure variations in tunnels 4.2.10.3  Aerodynamic effect on ballasted track 4.2.6.2.1  Slipstream effects on passengers on platforms and on trackside workers 4.2.6.2.2  Head pressure pulse 4.2.6.2.3  Maximum pressure variations in tunnels 4.2.6.2.5  Aerodynamic effect on ballasted tracks
Crosswind 4.2.10.2  Effect of crosswinds 4.2.6.2.4  Crosswind
Installations for servicing trains 4.2.12.2  Toilet discharge 4.2.12.3  Train external cleaning facilities 4.2.12.4  Water restocking 4.2.12.5  Refuelling 4.2.12.6  Electric shore supply 4.2.11.3  Toilet discharge system 4.2.11.2.2  Exterior cleaning through a washing plant   4.2.11.5  Interface for water refilling 4.2.11.7  Refuelling equipment 4.2.11.6  Special requirements for stabling of trains
Table 16
Interfaces with the subsystem ‘Rolling stock – freight wagons’
Interface Reference in TSI INF Reference in TSI WAG
Track gauge 4.2.4.1  Nominal track gauge 4.2.4.6  Railhead profile for plain line 4.2.5.1  Design geometry of switches and crossings 4.2.8.6  The immediate action limits for switches and crossings 4.2.3.6.2  Characteristics of wheelsets 4.2.3.6.3  Characteristics of wheels
Gauge 4.2.3.1  Structure gauge 4.2.3.2  Distance between track centres 4.2.3.5  Minimum radius of vertical curve 4.2.9.3  Platform offset 4.2.3.1  Gauging
Axle load and axle spacing 4.2.6.1  Track resistance to vertical loads 4.2.6.3  Lateral track resistance 4.2.7.1  Resistance of new bridges to traffic loads 4.2.7.2  Equivalent vertical loading for new earthworks and earth pressure effects imposed on new structures 4.2.7.4  Resistance of existing bridges and earthworks to traffic loads 4.2.3.2  Compatibility with load carrying capacity of lines
Running dynamic behaviour 4.2.8  Immediate action limits on track geometry defects 4.2.3.5.2  Running dynamic behaviour
Longitudinal actions 4.2.6.2  Longitudinal track resistance 4.2.7.1.5  Actions due to traction and braking (longitudinal loads) 4.2.4.3.2  Brake performance
Minimum curve radius 4.2.3.4  Minimum radius of horizontal curve 4.2.2.1  Mechanical interface
Vertical curve 4.2.3.5  Minimum radius of vertical curve 4.2.3.1  Gauging
4.3.2.   Interfaces with the energy subsystem
Table 17
Interfaces with the energy subsystem
Interface Reference in TSI INF Reference in TSI ENE
Gauge 4.2.3.1  Structure gauge 4.2.10  Pantographs gauge
4.3.3.   Interfaces with the control command and signalling subsystem
Table 18
Interfaces with the control command and signalling subsystem
Interface Reference in TSI INF Reference in TSI CCS
Structure gauge set for CCS installations. Visibility of track-side CCS objects. 4.2.3.1  Structure gauge 4.2.5.2  Eurobalise communication (space for installation) 4.2.5.3  Euroloop communication (space for installation) 4.2.10  Train detection systems (space for installation) 4.2.15  Visibility of track-side control-command and signalling objects
4.3.4.   Interfaces with the operation and traffic management subsystem
Table 19
Interfaces with the operation and traffic management subsystem
Interface Reference in TSI INF Reference in TSI OPE
Ride stability 4.2.11.2  Equivalent conicity in service 4.2.3.4.4  Operational quality
Use of eddy current brakes 4.2.6.2  Longitudinal track resistance 4.2.2.6.2  Braking performance
Crosswinds 4.2.10.2  Effect of crosswinds 4.2.3.6.3  Contingency arrangements
Operating rules 4.4  Operating rules 4.2.1.2.2.2  Modifications to information contained in the route book 4.2.3.6  Degraded operation
Staff competences 4.6  Professional competences 4.2.1.1  General requirements

4.4.   Operating rules

  • (1) Operating rules are developed within the procedures described in the infrastructure manager's safety management system. These rules take into account the documentation related to operation which forms a part of the technical file as required in  Article 15(4) and set out in Annex IV (point 2.4) of Directive (EU) 2016/797.
  • (2) In certain situations involving pre-planned works, it may be necessary to temporarily suspend the specifications of the infrastructure subsystem and its interoperability constituents defined in sections 4 and 5 of this TSI.

4.5.   Maintenance rules

  • (1) Maintenance rules are developed within the procedures described in the infrastructure manager's safety management system.
  • (2) The maintenance file shall be prepared before placing a line into service as the part of the technical file accompanying the declaration of verification
  • (3) The maintenance plan shall be drawn up for the subsystem to ensure that the requirements set out in this TSI are maintained during its lifetime.
4.5.1.   Maintenance file

A maintenance file shall contain at least:

  • (a) a set of values for immediate action limits,
  • (b) the measures taken (for example speed restriction, repair time) when prescribed limits are not met,

related to track geometric quality and limits on isolated defects.

4.5.2.   Maintenance plan

The infrastructure manager shall have a maintenance plan containing the items listed in point 4.5.1 together with at least the following:

  • (a) a set of values for intervention limits and alert limits,
  • (b) a statement about the methods, professional competences of staff and personal protective safety equipment necessary to be used,
  • (c) the rules to be applied for the protection of people working on or near the track,
  • (d) the means used to check that in-service values are respected,
  • (e) the measures taken, for speed greater than 250 km/h, to mitigate the risk of ballast pick up.

4.6.   Professional qualifications

The professional qualifications of staff required for operation and maintenance of the infrastructure subsystem are not set out in this TSI but are described in the infrastructure manager's safety management system.

4.7.   Health and safety conditions

  • (1) The health and safety conditions of staff required for the operation and maintenance of the infrastructure subsystem shall be compliant with the relevant European and national legislation.
  • (2) The issue is covered by the procedures described in the infrastructure manager's safety management system.

5. INTEROPERABILITY CONSTITUENTS

5.1.   Basis on which interoperability constituents have been selected

  • (1) The requirements of point 5.3 are based on a traditional design of ballasted track with Vignole (flat-bottom) rail on concrete or wooden sleepers and fastening providing resistance to longitudinal slip by bearing on the rail foot.
  • (2) Components and subassemblies used for the construction of other designs of track are not considered to be interoperability constituents.

5.2.   List of constituents

  • (1) For the purposes of this technical specification for interoperability, only the following elements, whether individual components or subassemblies of the track are declared to be ‘interoperability constituents’:
  • (a) the rail (5.3.1),
  • (b) the rail fastening systems (5.3.2),
  • (c) track sleepers (5.3.3).
  • (2) The following points describe the specifications applicable to each of these constituents.
  • (3) Rails, fastenings and sleepers used for short length of track for specific purposes, for example in switches and crossings, at expansion devices, transition slabs and special structures, are not considered to be interoperability constituents.

5.3.   Constituents performances and specifications

5.3.1.   The rail

The specifications of the ‘rail’ interoperability constituent concern the following parameters:

  • (a) railhead profile,
  • (b) rail steel.
5.3.1.1.   Railhead profile

The rail head profile shall fulfil the requirements of point 4.2.4.6 ‘Railhead profile for plain line’.

5.3.1.2.   Rail steel
  • (1) The rail steel is relevant to the requirements of point 4.2.6 ‘Track resistance to applied loads’.
  • (2) The rail steel shall meet the following requirements:
  • (a) The rail hardness shall be at least 200 HBW.
  • (b) The tensile strength shall be at least 680 MPa.
  • (c) Minimum number of cycles at fatigue test without failure shall be at least 5 × 106.
5.3.2.   The rail fastening systems
  • (1) The rail fastening system is relevant to the requirements of point 4.2.6.1 for ‘Track resistance to vertical loads’, point 4.2.6.2 for ‘Longitudinal track resistance’ and point 4.2.6.3 for ‘Lateral track resistance’.
  • (2) The rail fastening system shall comply in laboratory test conditions with the following requirements:
  • (a) the longitudinal force required to cause the rail to begin to slip (i.e. move in an inelastic way) through a single rail fastening assembly shall be at least 7 kN and for speeds of more than 250 km/h shall be at least 9 kN,
  • (b) the rail fastening shall resist application of 3 000 000 cycles of the typical load applied in a sharp curve, such that the change in performance of the fastening system shall not exceed:
  • — 20 % in terms of clamping force,
  • — 25 % in terms of vertical stiffness,
  • — a reduction of more than 20 % in terms of longitudinal restraint. The typical load shall be appropriate to:
  • — the maximum axle load the rail fastening system is designed to accommodate,
  • — the combination of rail, rail inclination, rail pad and type of sleepers with which the fastening system may be used.
5.3.3.   Track sleepers
  • (1) Track sleepers shall be designed such that when they are used with a specified rail and rail fastening system they will have properties that are consistent with the requirements of point 4.2.4.1 for ‘Nominal track gauge’, point 4.2.4.7 for ‘Rail inclination’ and point 4.2.6 for ‘Track resistance to applied loads’.
  • (2) For the nominal track gauge system of 1 435  mm, the design track gauge for track sleepers in straight alignments and in horizontal curves with radius greater than 300 m shall be 1 437  mm.

6. ASSESSMENT OF CONFORMITY OF INTEROPERABILITY CONSTITUENTS AND EC VERIFICATION OF THE SUBSYSTEMS

Modules for the procedures for assessment of conformity and suitability for use and EC verification are defined in Article 8 of this Regulation.

6.1.   Interoperability Constituents

6.1.1.   Conformity assessment procedures
  • (1) The conformity assessment procedure of interoperability constituents as defined in section 5 of this TSI shall be carried out by application of the relevant modules.
  • (2) Serviceable interoperability constituents that are suitable for reuse are not subject to the conformity assessment procedures.
6.1.2.   Application of modules
  • (1) The following modules for conformity assessment of interoperability constituents are used:
  • (a) CA ‘Internal production control’
  • (b) CB ‘EC type examination’
  • (c) CC ‘Conformity to type based on internal production control’
  • (d) CD ‘Conformity to type based on quality management system of the production process’
  • (e) CF ‘Conformity to type based on product verification’
  • (f) CH ‘Conformity based on full quality management system’
  • (2) The modules for conformity assessment of interoperability constituents shall be chosen from those shown in Table 20. Table 20 Modules for conformity assessment to be applied for interoperability constitunents Procedures Rail Rail fastening system Track sleepers Placed on the EU market before entry into force of relevant TSIs CA or CH CA or CH Placed on the EU market after entry into force of relevant TSIs CB + CC or CB + CD or CB + CF or CH
  • (3) In the case of products placed on the market before the publication of relevant TSIs, the type is considered to have been approved and therefore EC type examination (module CB) is not necessary, provided that the manufacturer demonstrates that tests and verification of interoperability constituents have been considered successful for previous applications under comparable conditions and are in conformity with the requirements of this TSI. In this case these assessments shall remain valid in the new application. If it is not possible to demonstrate that the solution is positively proven in the past, the procedure for interoperability constituents placed on the EU market after publication of this TSI applies.
  • (4) The conformity assessment of interoperability constituents shall cover the phases and characteristics as indicated in Table 36 of Appendix A to this TSI.
6.1.3.   Innovative solutions for interoperability constituents

If an innovative solution is proposed for an interoperability constituent, the procedure described in Article 10 shall apply.

6.1.4.   EC declaration of conformity for interoperability constituents
6.1.4.1.   Interoperability constituents subject to other European Union Directives
  • (1)in accordance with Article 10(3) of Directive (EU) 2016/797, for interoperability constituents that are the subject of other legal acts of the Union covering other matters, the EC declaration of conformity or suitability for use shall state that the interoperability constituents also meet the requirements of those other legal acts;
  • (2)in accordance with Annex I to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/250 ([^E0012]), the EC declaration of conformity or suitability for use shall include a list of restrictions or conditions of use.
6.1.4.2.   EC declaration of conformity for rails

No statement setting out the conditions of use is required.

6.1.4.3.   EC declaration of conformity for rail fastening systems

The EC declaration of conformity shall be accompanied by statement setting out:

  • (a) the combination of rail, rail inclination, rail pad and type of sleepers with which the fastening system may be used
  • (b) the maximum axle load the rail fastening system is designed to accommodate.
6.1.4.4.   EC declaration of conformity for track sleepers

The EC declaration of conformity shall be accompanied by statement setting out:

  • (a) the combination of rail, rail inclination and type of rail fastening system with which the sleeper may be used,
  • (b) the nominal and design track gauge,
  • (c) the combinations of axle load and train speed the track sleeper is designed to accommodate.
6.1.5.   Particular assessment procedures for interoperability constituents
6.1.5.1.   Assessment of rails

Assessment of rail steel shall be done according to the following requirements:

  • (a) Rail hardness shall be tested for position RS in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [7].
  • (b) Tensile strength shall be tested in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [7].
  • (c) Fatigue test shall be done in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [7].
6.1.5.2.   Assessment of sleepers
  • (1) (not used)
  • (2) For polyvalent gauge and multiple gauge track sleepers it is allowed not to assess the design track gauge for the nominal track gauge of 1 435  mm.

6.2.   Infrastructure subsystem

6.2.1.   General provisions
  • (1) At the request of the applicant, the notified body carries out the EC verification of the infrastructure subsystem in accordance with  Article 15 of Directive (EU) 2016/797 and in accordance with the provisions of the relevant modules.
  • (2) If the applicant demonstrates that tests or assessments of an infrastructure subsystem or parts of the subsystem are the same as have been successful for previous applications of a design, the notified body shall consider the results of these tests and assessments for the EC verification.
  • (3) The EC verification of the infrastructure subsystem shall cover the phases and characteristics indicated in Table 37 in Appendix B to this TSI.
  • (4) Performance parameters as set out in point 4.2.1 of this TSI are not subject to the EC verification of the subsystem.
  • (5) Particular assessment procedures for specific basic parameters of infrastructure subsystem are set out in point 6.2.4.
  • (6) The applicant shall draw up the EC declaration of verification for the infrastructure subsystem in accordance with Article 15 of Directive (EU) 2016/797.
6.2.2.   Application of modules

For the EC verification procedure of the infrastructure subsystem, the applicant may choose either:

  • (a) Module SG: EC verification based on unit verification, or
  • (b) Module SH1: EC verification based on full quality management system plus design examination.
6.2.2.1.   Application of module SG

In the case where EC verification is most effectively undertaken by using information collected by the infrastructure manager, contracting entity or the main contractors involved (for example data obtained using track recording vehicle or other measuring devices), the notified body shall take this information into account to assess conformity.

6.2.2.2.   Application of module SH1

The SH1 module may be chosen only where the activities contributing to the proposed subsystem to be verified (design, manufacturing, assembling, installation) are subject to a quality management system for design, production, final product inspection and testing, approved and surveyed by a notified body.

6.2.3.   Innovative solutions

If an innovative solution is proposed for the infrastructure subsystem, the procedure described in Article 10 shall apply.

6.2.4.   Particular assessment procedures for infrastructure subsystem
6.2.4.1.   Assessment of Structure gauge
  • (1) Assessment of structure gauge as a design review shall be done against characteristic cross sections using the results of calculations made by infrastructure manager or the contracting entity on the basis of the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [3].
  • (2) Characteristic cross sections are:
  • (a) track without cant,
  • (b) track with maximum cant,
  • (c) track with a civil engineering structure over the line
  • (d) any other location where the designed installation limit gauge is approached by less than 100 mm or the installation nominal gauge or uniform gauge is approached by less than 50 mm.
  • (3) After assembly before putting into service clearances shall be verified at locations where the designed installation limit gauge is approached by less than 100 mm or the installation nominal gauge or uniform gauge is approached by less than 50 mm.
  • (4) Instead of point (1), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system assessment of structure gauge as a design review is to be made against characteristic cross sections using the uniform structure gauge ‘S’ as defined in Appendix H to this TSI.
  • (5) Instead of point (1), for the 1 600  mm track gauge system assessment of structure gauge as a design review is to be made against characteristic cross sections using the structure gauge ‘IRL1’ as defined in Appendix O to this TSI.
6.2.4.2.   Assessment of distance between track centres
  • (1) A design review for assessment of the distance between track centres shall be done using the results of calculations made by the Infrastructure Manager or the contracting entity on the basis of the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [3]. The nominal distance between track centres shall be checked at the line layout where distances are given in parallel to the horizontal plane. The limit installation distance between track centres shall be checked with the radius and relevant cant.
  • (2) After assembly before putting into service, distance between track centres shall be verified at critical locations where the limit installation distance between track centres as defined in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [3] is approached by less than 50 mm.
  • (3) Instead of point (1), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system a design review for assessment of the distance between track centres is to be made using the results of calculations made by the infrastructure manager or the contracting entity. The nominal distance between track centres shall be checked at the line layout where distances are given in parallel to the horizontal plane. The limit installation distance between track centres shall be checked with the radius and relevant cant.
  • (4) Instead of point (2), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system after assembly before putting into service, distance between track centres shall be verified at critical locations where the limit installation distance between track centres is approached by less than 50 mm.
6.2.4.3.   Assessment of nominal track gauge
  • (1) Assessment of the nominal track gauge at design review shall be done by checking the self-declaration of the applicant.
  • (2) Assessment of the nominal track gauge at assembly before putting into service shall be done by checking the interoperability constituent sleeper's certificate. For non-certified interoperability constituents assessment of the nominal track gauge shall be done by checking the self-declaration of the applicant.
6.2.4.4.   Assessment of track layout
  • (1) At design review the curvature, cant, cant deficiency and abrupt change of cant deficiency shall be assessed against the local design speed.
  • (2) Assessment of switches and crossings layout is not required.
  • (3) At assembly before putting into service, for the review of the minimum horizontal curve the measurement values provided by the applicant or infrastructure manager shall be assessed. Rules for acceptance of works defined by the infrastructure manager shall be taken into account.
6.2.4.5.   Assessment of cant deficiency for trains designed to travel with higher cant deficiency

Point 4.2.4.3(2) states that ‘It is permissible for trains specifically designed to travel with higher cant deficiency (for example multiple units with lower axle loads; vehicles with special equipment for the negotiation of curves) to run with higher cant deficiency values, subject to a demonstration that this can be achieved safely’. This demonstration is outside the scope of this TSI and thus not subject to a notified body verification of the infrastructure subsystem. The demonstration shall be undertaken by the RU, if necessary in cooperation with the IM.

6.2.4.6.   Assessment of design values for equivalent conicity

Assessment of design values for equivalent conicity shall be done using the results of calculations made by the infrastructure manager or the contracting entity on the basis of the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [5].

6.2.4.7.   Assessment of railhead profile
  • (1) The design profile of new rails shall be checked against point 4.2.4.6.
  • (2) Reused serviceable rails shall not be subject to the requirements for railhead profile as set out in point 4.2.4.6.
6.2.4.8.   Assessment of switches and crossings

Assessment of switches and crossings related to points 4.2.5.1 to 4.2.5.3 shall be done by checking that a self-declaration of the infrastructure manager or contracting entity exists.

6.2.4.9.   Assessment of new structures, earthworks and earth pressure effects
  • (1) Assessment of new structures shall be done by checking the traffic loads and the track twist limit used for design against the minimum requirements of points 4.2.7.1 and 4.2.7.3. The notified body is not required to review the design nor carry out any calculations. When reviewing the value of factor alpha used in the design according to point 4.2.7.1 it is only necessary to check that the value of factor alpha satisfies Table 11.
  • (2) Assessment of new earthworks and earth pressure effects shall be done by checking the vertical loads used for design according to requirements of point 4.2.7.2. When reviewing the value of factor alpha used in the design according to point 4.2.7.2 it is only necessary to check that the value of factor alpha satisfies Table 11. The notified body is not required to review the design nor carry out any calculations.
6.2.4.10.   Assessment procedure of existing structures
  • (1)The assessment of existing structures against the requirements of points 4.2.7.4(3)(b) and (c) shall be done by one of the following methods:
  • (a) A check that the values of EN line categories, in combination with the allowed speed published, or intended to be published, for the lines containing the structures, are in line with the requirements of Appendix E;
  • (b) A check that the values of EN line categories, in combination with the allowed speed specified for the bridges or for the design, or alternative requirements specified with LM71 and factor alpha (α) for P1 and P2, are in line with the requirements of Appendix E;
  • (c) A check that the traffic loads specified for the structures or for the design against the minimum requirements of points 4.2.7.1.1, 4.2.7.1.2 and 4.2.7.2. When reviewing the value of factor alpha (α) in accordance with points 4.2.7.1.1 and 4.2.7.2, it is only necessary to check that the value of factor alpha (α) is in line with the value of factor alpha (α) set out in Table 11;
  • (d) where the requirement for an existing bridge is specified by reference to the design load model HSLM in Appendix E, the assessment of the existing bridge shall be done by either of the following methods:
  • — checking the specification of the design of the existing bridge,
  • — checking the specification of the dynamic appraisal,
  • — checking the published load carrying capacity of the existing bridge in the register of infrastructure (RINF) for the parameter 1.1.1.1.2.4.2 (Compliance of structures with the High Speed Load Model (HSLM));
  • (e) where the requirement for an existing bridge is specified by reference to alternative dynamic loading requirements (Appendix E note 8), the assessment of the existing bridge shall be done by checking the specification of the dynamic appraisal for these alternative loading requirements against the requirements in Appendix E note 8.
  • (2)It is not required to review the design nor carry out any calculations.
  • (3)For existing structures assessment point 4.2.7.4(4) applies respectively.
6.2.4.11.   Assessment of platform offset
  • (1) Assessment of the distance between the track centre and the platform edge as a design review shall be done using the results of calculations made by the Infrastructure Manager or the contracting entity on the basis of the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [3].
  • (2) After assembly before putting into service clearances shall be verified. The offset is checked at the ends of the platform and every 30 m in straight track and every 10 m in curved track.
  • (3) Instead of point (1), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system assessment of the distance between the track centre and the platform edge as a design review shall be done against requirements of point 4.2.9.3. Point (2) applies accordingly.
  • (4) Instead of point (1), for the 1 600  mm track gauge system assessment of the distance between the track centre and the platform edge as a design review shall be done against requirements of point 4.2.9.3(4). Point (2) applies accordingly.
6.2.4.12.   Assessment of maximum pressure variations in tunnels
  • (1)The assessment of the maximum pressure variation in the tunnel (10 kPa criterion) shall be done in accordance with the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [14] with trains complying with the TSI LOC&PAS and that are able to run at maximum line speed in the specific tunnel to be assessed.
  • (2)The input parameters to be used during the assessment shall be such that the reference characteristic pressure signature of the trains set out in the TSI LOC&PAS is fulfilled.
  • (3)The reference cross section areas are set out in the specification referenced in Appendix T, Index [14].
6.2.4.13.   Assessment of effect of crosswinds

This demonstration of the safety is outside the scope of this TSI and thus not subject to a notified body verification. The demonstration shall be undertaken by the infrastructure manager, if necessary in cooperation with the railway undertaking.

6.2.4.14.   Assessment of fixed installations for servicing trains

Assessment of fixed installations for servicing trains is in the responsibility of the Member State concerned.

6.2.4.15.   Assessment of compatibility with braking systems

The assessment of the requirements laid down in point 4.2.6.2.2(2) is not required.

6.2.5.   Technical solutions giving presumption of conformity at design stage

Presumption of conformity at design stage for technical solutions may be assessed prior and independent from a specific project.

6.2.5.1.   Assessment of track resistance for plain line
  • (1) The demonstration of conformity of the track to the requirements of point 4.2.6 may be done by reference to an existing track design which meets the operating conditions intended for the subsystem concerned.
  • (2) A track design shall be defined by the technical characteristics as set out in Appendix C.1 to this TSI and by its operating conditions as set out in Appendix D.1 to this TSI.
  • (3) A track design is considered to be existing, if both of the following conditions are met:
  • (a) the track design has been in normal operation for at least one year and
  • (b) the total tonnage over the track was at least 20 million gross tons for the period of normal operation.
  • (4) The operating conditions for an existing track design refer to conditions which have been applied in normal operation.
  • (5) The assessment to confirm an existing track design shall be performed by checking that the technical characteristics as set out in Appendix C.1 to this TSI and conditions of use as set out in Appendix D.1 to this TSI are specified and that the reference to the previous use of the track design is available.
  • (6) When a previously assessed existing track design is used in a project, the notified body shall only assess that the conditions of use are respected.
  • (7) For new track designs that are based on existing track designs, a new assessment can be performed by verifying the differences and evaluating their impact on the track resistance. This assessment may be supported for example by computer simulation or by laboratory or in situ testing.
  • (8) A track design is considered to be new, if at least one of the technical characteristics set out in Appendix C to this TSI or one of conditions of use set out in Appendix D to this TSI is changed.
6.2.5.2.   Assessment for switches and crossing
  • (1) The provisions as set out in point 6.2.5.1 are applicable for the assessment of track resistance for switches and crossings. Appendix C.2 sets out the technical characteristics of switches and crossings design and Appendix D.2 sets out the conditions of use of switches and crossings design.
  • (2) Assessment of design geometry of switches and crossings shall be done according to point 6.2.4.8 of this TSI.
  • (3) Assessment of maximum unguided length of fixed obtuse crossings shall be done according to point 6.2.4.8 of this TSI.
  • 6.3. (not used)
  • 6.4. Assessment of maintenance file
  • (1)In accordance with Article 15(4) of Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council ([^E0013]), the applicant shall be responsible for compiling the technical file, containing the documentation requested for maintenance.
  • (2)The Notified Body shall verify only that the documentation requested for maintenance, as set out in point 4.5.1, is provided. The Notified Body is not required to verify the information contained in the documentation provided.
  • 6.5. Subsystems containing Interoperability constituents not holding an EC declaration

6.5.1.   Conditions

  • (1) Until the list of interoperability constituents listed in Chapter 5 of this TSI are revised, a notified body is allowed to issue an EC certificate of verification for a subsystem even if some of the interoperability constituents incorporated within the subsystem are not covered by the relevant EC declarations of conformity and/or suitability for use according to this TSI, if the following criteria are complied with:
  • (a) the conformity of the subsystem has been checked against the requirements of section 4 and in relation to sections 6.2 to 7 (except point 7.7 ‘Specific Cases’) of this TSI by the notified body. Furthermore the conformity of the ICs to section 5 and 6.1 does not apply, and
  • (b) the interoperability constituents, which are not covered by the relevant EC declaration of conformity and/or suitability for use, have been used in a subsystem already approved and put in service in at least one of the Member State before the entry in force of this TSI.
  • (2) EC declarations of conformity and/or suitability for use shall not be drawn up for the interoperability constituents assessed in this manner.

6.5.2.   Documentation

  • (1) The EC certificate of verification of the subsystem shall indicate clearly which interoperability constituents have been assessed by the notified body as part of the subsystem verification.
  • (2) The EC declaration of verification of the subsystem shall indicate clearly:
  • (a) Which interoperability constituents have been assessed as part of the subsystem;
  • (b) Confirmation that the subsystem contains the interoperability constituents identical to those verified as part of the subsystem;
  • (c) For those interoperability constituents, the reason(s) why the manufacturer did not provide an EC Declaration of conformity and/or suitability for use before its incorporation into the subsystem, including the application of national rules notified under  Article 14 of Directive (EU) 2016/797.

6.5.3.   Maintenance of the subsystems certified according to 6.5.1.

  • (1) During and after the transition period and until the subsystem is upgraded or renewed (taking into account the decision of Member State on application of TSIs), the interoperability constituents which do not hold an EC Declaration of conformity and/or suitability for use and are of the same type are allowed to be used as maintenance related replacements (spare parts) for the subsystem, under the responsibility of the body responsible for maintenance.
  • (2) In any case the body responsible for maintenance must ensure that the components for maintenance related replacements are suitable for their applications, are used within their area of use and enable interoperability to be achieved within the rail system while at the same time meeting the essential requirements. Such components must be traceable and certified in accordance with any national or international rule or any code of practice widely acknowledged in the railway domain.
  • 6.6. Subsystem containing serviceable interoperability constituents that are suitable for reuse

6.6.1.   Conditions

  • (1) A notified body is allowed to issue an EC certificate of verification for a subsystem even if some of the interoperability constituents incorporated within the subsystem are serviceable interoperability constituents that are suitable for reuse, if the following criteria are complied with:
  • (a) the conformity of the subsystem has been checked against the requirements of section 4 and in relation to sections 6.2 to 7 (except point 7.7 ‘Specific Cases’) of this TSI by the notified body. Furthermore the conformity of the ICs to 6.1 does not apply, and
  • (b) the interoperability constituents are not covered by the relevant EC declaration of conformity and/or suitability for use.
  • (2) EC declarations of conformity and/or suitability for use shall not be drawn up for the interoperability constituents assessed in this manner.

6.6.2.   Documentation

  • (1) The EC certificate of verification of the subsystem shall indicate clearly which interoperability constituents have been assessed by the notified body as part of the subsystem verification.
  • (2) The EC declaration of verification of the subsystem shall indicate clearly:
  • (a) Which interoperability constituents are serviceable interoperability constituents that are suitable for reuse;
  • (b) Confirmation that the subsystem contains the interoperability constituents identical to those verified as part of the subsystem.

6.6.3.   Use of serviceable interoperability constituents in maintenance

  • (1) Serviceable interoperability constituents that are suitable for reuse are allowed to be used as maintenance related replacements (spare parts) for the subsystem, under the responsibility of the body responsible for maintenance.
  • (2) In any case the body responsible for maintenance must ensure that the components for maintenance related replacements are suitable for their applications, are used within their area of use, and enable interoperability to be achieved within the rail system while at the same time meeting the essential requirements. Such components must be traceable and certified in accordance with any national or international rule, or any code of practice widely acknowledged in the railway domain.

7. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE TSI

7.1.   National implementation plan

Member States shall develop a national plan for the implementation of this TSI, targeting the coherence of the entire rail system of the Union. This plan shall include all projects regarding new, renewal and upgrading of infrastructure subsystem and shall ensure a gradual migration within a reasonable timescale onwards an interoperable target infrastructure subsystem fully compliant with this TSI.

7.2.   Application of this TSI to a new infrastructure subsystem

  • (1)For a new infrastructure subsystem, the application of this TSI shall be compulsory.
  • (2)A ‘new infrastructure subsystem’ means an infrastructure subsystem placed into service after 28 September 2023 which creates a route or a part of a route where none currently exists.
  • Any other infrastructure subsystems shall be considered as ‘existing infrastructure subsystems’.
  • (3)The following cases are considered as upgrading and not as the placing into service of a new infrastructure subsystem:
  • (a) the realignment of part of an existing route;
  • (b) the creation of a bypass;
  • (c) the addition of one or more tracks on an existing route, regardless of the distance between the original tracks and the additional tracks.

7.3.   Application of this TSI to an existing infrastructure subsystem

7.3.1.   Performance criteria of the subsystem

In addition to the cases referred to in point 7.2.(3), ‘upgrading’ is a major modification work of an existing infrastructure subsystem resulting in at least compliance with one additional traffic code or a change in the declared combination of traffic codes (referred to Table 2 and Table 3 in point 4.2.1).

7.3.2.   Application of the TSI

The conformity with this TSI is mandatory for a subsystem or part(s) of it which are upgraded or renewed. Due to the characteristics of the inherited railway system, compliance of existing infrastructure subsystem with this TSI may be achieved through a gradual improvement of interoperability:

  • (1) For the upgraded infrastructure subsystem, the application of this TSI shall be compulsory, and applied to the upgraded subsystem within the geographical coverage of the upgrading. The geographical coverage of the upgrading shall be defined based on locations on tracks and metric references and shall result in the compliance of all basic parameters of the infrastructure subsystem associated with the tracks that are subject to the upgrading of the infrastructure subsystem. The addition of one or more rails supporting a further track gauge is also considered as upgrade when the performance criteria of the subsystem is triggered as described in point 7.3.1.
  • (2) In the event of a change other than an upgrading of the infrastructure subsystem, the application of this TSI for each basic parameters (referred to in point 4.2.2) affected by a change shall be compulsory when the change requires to carry out a new ‘EC’ verification procedure in accordance with Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/250 ([^E0014]). Provisions defined in Articles 6 and 7 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2019/250 shall apply.
  • (3) In the event of a change other than an upgrading of the infrastructure subsystem and for those basic parameters that are not affected by the change, or when the change does not require a new ‘EC’ verification, the demonstration of the level of compliance with this TSI is voluntary.
  • (4) In case of upgrading or renewal of the infrastructure subsystem, the compliance with the requirements which are laid down for new lines is not required.
  • (5) In case of ‘major substitution’, as defined in Article 2(15) of Directive (EU) 2016/797 of the European Parliament and of the Council, in the framework of a ‘renewal’, non TSI-compliant elements of the subsystem or part(s) of it shall systematically be replaced with TSI-compliant ones.
  • (6) ‘Substitution in the framework of maintenance’ means any replacement of components by parts of identical function and performance in the framework of maintenance, as defined in Article 2(17) of Directive (EU) 2016/797. It shall be made in accordance with the requirements of this TSI, whenever reasonably and economically feasible and it does not require an ‘EC’ verification.
  • (7) The following exceptions are permitted for existing infrastructure subsystem, in case of upgrading or renewal:
  • (a) In the case of upgrading or renewal of the infrastructure subsystem, for parameters cant governed by point 4.2.4.2 of this TSI and cant deficiency governed by point 4.2.4.3 of this TSI it is permitted to deviate from the limiting values as set out in this TSI while respecting the exceptional limit values and applying specific restrictions and measures set out in the specification referenced in Appendix T, index [4]. Applying this exception shall not prevent the access of vehicles authorised for the maximum values required in point 4.2.4.3 of this TSI.
  • (b) In the event of a change other than an upgrading of the infrastructure subsystem, the following conditions related to platform height and offset governed by points 4.2.9.2 and 4.2.9.3, shall apply:
  • — It shall be allowed to apply other nominal platform heights, if the compliance to the values set out by point 4.2.9.2 would require structural alterations to any load bearing element.
  • — It shall be allowed to apply other platform offset than the one defined in point 4.2.9.3(2) as long as the value for bq is equal or greater than bqlim.
7.3.3.   Existing lines that are not subject to a renewal or upgrading project

Where an infrastructure manager wishes to demonstrate the level of compliance of an existing line with the basic parameters of this TSI, it shall apply the procedure described in Commission Recommendation 2014/881/EU ([^E0015]).

7.3.4.   Route compatibility checks before the use of authorised vehicles

The route compatibility check procedure to be applied and the parameters of the infrastructure subsystem to be used are set out in point 4.2.2.5 and Appendix D.1 of TSI OPE.

7.4.   not used

7.5.   not used

7.6.   not used

7.7.   Specific cases

The following specific cases may be applied on particular networks. The specific cases are classified as:

  • (a) ‘P’ cases : permanent cases;
  • (b) ‘T’ cases : temporary cases, where it is recommended that the target system is reached by 2020 (an objective set out in Decision No 1692/96/EC of the European Parliament and Council ([^E0016])).

All specific cases and their relevant dates shall be re-examined in the course of future revisions of the TSI with a view to limiting their technical and geographical scope based on an assessment of their impact on safety, interoperability, cross border services, TEN-T corridors, and the practical and economic impacts of retaining or eliminating them. Special account shall be given to availability of EU funding.

Specific cases shall be limited to the route or network where they are strictly necessary and taken account of through route compatibility procedures.

7.7.1.   Particular features on the Austrian network
  • 7.7.1.1. (not used)
7.7.2.   Particular features on the Belgian network
7.7.2.1.   Platform offset (4.2.9.3)

P cases

For platform heights of 550 mm and 760 mm, the conventional value bq0 of platform offset shall be calculated according to the following formulas:
Image omitted; see official source In curve with a radius 1 000 ≤ R ≤ ∞ (m)
Image omitted; see official source In curve with a radius R < 1 000 (m)
7.7.3.   Particular features on the Bulgarian network
7.7.3.1.   Platform height (4.2.9.2)

P cases

For upgraded or renewed platforms, the nominal platform height of 300 mm and 1 100  mm above the running surface shall be allowed.

7.7.3.2.   Platform offset (4.2.9.3)

P cases

Instead of points 4.2.9.3(1) and 4.2.9.3(2), the platform offset shall be:

  • (a) 1 650  mm for platforms with heights of 300 mm and
  • (b) 1 750  mm for platforms with height of 1 100  mm.
7.7.4.   Particular features on the Danish network
7.7.4.1.   Platform height (4.2.9.2)

P cases

For S-Tog services the nominal platform height of 920 mm above the running surface shall be allowed.

7.7.5.   Particular features on the Estonian network
7.7.5.1.   Nominal track gauge (4.2.4.1)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.4.1(2), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system the nominal track gauge shall be either 1 520  mm or 1 524  mm.

7.7.5.2.   Resistance of new bridges to traffic loads (4.2.7.1)

P cases

For the 1 520  mm track gauge system, for lines with an axle load of 30 t, it shall be allowed to design structures to support vertical loads in accordance with the load model set out in Appendix M to this TSI.

7.7.5.3.   The immediate action limit for switches and crossing (4.2.8.6)

P cases

Instead of sub-point 4.2.8.6(3)(a), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system, the minimum value of bypass at the narrowest location between open switch rail and stock rail is 54 mm.

7.7.6.   Particular features on the Finnish network
7.7.6.1.   TSI Categories of line (4.2.1)

P cases

Instead of gauges specified in the columns ‘Gauge’ in Table 2 and Table 3 of point 4.2.1(6), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, it shall be allowed to use gauge FIN1.

7.7.6.2.   Structure gauge (4.2.3.1)

P cases

  • (1) Instead of points 4.2.3.1(1) and 4.2.3.1(2), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, both the upper and lower part of the structure gauge shall be set on the basis of the gauge FIN1. Those gauges are defined in Annex D, section D4.4 of  EN 15273-3:2013+A1:2016.
  • (2) Instead of point 4.2.3.1(3), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, calculations of the structure gauge shall be done using the static method in accordance with the requirements of sections 5, 6, 10 and Annex D Section D.4.4 of EN 15273-3:2013.
7.7.6.3.   Distance between track centres (4.2.3.2)

P cases

  • (1) Instead of point 4.2.3.2(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the distance between track centres shall be set on the basis of the gauge FIN1.
  • (2) Instead of point 4.2.3.2(2), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the nominal horizontal distance between track centres for new lines shall be specified for the design and shall not be smaller than the values mentioned in Table 21; it considers margins for aerodynamic effects. Table 21 Minimum nominal horizontal distance between track centres Maximum allowed speed [km/h] Minimum nominal horizontal distance between track centres [m] v ≤ 120 4,10 120 < v ≤ 160 4,30 160 < v ≤ 200 4,50 200 < v ≤ 250 4,70 v > 250 5,00
  • (3) Instead of point 4.2.3.2(3), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the distance between track centres shall at least satisfy the requirements for the limit installation distance between track centres, defined according Annex D, Section D4.4.5 of  EN 15273-3:2013+A1:2016.
7.7.6.4.   Minimum radius of horizontal curve (4.2.3.4)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.3.4(3), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, reverse curves (other than reverse curves in marshalling yards where wagons are shunted individually) with radii in the range from 150 m up to 275 m for new lines shall be designed in accordance with Table 22 to prevent buffer locking.

Table 22
Limits for the length of a straight intermediate element between two long circular curves in the opposite directions [m] [^E0017]
Alignment chain [^E0017] Limits for tracks for mixed traffic [m]
R = 150 m — straight — R = 150 m 16,9
R = 160 m — straight — R = 160 m 15,0
R = 170 m — straight — R = 170 m 13,5
R = 180 m — straight — R = 180 m 12,2
R = 190 m — straight — R = 190 m 11,1
R = 200 m — straight — R = 200 m 10,00
R = 210 m — straight — R = 210 m 9,1
R = 220 m — straight — R = 220 m 8,2
R = 230 m — straight — R = 230 m 7,3
R = 240 m — straight — R = 240 m 6,4
R = 250 m — straight — R = 250 m 5,4
R = 260 m — straight — R = 260 m 4,1
R = 270 m — straight — R = 270 m 2,0
R = 275 m — straight — R = 275 m 0

Note: For reverse curves with different radii the radius of the smaller curve shall be used when designing straight element between the curves.

7.7.6.5.   Nominal track gauge (4.2.4.1)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.4.1(1), the nominal track gauge shall be 1 524  mm.

7.7.6.6.   Cant (4.2.4.2)

P cases

  • (1) Instead of point 4.2.4.2(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the design cant shall not exceed 180 mm for ballasted or non-ballasted track.
  • (2) Instead of point 4.2.4.2(3), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, new lines with mixed or freight traffic on curves with a radius less than 320 m and a cant transition steeper than 1 mm/m, the cant shall be restricted to the limit given by the following formula D ≤ (R – 50) × 0,7 where D is the cant in mm and R is the radius in m.
7.7.6.7.   Maximum unguided length of fixed obtuse crossings (4.2.5.3)

P cases

In Appendix J, for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm:

  • (a) instead of point (J.1)(b), the minimum radius through obtuse crossing shall be 200 m; for radius between 200-220 m small radius shall be compensated with track gauge widening;
  • (b) instead of point (J.1)(c), the minimum check rail height shall be 39 mm.
7.7.6.8.   The immediate action limit of track gauge as an isolated defect (4.2.8.4)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.8.4(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the immediate action limits of track gauge as an isolated defect are set out in Table 23.

Table 23
Immediate action limits of track gauge for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm
Speed [km/h] Dimensions [mm] Dimensions [mm]
Minimum track gauge Maximum track gauge
v ≤ 60 1 515 1 554
60 < v ≤ 120 1 516 1 552
120 < v ≤ 160 1 517 1 547
160 < v ≤ 200 1 518 1 543
200 < v ≤ 250 1 519 1 539
v > 250 1 520 1 539
7.7.6.9.   The immediate action limit of cant (4.2.8.5)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.8.5(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the maximum cant allowed in service is 190 mm.

7.7.6.10.   The immediate action limits for switches and crossings (4.2.8.6)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.8.6(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the technical characteristics of switches and crossings shall comply with the following in-service values:

  • (a) Maximum value of free wheel passage in switches: 1 469  mm. This value can be increased if the Infrastructure Manager demonstrates that the actuation and locking system of the switch is able to resist the lateral impact forces of a wheel set.
  • (b) Minimum value of fixed nose protection for common crossings: 1 476  mm. This value is measured 14 mm below the running surface, and on the theoretical reference line, at an appropriate distance back from the actual point (RP) of the nose as indicated in Figure 2. For crossings with point retraction, this value can be reduced. In this case the Infrastructure Manager shall demonstrate that the point retraction is sufficient to guarantee that the wheel will not hit the nose at the actual point (RP).
  • (c) Maximum value of free wheel passage at crossing nose: 1 440  mm.
  • (d) Maximum value of free wheel passage at check rail/wing rail entry: 1 469  mm.
  • (e) Minimum flangeway width: 42 mm.
  • (f) Minimum flangeway depth: 40 mm.
  • (g) Maximum excess height of check rail: 55 mm.
7.7.6.11.   Platform offset (4.2.9.3)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.9.3(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, the distance between the track centre and the platform edge, parallel to the running plane, shall be set on the basis of the installation limit gauge and is defined in chapter 13 of  EN 15273-3:2013+A1:2016. The instllation limit gauge shall be set on the basis of the gauge FIN1. The minimum distance of bq, calculated as in chapter 13 of  EN 15273-3:2013+A1:2016 is herafter refered to as bqlim.

7.7.6.12.   Train external cleaning facilities (4.2.12.3)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.12.3(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, where a washing plant is provided it shall be able to clean the outer sides of single or double-deck trains between a height of:

  • (a) 330 to 4 367  mm for a single-deck train,
  • (b) 330 to 5 300  mm for double-deck trains.
7.7.6.13.   Assessment of structure gauge (6.2.4.1)

P cases

Instead of point 6.2.4.1(1), for the nominal track gauge of 1 524  mm, assessment of structure gauge as a design review shall be done against characteristic cross sections using the results of calculations made by the Infrastructure Manager or the contracting entity on the basis of sections 5, 6, 10 and Annex D, Section D.4.4 of  EN 15273-3:2013+A1:2016.

7.7.7.   Particular features on the French network
7.7.7.1.   Platform height (4.2.9.2)

P cases

For the rail network of Ile-de-France the nominal platform height of 920 mm above the running surface shall be allowed.

7.7.8.   Particular features on the German network
7.7.8.1.   Platform height (4.2.9.2)

P cases

For S-Bahn services the nominal platform height of 960 mm above the running surface shall be allowed.

7.7.8.2.   Immediate action limits of track gauge as an isolated defect (4.2.8.4)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.8.4(1), the minimum track gauge for all speeds is 1 430  mm.

7.7.9.   Particular features on the Hellenic network
7.7.9.1.   Platform height (4.2.9.2)

P cases

The nominal platform height shall be allowed to be 300 mm above the running surface.

7.7.10.   Particular features on the Italian network
7.7.10.1.   Platform offset (4.2.9.3)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.9.3(1), for the platforms with the height of 550 mm, the distance bqlim [mm] between the the track centre and the platform edge, parallel to the running plane, shall be calculated from the formula:

  • (a) on straight track and inside the curves: bqlim = 1 650  + 3 750 /R + (g – 1 435 )/2 + 11,5
  • (b) outside the curves: bqlim = 1 650  + 3 750 /R + (g – 1 435 )/2 + 11,5 + 220 * tanδ where R is the radius of the track, in metres, g is the track gauge, δ is the angle of the cant with the horizontal line.
7.7.10.2.   Equivalent conicity (4.2.4.5)

P cases

  • (1) Instead of point 4.2.4.5.(3) design values of track gauge, rail head profile and rail inclination for plain line shall be selected to ensure that the equivalent conicity limits set out in Table 24 are not exceeded. Table 24 Equivalent conicity design limit values Wheel profile Speed range [km/h] S1002, GV1/40 EPS v ≤ 60 Assessment not required 60 < v ≤ 200 0,25 0,30 200 < v ≤ 280 0,20 N.A. v > 280 0,10 N.A.
  • (2) Instead of point 4.2.4.5. (4) the following wheelsets shall be modelled passing over the designed track conditions (simulated by calculation according to  EN 15302:2021):
  • (a) S 1002 as defined in Annex C to EN 13715:2020 with SR1;
  • (b) S 1002 as defined in Annex C to EN 13715:2020 with SR2;
  • (c) GV 1/40 as defined in Annex B to EN 13715:2020 with SR1;
  • (d) GV 1/40 as defined in Annex B to EN 13715:2020 with SR2;
  • (e) EPS as defined in Annex D to EN 13715:2020 with SR1. For SR1 and SR2 the following values apply:
  • (f) For the 1 435  mm track gauge system SR1 = 1 420  mm and SR2 = 1 426  mm.
7.7.10.3.   Equivalent conicity in service (4.2.11.2)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.11.2.(2) the infrastructure manager shall measure the track gauge and the railhead profiles at the site in question at a distance of approximate 10 m. The mean equivalent conicity over 100 m shall be calculated by modelling with the wheelsets (a) – (e) mentioned in paragraph 7.7.10.2 (2) of this TSI in order to check for compliance, for the purpose of the joint investigation, with the limit equivalent conicity for the track specified in Table 14.

7.7.11.   Particular features on the Latvian network
7.7.11.1.   Resistance of new bridges to traffic loads — vertical loads (4.2.7.1.1)

P cases

  • (1) For sub-point 4.2.7.1.1(1)(a), for the 1 520  mm track gauge system, load model 71 shall be applied with a distributed load qvk of 100 kN/m.
7.7.12.   Particular features on the Polish network
7.7.12.1.   TSI Categories of line (4.2.1)

P cases

In point 4.2.1(7), Table 2 line P3, instead of gauge DE3, on upgraded or renewed railway lines in Poland gauge G2 is allowed.

7.7.12.2.   Distance between track centres (4.2.3.2)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.3.2(4), for 1 520  mm track gauge, for station tracks for direct reloading of goods from wagon to wagon the nominal horizontal minimum distance of 3,60 m shall be allowed.

7.7.12.3.   Minimum radius of horizontal curve (4.2.3.4)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.3.4(3), for the 1 520  mm track gauge, on tracks other than main tracks, reverse curves with radii in the range from 150 m up to 250 m shall be designed with a section of straight track of at least 10 m between the curves.

7.7.12.4.   Minimum radius of vertical curve (4.2.3.5)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.3.5(3), for the 1 520  mm track gauge, the radius of vertical curves (except the marshalling yards) shall be at least 2 000  m both on a crest and in a hollow.

7.7.12.5.   Cant deficiency (4.2.4.3)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.4.3(3), for all types of rolling stock of the 1 520  mm track gauge the cant deficiency shall not exceed 130 mm.

7.7.12.6.   Abrupt change of cant deficiency (4.2.4.4)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.4.4(3), for 1 520  mm track gauge, requirements of points 4.2.4.4(1) and 4.2.4.4(2) shall be applied.

7.7.12.7.   The immediate action limit for track twist (4.2.8.3)

P cases

Instead of point 4.2.8.3(4) and 4.2.8.3(5), for 1 520  mm track gauge points from 4.2.8.3(1) to 4.2.8.3(3) shall be applied.

Reading this document does not replace reading the official text published in the Official Journal of the European Union. We assume no responsibility for any inaccuracies arising from the conversion of the original to this format.

This text is published under EUR-Lex's own terms of reuse, not a Legalize or public-domain licence. EUR-Lex
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0)
© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu — Source: EUR-Lex (Publications Office of the European Union). Reused under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) licence. Only EU legislation published in the printed Official Journal of the European Union is deemed authentic; consolidated texts are reproduced here for documentation purposes and have been reformatted to Markdown.