994 resultados para train level crossings
Resumo:
Background: Younger and older pedestrians are both overrepresented in train-pedestrian injury and fatality collision databases. However, scant research has attempted to determine the factors that influence level crossing behaviours for these high risk groups. Method: Five focus groups were undertaken with a total of 27 younger and 17 older pedestrian level crossing users (N = 44). Due to the lack of research in the area, a focus group methodology was implemented to gain a deeper exploratory understanding into the sample’s decision making processes through a pilot study. The three main areas of enquiry were identifying the: (a) primary reasons for unsafe behaviour; (b) factors that deter this behaviour and (c) proposed interventions to improve pedestrian safety at level crossings in the future. Results: Common themes to emerge from both groups regarding the origins of unsafe behaviours were: running late and a fatalistic perspective that some accidents are inevitable. However, younger pedestrians were more likely to report motivators to be: (a) non-perception of danger; (b) impulsive risk taking; and (c) inattention. In contrast, older pedestrians reported their decisions to cross are influenced by mobility issues and sensory salience. Conclusion: The findings indicate that a range of factors influence pedestrian crossing behaviours. This paper will further outline the major findings of the research in regards to intervention development and future research direction.
Resumo:
Level crossing crashes have been shown to result in enormous human and financial cost to society. According to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) [5] a total of 632 Railway Level crossing (RLX) collisions, between trains and road vehicles, occurred in Australia between 2001 and June 2009. The cost of RLX collisions runs into the tens of millions of dollars each year in Australia [6]. In addition, loss of life and injury are commonplace in instances where collisions occur. Based on estimates that 40% of rail related fatalities occur at level crossings [12], it is estimated that 142 deaths between 2001 and June 2009 occurred at RLX. The aim of this paper is to (i) summarise crash patterns in Australia, (ii) review existing international ITS interventions to improve level crossing and (iii) highlights open human factors research related issues. Human factors (e.g., driver error, lapses or violations) have been evidenced as a significant contributing factor in RLX collisions, with drivers of road vehicles particularly responsible for many collisions. Unintentional errors have been found to contribute to 46% of RLX collisions [6] and appear to be far more commonplace than deliberate violations. Humans have been found to be inherently inadequate at using the sensory information available to them to facilitate safe decision-making at RLX and tend to underestimate the speed of approaching large objects due to the non-linear increases in perceived size [6]. Collisions resulting from misjudgements of train approach speed and distance are common [20]. Thus, a fundamental goal for improved RLX safety is the provision of sufficient contextual information to road vehicle drivers to facilitate safe decision-making regarding crossing behaviours.
Resumo:
Railway level crossings are amongst the most complex of road safety control systems, due to the conflicts between road vehicles and rail infrastructure, trains and train operations. Driver behaviour at railway crossings is the major collision factor. The main objective of the present paper was to evaluate the existing conventional warning devices in relation to driver behaviour. The common conventional warning devices in Australia are a stop sign (passive), flashing lights and a half boom-barrier with flashing lights (active). The data were collected using two approaches, namely: field video recordings at selected sites and a driving simulator in a laboratory. This paper describes and compares the driver response results from both the field survey and the driving simulator. The conclusion drawn is that different types of warning systems resulted in varying driver responses at crossings. The results showed that on average driver responses to passive crossings were poor when compared to active ones. The field results were consistent with the simulator results for the existing conventional warning devices and hence they may be used to calibrate the simulator for further evaluation of alternative warning systems.
Resumo:
This paper discusses human factors issues of low cost railway level crossings in Australia. Several issues are discussed in this paper including safety at passive level railway crossings, human factors considerations associated with unavailability of a warning device, and a conceptual model for how safety could be compromised at railway level crossings following prolonged or frequent unavailability. The research plans to quantify safety risk to motorists at level crossings using a Human Reliability Assessment (HRA) method, supported by data collected using an advanced driving simulator. This method aims to identify human error within tasks and task units identified as part of the task analysis process. It is anticipated that by modelling driver behaviour the current study will be able to quantify meaningful task variability including temporal parameters, between participants and within participants. The process of complex tasks such as driving through a level crossing is fundamentally context-bound. Therefore this study also aims to quantify those performance-shaping factors that contribute to vehicle train collisions by highlighting changes in the task units and driver physiology. Finally we will also consider a number of variables germane to ensuring external validity of our results. Without this inclusion, such an analysis could seriously underestimate the probabilistic risk assessment.
Resumo:
This paper discusses human factors issues of low cost railway level crossings in Australia. Several issues are discussed in this paper including safety at passive level railway crossings, human factors considerations associated with unavailability of a warning device, and a conceptual model for how safety could be compromised at railway level crossings following prolonged or frequent unavailability. The research plans to quantify safety risk to motorists at level crossings using a Human Reliability Assessment (HRA) method, supported by data collected using an advanced driving simulator. This method aims to identify human error within tasks and task units identified as part of the task analysis process. It is anticipated that by modelling driver behaviour the current study will be able to quantify meaningful task variability including temporal parameters, between participants and within participants. The process of complex tasks such as driving through a level crossing is fundamentally context-bound. Therefore this study also aims to quantify those performance-shaping factors that contribute to vehicle train collisions by highlighting changes in the task units and driver physiology. Finally we will also consider a number of variables germane to ensuring external validity of our results. Without this inclusion, such an analysis could seriously underestimate risk.
Resumo:
The Cooperative Research Centre (CRC) for Rail Innovation is conducting a tranche of industry-led research projects looking into safer rail level crossings. This paper will provide an overview of the Affordable Level Crossings project, a project that is performing research in both engineering and human factors aspects of low-cost level crossing warning devices (LCLCWDs), and is facilitating a comparative trial of these devices over a period of 12 months in several jurisdictions. Low-cost level crossing warning devices (LCLCWDs) are characterised by the use of alternative technologies for high cost components including train detection and connectivity (e.g. radar, acoustic, magnetic induction train detection systems and wireless connectivity replacing traditional track circuits and wiring). These devices often make use of solar power where mains power is not available, and aim to make substantial savings in lifecycle costs. The project involves trialling low-cost level crossing warning devices in shadow-mode, where devices are installed without the road-user interface at a number of existing level crossing sites that are already equipped with conventional active warning systems. It may be possible that the deployment of lower-cost devices can provide a significantly larger safety benefit over the network than a deployment of expensive conventional devices, as the lower cost would allow more passive level crossing sites to be upgraded with the same capital investment. The project will investigate reliability and safety integrity issues of the low-cost devices, as well as evaluate lifecycle costs and investigate human factors issues related to warning reliability. This paper will focus on the requirements and safety issues of LCLCWDs, and will provide an overview of the Rail CRC projects.
Resumo:
This paper assesses Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) to identify safety systems that are most likely to reduce driver errors at railway crossings. ITS technologies have been integrated in order to develop improved evaluation tools to reduce crashes at railway crossings. Although emerging technologies, knowledge, innovative interventions have been introduced to change driver behaviour, there is a lack of research on the impact of integrating ITS technologies and transportation simulation on drivers. The outcomes of ITS technologies for complementing traditional signage were compared with those of current safety systems (passive and active) at railway crossings. Three ITS technologies are compared with current treatments, in terms of compliance rate and vehicle speed profiles. It is found that ITS technologies improve compliance rate by 17~30% and also encourage drivers to slow down earlier compared to current passive and active crossings when there is a train approaching the railway crossings.
Resumo:
Collisions among trains and cars at road/rail level crossings (LXs) can have severe consequences such as high level of fatalities, injuries and significant financial losses. As communication and positioning technologies have significantly advanced, implementing vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs) in the vicinity of unmanned LXs, generally LXs without barriers, is seen as an efficient and effective approach to mitigate or even eliminate collisions without imposing huge infrastructure costs. VANETs necessitate unique communication strategies, in which routing protocols take a prominent part in their scalability and overall performance, through finding optimised routes quickly and with low bandwidth overheads. This article studies a novel geo-multicast framework that incorporates a set of models for communication, message flow and geo-determination of endangered vehicles with a reliable receiver-based geo-multicast protocol to support cooperative level crossings (CLXs), which provide collision warnings to the endangered motorists facing road/rail LXs without barriers. This framework is designed and studied as part of a $5.5 m Government and industry funded project, entitled 'Intelligent-Transport-Systems to improve safety at road/rail crossings'. Combined simulation and experimental studies of the proposed geo-multicast framework have demonstrated promising outcomes as cooperative awareness messages provide actionable critical information to endangered drivers who are identified by CLXs.
Resumo:
Recent modelling of socio-economic costs by the Australian railway industry in 2010 has estimated the cost of level crossing accidents to exceed AU$116 million annually. To better understand causal factors that contribute to these accidents, the Cooperative Research Centre for Rail Innovation is running a project entitled Baseline Level Crossing Video. The project aims to improve the recording of level crossing safety data by developing an intelligent system capable of detecting near-miss incidents and capturing quantitative data around these incidents. To detect near-miss events at railway level crossings a video analytics module is being developed to analyse video footage obtained from forward-facing cameras installed on trains. This paper presents a vision base approach for the detection of these near-miss events. The video analytics module is comprised of object detectors and a rail detection algorithm, allowing the distance between a detected object and the rail to be determined. An existing publicly available Histograms of Oriented Gradients (HOG) based object detector algorithm is used to detect various types of vehicles in each video frame. As vehicles are usually seen from a sideway view from the cabin’s perspective, the results of the vehicle detector are verified using an algorithm that can detect the wheels of each detected vehicle. Rail detection is facilitated using a projective transformation of the video, such that the forward-facing view becomes a bird’s eye view. Line Segment Detector is employed as the feature extractor and a sliding window approach is developed to track a pair of rails. Localisation of the vehicles is done by projecting the results of the vehicle and rail detectors on the ground plane allowing the distance between the vehicle and rail to be calculated. The resultant vehicle positions and distance are logged to a database for further analysis. We present preliminary results regarding the performance of a prototype video analytics module on a data set of videos containing more than 30 different railway level crossings. The video data is captured from a journey of a train that has passed through these level crossings.
Resumo:
Level crossing risk continues to be a significant safety concern for the security of rail operations around the world. Over the last decade or so, a third of railway related fatalities occurred as a direct result of collisions between road and rail vehicles in Australia. Importantly, nearly half of these collisions occurred at railway level crossings with no active protection, such as flashing lights or boom barriers. Current practice is to upgrade level crossings that have no active protection. However, the total number of level crossings found across Australia exceed 23,500, and targeting the proportion of these that are considered high risk (e.g. public crossings with passive controls) would cost in excess of AU$3.25 billion based on equipment, installation and commissioning costs of warning devices that are currently type approved. Level crossing warning devices that are low-cost provide a potentially effective control for reducing risk; however, over the last decade, there have been significant barriers and legal issues in both Australia and the US that have foreshadowed their adoption. These devices are designed to have significantly lower lifecycle costs compared with traditional warning devices. They often make use of use of alternative technologies for train detection, wireless connectivity and solar energy supply. This paper describes the barriers that have been encountered for the adoption of these devices in Australia, including the challenges associated with: (1) determining requisite safety levels for such devices; (2) legal issues relating to duty of care obligations of railway operators; and (3) issues of Tort liability around the use of less than fail-safe equipment. This paper provides an overview of a comprehensive safety justification that was developed as part of a project funded by a collaborative rail research initiative established by the Australian government, and describes the conceptual framework and processes being used to justify its adoption. The paper provides a summary of key points from peer review and discusses prospective barriers that may need to be overcome for future adoption. A successful outcome from this process would result in the development of a guideline for decision-making, providing a precedence for adopting low-cost level crossing warning devices in other parts of the world. The framework described in this paper also provides relevance to the review and adoption of analogous technologies in rail and other safety critical industries.
Resumo:
Safety at railway level crossings (RLX) is one part of a wider picture of safety within the whole transport system. Governments, the rail industry and road organisations have used a variety of countermeasures for many years to improve RLX safety. New types of interventions are required in order to reduce the number of crashes and associated social costs at railway crossings. This paper presents the results of a large research program which aimed to assess the effectiveness of emerging Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) interventions, both on-road and in-vehicle based, to improve the safety of car drivers at RLXs in Australia. The three most promising technologies selected from the literature review and focus groups were tested in an advanced driving simulator to provide a detailed assessment of their effects on driver behaviour. The three interventions were: (i) in-vehicle visual warning using a GPS/smartphone navigation-like system, (ii) in-vehicle audio warning and; (iii) on-road intervention known as valet system (warning lights on the road surface activated as a train approaches). The effects of these technologies on 57 participants were assessed in a systematic approach focusing on the safety of the intervention, effects on the road traffic around the crossings and driver’s acceptance of the technology. Given that the ITS interventions were likely to provide a benefit by improving the driver’s awareness of the crossing status in low visibility conditions, such conditions were investigated through curves in the track before arriving at the crossing. ITS interventions were also expected to improve driver behaviour at crossings with high traffic (blocking back issue), which were also investigated at active crossings. The key findings are: (i) interventions at passive crossings are likely to provide safety benefits; (ii) the benefits of ITS interventions on driver behaviour at active crossings are limited; (iii) the trialled ITS interventions did not show any issues in terms of driver distraction, driver acceptance or traffic delays; (iv) these interventions are easy to use, do not increase driver workload substantially; (v) participants’ intention to use the technology is high and; (vi) participants saw most value in succinct messages about approaching trains as opposed to knowing the RLX locations or the imminence of a collision with a train.
Resumo:
Recent modelling of socio-economic costs by the Australian railway industry in 2010 has estimated the cost of level crossing accidents to exceed AU$116 million annually. To better understand the causal factors of these accidents, a video analytics application is being developed to automatically detect near-miss incidents using forward facing videos from trains. As near-miss events occur more frequently than collisions, by detecting these occurrences there will be more safety data available for analysis. The application that is being developed will improve the objectivity of near-miss reporting by providing quantitative data about the position of vehicles at level crossings through the automatic analysis of video footage. In this paper we present a novel method for detecting near-miss occurrences at railway level crossings from video data of trains. Our system detects and localizes vehicles at railway level crossings. It also detects the position of railways to calculate the distance of the detected vehicles to the railway centerline. The system logs the information about the position of the vehicles and railway centerline into a database for further analysis by the safety data recording and analysis system, to determine whether or not the event is a near-miss. We present preliminary results of our system on a dataset of videos taken from a train that passed through 14 railway level crossings. We demonstrate the robustness of our system by showing the results of our system on day and night videos.
Resumo:
A number of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) were used with an advanced driving simulator to assess its influence on driving behavior. Three types of ITS interventions namely, Video in-vehicle (ITS1), Audio in-vehicle (ITS2), and On-road flashing marker (ITS3) were tested. Then, the results from the driving simulator were used as inputs for a developed model using a traffic micro-simulation (Vissim 5.4) in order to assess the safety interventions. Using a driving simulator, 58 participants were required to drive through a number of active and passive crossings with and without an ITS device and in the presence or absence of an approaching train. The effect of driver behavior changing in terms of speed and compliance rate was greater at passive crossings than at active crossings. The difference in speed of drivers approaching ITS devices was very small which indicates that ITS helps drivers encounter the crossings in a safer way. Since the current traffic simulation was not able to replicate a dynamic speed change or a probability of stopping that varies based on different ITS safety devices, some modifications of the current traffic simulation were conducted. The results showed that exposure to ITS devices at active crossings did not influence the drivers’ behavior significantly according to the traffic performance indicators used, such as delay time, number of stops, speed, and stopped delay. On the other hand, the results of traffic simulation for passive crossings, where low traffic volumes and low train headway normally occur, showed that ITS devices improved overall traffic performance.
Resumo:
The problem of collisions between road users and trains at rail level crossings (RLXs) remains resistant to current countermeasures. One factor underpinning these collisions is poor Situation Awareness (SA) on behalf of the road user involved (i.e. not being aware of an approaching train). Although this is a potential threat at any RLX, the factors influencing SA may differ depending on whether the RLX is located in a rural or urban road environment. Despite this, there has been no empirical investigation regarding how road user SA might differ across distinct RLX environments. This knowledge is needed to establish the extent to which a uniform approach to RLX design and safety is acceptable. The aim of this paper is to investigate the differences in driver SA at rural versus urban RLXs. We present analyses of driver SA in both rural and urban RLX environments based on two recent on-road studies undertaken in Victoria, Melbourne. The findings demonstrate that driver SA is markedly different at rural and urban RLXs, and also that poor SA regarding approaching trains may be caused by different factors. The implications for RLX design and safety are discussed.
Resumo:
Improving safety at railway level crossings is an important issue for the Australian transport system. Governments, the rail industry and road organisations have tried a variety of countermeasures for many years to improve railway level crossing safety. New types of Intelligent Transport System (ITS) interventions are now emerging due to the availability and the affordability of technology. These interventions target both actively and passively protected railway level crossings and attempt to address drivers’ errors at railway crossings, which are mainly a failure to detect the crossing or the train and misjudgement of the train approach speed and distance. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of three emerging ITS that the rail industry considers implementing in Australia: a visual in-vehicle ITS, an audio in-vehicle ITS, as well as an on-road flashing beacons intervention. The evaluation was conducted on an advanced driving simulator with 20 participants per trialled technology, each participant driving once without any technology and once with one of the ITS interventions. Every participant drove through a range of active and passive crossings with and without trains approaching. Their speed approach of the crossing, head movements and stopping compliance were measured. Results showed that driver behaviour was changed with the three ITS interventions at passive crossings, while limited effects were found at active crossings, even with reduced visibility. The on-road intervention trialled was unsuccessful in improving driver behaviour; the audio and visual ITS improved driver behaviour when a train was approaching. A trend toward worsening driver behaviour with the visual ITS was observed when no trains were approaching. This trend was not observed for the audio ITS intervention, which appears to be the ITS intervention with the highest potential for improving safety at passive crossings.