lFf

~ ~ ~, 1JffiJ mcm~~

;rt ~-~~o oo~CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY BOARD

&EX-OFFICIO PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

GOVERNMENT OF INDIAMINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

NEW DELHI-11 0001

14th February, 2002

Monitoring of Equipment failures is being done at various levels inDivisional HOs, Zonal HOs and at Board level through a series of the then CRB'sletters No. 92/0R/E&R/75/1 dated 21.4.1992 and 25.4.1992. Over the years,though the system continues to be in place, some slackness appears to havecrept in, resulting in incorrect reporting and defective feed-back for propermanagerial decisions.

Different railways are also having substantially different formats forcapturing the data at the Division and Zonal HOs level. Proper reconciliation ofthese failures is not being done at the appropriate level, which, in turn, results invariation offigures of failures coming from different sources.

In order to ensure adequate attention to this vital subject of reporting andanalysis of equipment failures which affects both operation and financialperformance of the railways adversely 'Failure Management', as per instructionsin force, is an important duty of AGMs in HOs and nom_inatedADRMs in Divisions.Further, one nominated HOD in each department is to coordinate with the AGMfor critical review and monitoring of failures.

To further strengthen this vital aspect and to ensure uniformity in correctreporting and analysis of the Equipment failures, the following are enclosed:

Proforma for reporting of equipment failures(Division to Zonal HOs)

Proforma for reporting of equipment failures(Zonal HQ to Railway Board)

I would expect that the present system will get re-energised with this set ofinstructions and we shall be better placed to take corrective action so as tominimise the Equipment failures.

Annexure 1Guidelines For Reporting of Equipment Failures

Equipment Failure monitoring is being done by E&R directorate as perCRB's DO letters No.92/0RlE&R/1 dated 21.4.1992, 20.5.92, 1.6.92, 18.8.92 and29.9.92.

In the present System all Railways are sending details of failures to E&RDirectorate in an EXCEL proforma and based on these reports E&R Directorateprepares 10Reports which are sent to concerned Directorates. E&R Directorate onlymonitors the overall trends of failuresand the concerned Directorate does the detailedfailure analysisand follow-up action to identifYthe poor performers and to improvetheir performance.

Railway Board has been repeatedly emphasising on correct Reporting ofEquipment failures..E&R Directorate recently conducted a Study covering 7 ZonalRailways to assess the correctness of the Reporting of Equipment failures bycomparing the figures of Equipment failures logged in HQ control office of theseRailways with those reported to Railway Board. During this Study it was found thateach Railway is reporting failures in different formats and different classifications totheir Zonal HQ.

A need has been felt to issue guidelines for Reporting of Equipment failuresfrom Divisions to Zonal HQ and Zonal HQ to Board to ensure uniformity ofreporting from railway to railway and also within the railways from time to time.These guidelineshave been framed by consolidating existing instructions from variousCodeslManuals and various letters/circulars issued by Board on this subject.

RaillWeIdfailuresare to be reported as per ME's DO. No. 92/track III TM/l1dated 29.7.98. According to this letter all Railways should report rail/weld failuresoccuring on their system in terms of para 257 of the P.Way mannual which isreproduced below:

"A Rail is said to have failed if it has fractured in track or it is considerednecessary to remove it from track on account of defects other than those due toaccidental damages due to buckling, kinking, derailments, abnormal wheel bums etc."

as followsa) Cases of banner flagsb) Cases of bursting of blocksc) Miscellaneouscases

Locomotive failures (both Diesel & Electric) are to be reported as perPara 2 (iii) of CRB's DO lr. No.92/0RlE&Rl1 dated 18.8.92 which states that"Diesel & Electric loco failures include Statistical and Non-statistical failures ".

For Board the sum of all Statistical & Non-statistical failures are to bereported; dividedas for Home locos and for foreign locos.

Definition of Statistical Engine Failure is given in the Manual ofStatistical instructions (Vol. I) issued in 1983 in para 13 (page 87). This isreproduced below:

13.01(i) An engine is considered to have failed when it is unable to work itsbooked train within the prescribed load from start, (i.e. after being attached on tothe train), to destination (i,e., to the first shed or point where the engine is bookedto cut off or to work another train as per link diagram) or causes a delay in arrivalat destination of one hour or more in the case of ste~ locomotives and 30minutes or more for passenger trains and 60 minutes or more forfreight trainsin the case of diesel and electrical locomotives, due to under mentioned.causes:

(a) Defectivedesign.(b) Defectivematerial.(c) Bad workmanship in shops(d) Bad workmanship in shed.(e) Mismanagementby engine crew.(f) Bad fuel.(g) Bad water.

Definition of Non-statistical failures is given in Page 13 Para 2.12.2.3(2) of Indian Railways Maintenance Manual for Diesel Locomotives-1978.According to this defmitionnon-statistical failures are as follows;

ial Locomotlvt under-gomg repaIrs at the end of it~ trip a1 station/terminalyard/shed and nor being availablefor the return trip .

(b}Failure of locomotive booked on triai after heavy schedules or change ofmajor components like armature, turbo-generator etc.

(c) Failures oflocos which are over due by more than 24 hours. •(d) Cases of heavy time losses (more than 30 minutes) on the run as a result of

inclement weather like dust-torms, heavy rains etc. when visibility ofsignals is affected of slippingof wheels takes place and cannot be attributedto faulty operation of running staff

(e) Cases of heavy time losses (more than 30 minutes) due to over-load; loadbeing more than specified.

Other detentions on locomotive account maybe d.ivided as otherdetentions of less than 30 minutes of passenger trains and less than 60 minutes on'Goods trainsaild Stallings.

Wagon failures are to be reported under the heads of Poor BrakePower, SpringBreakage, Journal Breakage, Hot Axle, Train Parting and WagonDetachments. Wagon detachments are to be further classified as (a) Roadside'detachments and (b) Detachn;lents on through Goods trains not offered forexamination.

Hot Box is defined in para 1.20 of IRCA Part 3 as "Every Journalwhich runs warm necessitating a vehicle, wagon or Brake-van being detachedfrom a train from the commencement of its journey to its booked destinationinclusive shouldbe considered a Hot Box" .

There are cases of spring breakages wherein Goods wagons areallowed to run with clamped springs without detaching the wagon. Such casesshould be accounted as a Spring Breakage but need not be accounted as aWagon Detachment.

Miscellaneous cases of detentions on Wagon account such as brakebinding, flat tyres ete may be reported to HQ only.

In the present system coach detachment are being reported onterritorial basis only. The system is being slightly changed to cover responsibilityas Home and foreign similar to loco failures. Coach detachments will now be

reponeo to Hoare as Detachmems of Home railwa) coaChes ane d$chmem offoreign railwa) coaches

For purpose of analysis in HQ coach detachments may be divided ascases of Hot axle, cases of Electrical defects and other cases. The definition ofHot Box for Coaching Stock in IRCA Part IV Para 1.14 is the same as for Goodsstock. Cases of train detentions on Coach account (not leading to a Coachdetachment) may be reported to HQ only as Mechanical cases and Electricalcases.

As per CRB's DO lr. No.92/0RlE&R/I dated 18.8.92 OHE failuresare to be reported as per instructions contained in para 717 (page No.122) ofManual of AC Traction Maintenance and Operation. This is reproduced below:

"Failure of 25 KV supply can be due to(a) Failure of equipment or lines or supply authorities or(b) Failure of railwayequipment oflines

Failure of the equipment belonging to the supply authorities generallyaffects the whole of the OHE fed by the sub-stationconcemed. When theindications at the RCC are failure of supply over entire area fed by one sub-station, the cause and likely duration of failure should be ascertained immediatelyfrom the operator of the grid sub-station.

A possible, though rare, case of failure of supply is when faultsdevelop simultaneouslyon several sectors of ORE or feeders supplied by the sub-station. In such a case, TPC should proceed to isolate the fault as given in theparagraphs that follow.

Failure of supply to one sector of OHE may also be caused by failureof a feeder circuit breaker to hold due to a defect in it. It is also rare. In such acase, the supply should be restored through the second feeder circuit breaker andusing the bus coupler".

AUOHE breakdowns and tripping for more than 5 minutes are to bereported to Board.

All tripping for less than 5 minutes and bursting of blocks on OREaccount may be reported to HQ.

As per CRB's DO Jr. No.92/0R/E&Rll dated 18.8.92 in para 2(v)Signal Failures are to be reported as per Signal Failure registers.

The sum of all types of Signal failures as per Signal failure Register isto be reported to Board.

For purpose of analysis in HQ Signal failures should be divided intofailures of Signals,Points, Blocks, Track circuits and others.

Telecommunicationfailures may be reported to HQ only as failures oftelephones, contro~,LCgates and others.

Failures due to miscellaneous causes such as Cattle run~over, ICCpullingetc maybe reported to HQ only.

Two Standard Formats (in EXCEL) for Reporting of Equipmentfailures from Divisions to Zonal HQ and Zonal HQ to Board have been preparedin the Efficiency& Research Directorate. In these formats an attempt has beenmade to capture all types of information which is prima-facie available tocategorise a type offailure.

By filling these formats correctly we may be able to avoid a lot ofwaste of time and energy presently spent in getting failures delogged andcategorised correctly when initially a wrong reporting is made. The proposedsystemwillwork as follows:

1. A daily report of Equipment failures will be prepared as per the Standard fomatand this will be emailedon a daily basis from each Division to HQ.2. The cases are classified as those Reportable to Board and those reportable toHQ only.3. Based on this data logged a Weekly Report can be prepared in Divisioncontaining detailed failure analysis and follow-up action of each failure and thiscan also be emailedto HQ.

1. Cases Reportable to Board and HQ will be put up to all GMs & PHODs.2. In Zonal HQ it should be possible to make the Report for Board without anyhuman interface. The cases Reportable to Board will be e-mailed to E&RDirectorate on a monthJy basis (as is done now).3. Each Department can further sub-divide the categories/classifications offailures for detailed analysis. The guidelines on Analysis are given in Annexure 44. The weekly failure analysis can be discussed in HQ by AGM with concernedHODs.

I. The E&R Directorate will send the 10 Reports to all Directorates for detailedanalysis as it does now.

5.4 Advantages of ~heproposed System

1. All the levels will get the same figures of failures and there will be no confusion, on this account.

2. Positions will get standardised on all Railways.3. In the Standard fonnat eategorisation to the extent possible on the initialreporting can be done. This will avoid waste of time and energy presently spent ingetting failures delogged.4. Such a system should lead to more correct reporting of failures.

~5. The emphasis should change from spending energy in de-logging! adjustingfailures to taking follow up action to avoid f4ture failures.

6. The system will enable Bench-marking and identifYing divisions having leastfailures for others to emulate.

7. The system will enable concentrated attention to RailwayslDivisions in whichmore failures are occuring.

Reportable to 54 Coach detro-Horne-Total64 Bd.'65 5.5 Coach detm-Foreign-Hot axle66 Analysis for HQ 5.6 Coach detm-Foreign-ElectricaJ67 5.7 Coach detm-Forelgn-othe~68 Reportable to 5.8 Coach detro-Foreign-Total69 Bd. 5.9 Coach detm.-Home+Forelgn70 Reportableto 5.10 other Mech.cases(Part'g,Poor BP)71 HQ. 5.11 othe~-Electrical reasons72 6 OHE 6.1 OHE breakdowns

'73r~ Failures Reportable to 6.2 Trippinns> 5 mts due to Rlys74 Bd. 6.3 Trippings> 5 mts due to Supolier75 6.4 Total cases> 5 minutes76 6.5 Trippings< 5 mts due to Rlys77 Reportable to 6.6 Trippings< 5 mts due to Supplier78 HQ 6.7 Bursting of blocks79--~.-== 6.8 Total cases_~O. _L . ..!'.gnal Failures as per 7.1 Signal failures _~81_ . Signal Register, g ._.Polnt faUures__~ __ '- only total failures 7.3 . Block failures-d .~ --~ to be reported to +~ Track g{h~;:aJ1J.iLes --1---

-135' .-=--- ~:.__ -- Board 7:61-----. Total SiQnal failures .- ----="=--::...--::=_~ ..8. ...I!!1~com ~ ~T_el~one'?. .__ . . ---f---.----- ... ~

i[~.=t------=- Re~rt~~:~ to Hf----== ~fg-~~it.-_:.-=====:..._- -- -- - --='=--- =~===1ii~::~~~~~~:::'~I :: -~f~::~:i,:~~~:~~:;f--:-~:::-~ t ....=-: .~

~ _., L_ ~IltJf':tG

STF.TEMEN- or E:;);)I"'MEj·r" "AI_uRE.:. FRO". AORtl' TG "'3N

..~aci:~!~t~:~~aiiu~s atieC:bn~a~'lnO~~~~:~~~ Wrtn'al<!~i~~t~iiffC~]t!~I~(ii"Bd~~at~. ._=_- ====.-=~'l.i-Olh@r'casesofequ;pmeiitriiiiiireswflf be reportea too,:,!!~"~==~~==~ =~"_~,~=~~=-~",~,"~=,._~~"~J

: ~"'~~lEq-'iipment'~Criteriafor""=~~"' . ,Reportableto Reportableto Reportable' Reportable!R rkl I SN Failures Cases Sub-head Boartl-dailv Board-cum. to HQ-dailv ! to HQ-cum. ' ema s

KllII All cases to be, '...lJ..------ ._~FracturEc_Failures re orted to .J.1.J... .__ '{'IeICUclilure

~oard W4J-- others (fish plates/bons), I 1.4. Total RlW/Others

j 1. 5 i . Banner flagsAll cases to be i 1.6 ; Burstlna of blocksreported to HQ i 1.7 Mlsc

I 18 Total Banner/BurstIMisc.2.1 Stat Home - Loco defect2.2 Stat Home-Mismntof creIN2.3 DE SllIt Failures..Home2.4 Stat Foreign - Loco defect2.5 Stat Foreian-Mismotof creIN2.6 DE Slat. Failures-Foreian2.7 DE s1lIt-total-Home+Foreign2.8 NS-Home- ODS> 24 hours2 9 NS-Home- others

2.10 DE NS failures -Home2.11 NS-ForeiQn-ODS > 24 hou~2.12 NS-Foreion - othe~2:13 DE NS failures· Foreian2.14 DE-NS-total· Home + Foreign2.15 DE Failures - Home IStat+NS)2.16 DE Failures· Forelan IStatt'NSI2.17 Detentions due to Joco<30 mts2.18 StalJing2.19 Crew not tumina up for dutv3.1 Stat Home - Loco defect3.2 StatHome-Mismatof crew3,3 EE Stat. Failures-Home

Total detention> 3.4 StatForeinn - Loco defect30 mts for Pass. 3.5 Stal. Foreinn-Mismotof crewTrain, 60 mts for 3.6EE Stat Failures-ForeianGoods train, to 3.7 EE stat-total-Home+Foreian

be reported 3.8 NS-Home- ODS > 24 hoursclassified as 3.9 NS-Home- Others

shown for 3.10 EE NS failures -Homeanalysis in HQ 3.11 NS-Foreian-ODS > 24 hours

3.12 NS-Foreign - othe~3.13 EE NS failures - Foreign3.1'1 EE-NS-total- Home + Foreian3.15 EE Failures - Home (Stat+NS)3.16 EE Failures - Foreign IStatt-NS)3.17 detentions due to 1000< 30 mts3.18 Stalling3.19 Crew not turning up for duty4.1 Poor Brake power4.2 Sprino breakaoe4.3 Journal breaka..ge

Reportable to 4.'1 Hat axleBoard 4.5 Train Parting

4.6 Detachments in throunh trains4 7 Detachments in Yards of through. trains not offered for examination

~€~~,~-i

-st~l10' ,11' 112 -----+-

1314

~216171819202122

2324252627282930313233~r-l-~f--363738

13114041424344454647464950515253 45455565758

II, ,

, i i

i i +--I

I

DieselFailures

Total detention >30 mts for Pass.Train, 60 mts forGoods train, to

be reportedclassified as

shown foranalysis in HQ

Reportable toBoard

Reportable toHQonly

E1ectrlcLoco

Failures

Reportable toBoard

Reportable toHQonly

Reportable toHQonly

Misc-Brake binding, flat lyres etc

Coach detm-Home-Hot axleCoach detm-Home-ElectricalCoach detm-Home-others

5.1Analysis forHQ 5.2

5.3

r Annexur~lIl---

A- -----. -----_.------~--- -S----------------------C----~. -b------e--. ----F-------G---=--

-------.~ ------.- - -_._---_.- ~--- "-- STANDARD FORMAT OF EQUIPMENT FAILURE ----2 IPROPOSED3 ~ : i i : I

4IS.No.' ,ITEM "

j Cummulative unto the , Remarks5 I ! , Avoidable Total ! Avoidable Total67. 1 Rail Failures8 (a) Rail Fractures9 (b) Weld Fractures10 TOTAL(A+B)1.112 2 Diesel Loco Failures

(a)Reporting Railway's Loco in its own

13 Territory

(b)ForeignRailway's loco in reporting

14 RailwaysTerritory15 i) CR16 Ii) ER17 iii) NR18 iv) NER19 v) NFR20 vi) 8ft21 vii) SCR22 viii) SER23 ix) WR24 Grand Total (A + B)2526 3 Electric Loco Failures

(a)Reporting Railway'::sLoco in its own

27 Territory

{b)ForeignRailway's Loco in reporting

28 RailwaysTerritory29 i) CR30 Ii) ER,31 iii) NR32 Iv) NER33 v) NFR34 VI) SR35 Vii) SCR36 viii) SER37 ix) WR36 Grand Total (A + B)3940 4 Wagon failures41 i) Poor Brake Power42 Ii) Spring Breakage43 •JoumalBreakage44 Iv) Hot Axle45 v) Train Parting46 VI) Wagon Detachments47 a) Road Side Detachroonts

Detachments In Yards of throughb) Goods train not offered for

48 examination49 TOTAL (A+B)5051 5 Coach Detachments

(a)Reporting Railway's Coaches In its

52 own Territory

(b)Foreign Railway's coaches In

53 reporting RailwaysTerritory54 i) CR55 ii) ER66 Iii) NR57 Iv) NER58 v) NFR --

59 vi) 8R60 SCR

-vii) 1-----

61 viii) SER62 Ix) WR63 ~and Total (A + B)-64~--- -- ~------ ~-'~ ------

-65 6 OHE Failures-~- _._---- ------ ---'----"-

-- -- ~------ ._--.-66'--_.- ---

Signal Failures as per Signal ----------67 7 Failure Reaister

] ,] For correct analysis of various kinds of Equipment failures a

computerized database for Equipment failures must be maintained in 'each

Division. This database should be maintained by Operating Department

based on control records and periodic record received from senior

subordinate of all departments. In addition each Br. officer must maintain a

complete database of Equipment failures concerning his Department. Based

on this initial database a reconciled database after the initial reports have

been reconciled must be maintained on each division. This should be

maintained under the supervision of ADRM and no other person should be

able to make any change in this database except the ADRM.

1.2. Computerised database of the following type of Equipment failures

shouldbe maintained:

1. Track defects2. Coach defects3. Wagon defects4. Motive power defects (Diesel + Electrical)5. Signalfailures6. Communication failures7. OREfailures

1.3. Periodic analysis (preferably monthly) for Equipment failures data

I.basemust be under taken by each department to identity the problem areas,

failure prone sections, particular installation failing regularly and particular

equipment part failures regularly, shortcomings in maintenance practices,,

senior supervisors in whose jurisdiction more failures are occurring. Based

on the above analysis, corrective actions must be initiated by each

department in order to ensure that such cases are reduced in future.

A monthly review should be carried out by the ADRMs in the

divisions and AGMs in HQs.

At least 70 to 80% of the failures are systems failures and are

directly or indirectly the responsibility of the senior management. Senior

officersshould examine failures even more thoroughly and should come up

with suitable and effective solution to reduce such failures.

J .4 Equipmem faijure~ mus, be anaivseo for being

avoidable and unavoidable under the eA'tamsystem and rules.

1.5. All avoidable Equipment failures must be further analysed so as to

indicate whether the failure was due to:

• Failure of operation management• Failure of maintenance management• Lack of instructions• Lack of training• Failure of material• Design defect

1.6. Failures that are classified as 'avoidable' should be monitored by the

Branch officer f HODs of department concerned so as to work towards

the zero 'avoidable' failures.

Past trends indicate that 60% to 70% failures under every discipline

are avoidable with better professional management. These failures should

be looked into not merely as cases of staff failures where individual's

responsibilitiesare fixed but from system improvement point of view.

1.7. What is classified as 'unavoidable' should be further analysed on a

quarterly basis by the ADRMs in the divisions and HODs! AGMs in the

HQs so as to take action for reducing their number by introduction of

modern technology, changing the roles or taking further appropriate action

so as to over come this problem. At the Railway Board's level the

concerned AM should undertake a quarterly review for the same purpose.

1.8. An example of a list giving the type of rail/weld failures which could

be considered as 'avoidable' with a vigilant management is as under:

Rail fractures

• Th1R defeCl nm removed within 3 days of detection

• REM defect not removed within 15 days of detection

• An untested rail put in the track

• Any fracture on turnouts and SEJs (because these are inspected m

detail once every quarter)

Weld fractures

• Any flash butt weld fracture

• Any fracture of thermit weld within one year (shows bad

• workmanship)

• If the weld was not tested and i. not supported on wooden

• locks and n. not joggled fish plated

• If the weld was found defective during USFD and not joggled fish

plated as prescribed.

Similar exercise is r~quired to be done in respect of each asset and

probable reasons resulting in avoidable failure listed.

2. ANALYSIS OF EQUIPMENT FAILURES

The analysis of the failures should be done by every department and

sent to the concerned PROD. Analysis may be done in sub-heads elaborated

below in addition to what is being done. This analysis is required to assist

the executive in taking managerial decisions to contain the detentions.

(i) Rail Failure Analysis

a) Rail fractures

b) Weld fractures

c) Rail cracks

d) Weld cracks

e) Failures offish plates and fish bolts etc

f) Miscellaneous

(ii) Analysis of other engineering Detentions! Disruptions:

a) Detention on banner flags for works of emergency nature

b) Banner flags for routine works.

c) Bursting of blocks for track machines.

d) Bursting of blocks other than track machines.

e) Others.

. [ '"T '''----"'

2.2 Analysis of Detentions due to loco (Electric and Diesel)

Statistical and Non-statistical failures which cause a detention of

over 30 minutes for passenger trains and 60 minutes for Goods trains should

be reported to Board and all other cases causing detention to traffic should

be reported to HQ. These failures will be analysed technically by

Mechanical or Electrical Department on the basis of the homing sheds, type

of system that has failed, type of equipment that has failed, whether material

or human failure, etc., as is being done at preSent.

These detentions should be classified and analysed under the

followingheads:- .

i) Statistical failures reported to the Board.

ii) Non-statistical failures reported to the Board.

iii) Other incidents reported to the HQ only

iv) Stallings reported to Board & HQ.

i) Statistical failures

a) Defective design

b) Defective material

c) Bad worksmanship in Shops

d) Bad worksmanship in Sheds

e) Mismanagementby engine crew

t) Bad fuel

g) Bad water

ii) Non-statistical failure

a) Link failure

b) Loco trial on Load

c) Loco ODS more than 24 hours

d i lnclement ~reather

e) Overload (load greater than maximum permissible)

iii) Other detentions on loco account not reportable to the Board should

also be analysed under sub-heads that have caused the detention, i.e.,

a) Loco defect

b) Mishandling by loco crew'" c) Failure of overdue schedule loco

d) Cattle run over, other run over cases.

e) Cases of crew not turning up for duty.

f) Other causes.

iv) Stalling

Definition of stalling

Any train which is detained for more than 30 minutes in a section due

to failure of loco to haul the load for any reason other than loco defect, will

be classifiedas a 'Stalling'.

Stallingswill be analysedunder the following sub-heads:-

a) On account of bad weather

b) On account of over-load of more than 2 % in comparison with .

RDSO's load tables, vis a vis the gradient in the section.

c) Sanders not working

d) Speed restriction on approach of rising gradient.

e) Signalsnot taken off in time on approach of rising gradients.

f) Other causes.

2.3 ANALYSIS OF WAGON FAILURES

These detentions will be analysed under the following heads, as

at present

a) Poor brake power

b) Spring breakage

c) Journalbreakage

d) Hot axle

e) Train parting

f) Detachments in thrOliclltrains

2.4 ANALYSISOF COACH FAILURES

These detentions will be analysed under the following heads,

i) Coach Detachments

a) Brake system

b) Roller bearing failure

c) Draw and Buffing gear

d) Misc. mechanical defects

e) Air-conditioning failure

f) Train lighting failure

ii) Other Detention on Coach Account

a) Brake binding

b) Roller ~ing

c) Train parting

d) Misc. mechanical reasons

e) Late placement of rakes

f) Non-availability of water

g) Air-conditioning defects

h) Train lighting defects

2.5 ANALYSIS OF TRD FAILURES

The detentions will be analysed under the following heads:

a) ORE breakdowns

b) Trippings of more than 5 mts. Duration on account of railway sub-

station / distribution system defect.

c) Trippings of more than 5 minutes duration due to sub-station failures

/ distribution system failures of the electricity supply agency.

d) Trippings ofless than 5 mts. Duration each on railway account,

e) Trippings of less than 5 mts, duration on Electricity Authority

A detailed analysis of the signal failures, cause-WIse, station-wise,

sectionwise, senior subordinate wise is already being done on most of the

Railways and the same is considered adequate. Analysis of Signal failures

should be carried out under heads like :

a) Signal failures

b) Point failures

c) Block failure

d) Track circuit failures

e) Others

2.7 ANALYSISOF TELECOMMUNICATION FAILURES

Communication failures should be analysed separately under the

heads:

a) Telephone failures

b) Control failures

c) LC gate failures

d) Others

2.8 MISCELLANEOUS FAILURES

Failures which cannot be attributed to failure of an

Equipment maybe classified as a Miscellaneous failure. These maybe

under the followingheads

a) ICC Pulling

b) Cattle run-over

c) Others

GOVERNMENT OF INDIAMINISTRY OF RAILWAYS

(RAILWA Y BOAlID)

The General Manager,Southern RaHway,Chennai.

The figures of loco failures reported to Railway Board in the statement ofEquipment Failures and the Action Plan statement (which are also enclosed with GM'sMCnO to CRE as Annexures B & C) are being used to compile Statistics of IndianRailways. Thus it is desired that the figures of loco failures reported in these statementsshould contain only statistical loco failures.

(Aru~P~"~'O"Director, E&R(ME),

Railway Board.

1. The General Managers, all Indian Railways (Except SR).2. AMIME, AMIL & AM(Traffic)