Gross Weight Load: Can It Be Used for Railcar Gravity Force?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Altai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Load Weight
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the terminology used in the context of railcar weight and forces, specifically whether the term "gross weight load" can appropriately describe the gravity force acting on a fully loaded railcar. Participants explore the definitions of gross weight, net weight, and tare weight, as well as the implications of these terms in engineering calculations related to rail transport.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the appropriateness of using "gross weight load" for the gravity force of a railcar, seeking clarification on its usage.
  • Another participant explains that gross weight typically includes the load, while net weight excludes it, suggesting that the term "load" may be unnecessary.
  • A different participant considers the term "gross weight force" but expresses uncertainty about its correctness in the context of forces related to a railcar's weight.
  • Participants discuss the distinction between weight as a force and mass, noting that many people confuse the two terms.
  • One participant questions the relevance of force calculations for railwaymen, suggesting they may only need to know the weight or mass of the railcar.
  • Another participant counters that the material discusses various loads and forces acting on a railcar, implying that understanding these forces is important.
  • Definitions of tare weight, net weight, and gross weight are provided, emphasizing their relevance in shipping and transport contexts.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the terminology and its relevance to railway professionals. There is no consensus on whether "gross weight load" is an appropriate term for the gravity force of a railcar, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the necessity of including "force" in the terminology.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the potential confusion between weight and mass, as well as the specific context in which the terminology is being used. The discussion reflects varying levels of familiarity with transport terminology and the specific needs of railway professionals.

Altai
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Dear native English speaking professionals!
Would someone please advise on the term "gross weight load" - is it possible to use it for gravity force of a fully loaded railcar?

I use it in the following context:

"Estimated vertical force on one chord section is assumed to be equal to:
q(v) = P(gr) : n
where P(gr) is gross weight load;
n is number of car dumper clamps; it is assumed that n = 8 (4 per side)."

Is it OK to use this term here? Being no native English speaker, I'm not 100% sure...
 
Last edited:
Engineering news on Phys.org
Hi Altai! :smile:

I'm not familiar with transport terminology :redface:, but I've always understood gross weight to include the load, and net weight to exclude the load …

see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gross_weight#Measuring_weight" …
Gross weight is a term that generally is found in commerce or trade applications, and refers to the total weight of a product and its packaging. Conversely, net weight refers to the weight of the product alone, discounting the weight of its container or packaging; and tare weight is the weight of the packaging alone.​

So the word "load" would be unnecessary (I think).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for your reply tiny-tim.
I was also thinking about "gross weight force", but... again, I'm not so sure. Though what "P" stands for is really a force due to the weight of a fully loaded railcar - including the weight of the car itself (tare weight) and the weight of its contents (net weight).
 
Hi Altai! :smile:

Weight is a force.

m is mass, and mg is weight.

Of course, a lot of people say "weight" when they mean "mass" …

who is this being written for?​
 
It's for English-speaking railwaymen. I'm just translating some Russian material into English.
So the "force" part is also excessive here? Oops.
 
Altai said:
It's for English-speaking railwaymen.

mmm … I don't really understand why a railwayman would be interested in force :confused: …

what calculations do they need to make?

Don't they simply want to know what the weight (the mass) is?
 
tiny-tim said:
mmm … I don't really understand why a railwayman would be interested in force :confused: …

Well, the material is about all kinds of loads and forces acting on a railcar, so why not?
 
Tare weight = weight of the empty container or car
Net weight = weight of the contents of the container or car
Gross weight = total of Tare and Net weights

These figures are displayed on the sides of shipping containers, for instance
 

Similar threads

Railcar Operating Loads: Cargo Side Thrust Forces
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Units of Measurement for Railcar Operating Loads
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
How Do You Calculate Member Forces Using the Unit Load Method?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Find force to raise load using friction and two bars
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
Calculating Weight of Load Using Lever Force - 65 Characters
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
Is My Buoyant Force Calculation Correct?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
Hydrodynamic forces on a foil, Reynolds number, viscosity
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
Graduate Why a vector field can not be used to describe gravity?
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
Graduate Is Energy Used When Moving A Weight Without Doing Work?
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad Why Does Drag Force Depend on Cone Shape and Size but Not on Mass or Gravity?
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K