Dr. Chris Wullems - Queensland University of Technology - Research update on level crossing safety

railcrc.net.au

Level Crossings Suite of Rail CRC Level Crossing Research

RISSB Rail Safety 2014 Wednesday 26th March 2014

railcrc.net.au

•  10 year period from 2000-‐20092

–  Approx. a 3rd of rail-‐related fatali1es resulted from collisions between road and rail vehicles (695 collisions resulKng in 97 fataliKes)

–  Approx. 45% of collisions (312) occurred at level crossings with passive controls

1 -‐ Source: 2009 Level Crossing Stocktake, Railway Industry Safety and Standards Board, Australia 2 -‐ Source: 2011 Level Crossing Safety BulleCn, Independent Transport Safety Regulator, NSW

Photo source: 2007 Office of the Chief InvesCgator, Rail Safety InvesCgaCon Report № 2007 / 09 -‐ Level Crossing Collision V/Line Passenger Train 8042 and a Truck Near Kerang, Victoria

IntroducKon Australia1

Public 8,838 % with acKve protecKon 33%

Private 12,508 % with acKve protecKon 0.5%

Maintenance 566 % with acKve protecKon 1%

RISSB Rail Safety 2014 2

What are LCLCWDs? (1)

Low Cost Level Crossing Warning Devices •  Use of innovaKve & alternaKve technologies to reduce lifecycle costs

–  InstallaKon and civil works – e.g. trenching, cable runs, under road / under track bores,

–  Costs associated with train detecKon based on wheel-‐rail interface •  Track improvement work (ballast cleaning, head bonding, etc.) •  Re-‐commissioning of seasonal lines

–  Provision of mains power

•  For installaKon at low-‐exposure level crossings with passive controls •  Why?

–  More level crossings with passive controls can be upgraded for the same budget than with tradiKonal warning device •  Larger and earlier safety benefit


Suite of Affordable RLX Projects


Industry standards body / ALCAM committee

Project R2.121 - Low Cost Railway Level Crossing Risk and Legal Evaluation

Project R3.122 - Affordable Railway Level Crossings

Development of nationally consistent system definition

and requirement specification

National Low Cost Level Crossing Trial Programme

Development of a safety argument supporting low-cost level crossings with

lower level of safety integrity

Future industry code of practice

Nationally consistent generic application

safety case

Australian Level Crossing

Assessment Model

Operational evidence (safety qualification data)

Expert peer-review

Legal advice

Engagement with regulator

Development of Decision-making

framework

Rail CRC NaKonal Low-‐cost Level Crossing Trial Programme & Risk and Legal

EvaluaKon Project


•  Located on North Coast Line •  Narrow gauge, bi-directional track •  25KV AC overhead power •  Preceding cutting and curve •  60 km/h [70km/h Tilt-train] •  Freight & passenger traffic

•  Located on North Coast Line •  Standard gauge, bi-directional track •  115km/h freight [125km/h passenger] •  Freight & passenger traffic

•  Located on Geelong-Ballarat freight corridor

•  Broad gauge, bi-directional track •  Low-frequency freight traffic

railcrc.net.au

Train detec1on / track occupancy technology

System 1 – Track-‐mounted anisotropic magneto resisKve (AMR) sensors System 2 – Radar

Power supply

Solar

LCLCWD component connec1vity

Wireless Safety integrity*

SIL2 (THR < 1E-‐6 / hour)

Notes AMR sensors are wireless. Internal baderies providing 7-‐year nominal operaKng life. Radar train detecKon soluKon mounted outside danger zone.

railcrc.net.au


Frauscher RSR180 wheel sensors Power supply

Solar


Cables (clipped to rail or buried route) Safety integrity*


Notes Meets Swiss MICRO low-‐cost standard. Railways permided cables to be clipped to rail for trial.

railcrc.net.au


Frauscher RSR123 wheel sensors Power supply

Solar


Wireless (Level crossing supports installaKon with or without cables)

Safety integrity*


Notes Modular design upgradable to level crossing suitable for deployment at high-‐exposure sites.

Making a case for Low Cost Level Crossings

•  Significant proporKon of equipment cost is influenced by safety integrity requirements –  More demanding development processes that are reflected in development

costs

PracCce of requiring all signaling equipment to have a SIL4 raCng can create a distorCon in safety spending where level of risk reducCon is overkill


Argument for UKlizaKon of Warning Devices with Lower SIL

•  Barriers to developing argument –  Lack of industry accepted risk acceptance criteria / limits of tolerability (individual risk)

•  Fundamental to developing safety targets (tolerable hazard rates) •  Informs disproporKon factor in meeKng legal duty

–  Lack of industry accepted safety targets •  Fundamental for determining magnitude of risk reducKon required •  Fundamental for SIL apporKonment process

•  Our view is that this approach should work within the current legal and regulatory framework


Safety integrity for safety funcKon: warn level crossing user of approaching train

be commensurate to magnitude of risk reducKon required to meet the tolerable hazard rate (THR) for system-‐hazard: collision between road and rail vehicle

Low-‐Cost Rail Level Crossing Risk & Legal EvaluaKon

•  Development of robust safety argument for deployment of LCLCWDs

–  Risk assessment –  Preliminary generic applicaKon safety case

•  Peer-‐review of safety argument •  Opinion from the regulator

–  Seek legal advice in relaKon to Tort liability issue and whether argument meets intent of the naKonal rail safety legislaKon

–  Development of a decision-‐making framework for adopKon of LCLCWDs

•  Criteria and process with case studies -‐ towards an industry guideline

•  Retrofijng ALCAM to consider LCLCWDs as a risk control


R2.119 Project ParKcipants


LimitaKons of Level Crossing Incident Analysis

•  Number of level crossing collisions (lagging indicators) insignificant for data analysis

•  Near-‐miss occurrences (leading indicators) –  Occur with a frequency orders of magnitude greater than collisions –  Reportable occurrences

•  However, there are issues with current paper-‐based reporKng –  Under-‐reporKng & inconsistencies in reporKng –  SubjecKvity –  Inaccuracies in retrospecKve descripKon of events


LimitaKons of Level Crossing Incident Analysis

•  Pikalls of causal analysis on sparse data1 –  Over-‐interpretaKon –  Tendency for analysts to idenKfy causal factors representaKve of a category of failure rather than idenKfying characterisKcs that may disKnguish it

–  Current near-‐miss reporKng does not describe the “less visible influences” that may condiKon an incident

1. Johnson, C. (2003). Failure in Safety-‐CriCcal Systems: A Handbook of Incident and Accident ReporCng. Glasgow, Scotland Glasgow University Press.


R2.119 Baseline Rail Level Crossing Video

Data CollecKon Infrastructure North Coast Line ≈ 1680km

Currently 3 Tilt-‐trains, later in the year 4 824 public level crossings

Tilt-train •  Forward facing video •  2Tb (2048 Gb) video / fortnight / train •  Total storage 200Tb (204,800 Gb) •  Disk swap procedure

•  Periodic ATP downloads

824 Level crossings 451 Public 248 OccupaKonal 28 Pedestrian 97 Queensland Rail

Video AnalyKcs

Aminmansour S, Maire F & Wullems C. “Video Analy1cs for the Detec1on of Near-‐miss Incidents on Approach to Railway Level Crossings”, in Proceedings of the Joint Rail Conference (JRC 2014), April 2014, Colorado Springs, CO, USA 18

Manual Scoring Process

19

PotenKal Benefits – Baseline RLX Video •  The integrated approach to safety data recording and analysis insures

systemic factors that condi1on, influence or poten1ally contribute to an occurrence are captured both for safety occurrences and precursor events

•  Provides a rich tapestry of antecedent causal factors that can significantly

improve learning around accident causaKon •  Can provide benefits to railways through:

–  The development of targeted and more effecKve countermeasures –  Beder risk models to esKmate risk and prioriKze safety funds

•  Inform improvements to exisKng paper-‐based reporKng –  Beder criteria and sub-‐categorizaKon consistent with statutory reporKng requirements –  Simulator-‐based training for drivers to improve objecKvity of reporKng


QuesKons


Dr. Chris Wullems - Queensland University of Technology - Research update on level crossing safety

News & Politics

Transcript of Dr. Chris Wullems - Queensland University of Technology - Research update on level crossing safety