TU1103 Report

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

1/216

Operation and safety of tramwaysin interaction with public space

Analysis and OutcomesDetailed Report

COST is supported bythe EU Framework Programme

Horizon 2020 TU1103 Action fnal reportSeptember 2015

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

2/216

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

3/216

TU1103 Action nal reportSeptember 2015

COST is supported bythe EU Framework Programme

Horizon 2020

Colophon

Authors :

COST TU1103 Chair : Laetitia FONTAINE - Service Technique desRemontées Mécaniques et des Transports Guidés (STRMTG – France).All participants of this COST Action have contributed to the report(see complete list at www.tram-urban-safety.eu and on chapter 7 of

this report).

Reviewers :

Laetitia FONTAINE, Dominique BERTRAND, Carlos GAIVOTO,Giuseppe INTURRI, Marine MILLOT, Reddy MORLEY, MargaritaNOVALES, Reinhold SCHROETER, Matus SUCHA, Manuel TEIXEIRA,David WALMSLEY, Johannes YEZBEK, Tony YOUNG.

Version : Final

Date : September, 2015

Contact :

E-mail : [email protected] : www.tram-urban-safety.eu

Operation and safety of tramwaysin interaction with public space

Analysis and OutcomesDetailed Report

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

4/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space - TU1103 page 2/211

COST Foreword

This publication is supported by COST.

COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) is a pan-European intergo-

vernmental framework. Its mission is to enable break-through scientic and techno-logical developments leading to new concepts and products and thereby contribute tostrengthening Europe’s research and innovation capacities. It is the oldest and widestEuropean intergovernmental network for cooperation in research. Established by theMinisterial Conference in November 1971, COST allows researchers, engineers and scho-lars to jointly develop their own ideas and take new initiatives across all elds of scienceand technology, while promoting multi- and interdisciplinary approaches. COST aims atfostering a better integration of less research intensive countries to the knowledge hubsof the European Research Area. The COST Association, an International not-forprotAssociation under Belgian Law, integrates all management, governing and administrativefunctions necessary for the operation of the framework. The COST Association has

currently 36 Member Countries.

The funds provided by COST - less than 1 % of the total value of the projects - supportthe COST cooperation networks (COST Actions) through which, with EUR 30 million peryear, more than 30 000 European scientists are involved in research having a total valuewhich exceeds EUR 2 billion per year. This is the nancial worth of the European addedvalue, which COST achieves. A « bottom up approach » (the initiative of launching a COSTAction comes from the European scientists themselves), « à la carte participation » (onlycountries interested in the Action participate), « equality of access » (participation is openalso to the scientic communities of countries not belonging to the European Union) and« exible structure » (easy implementation and light management of the research initia-tives) are the main characteristics of COST. As precursor of advanced multidisciplinaryresearch COST has a very important role for the realisation of the European ResearchArea (ERA) anticipating and complementing the activities of the Framework Programmes,constituting a « bridge » towards the scientic communities of emerging countries, in-creasing the mobility of researchers across Europe and fostering the establishment of« Networks of Excellence » in many key scientic domains such as : Biomedicine andMolecular Biosciences ; Food and Agriculture ; Forests, their Products and Services ; Ma-terials, Physical and Nanosciences ; Chemistry and Molecular Sciences and Technologies ;Earth System Science and Environmental Management ; Information and Communica-tion Technologies ; Transport and Urban Development ; Individuals, Societies, Culturesand Health. It covers basic and more applied research and also addresses issues ofpre-normative nature or of societal importance.

For further information, http://www.cost.eu.

COST is supported by the EU Framework Programme Horizon 2020.

The Legal notice by COST Association :

Neither the COST Association nor any person acting on its behalf is responsible for theuse that might be made of the information contained in this publication. The COST Asso-ciation is not responsible for the external websites referred to in this publication.

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

5/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 3/211

Chair’s foreword on TU110 Action ! O"eration and safety of tra#ways in

interaction with "$blic s"ace

Tramway and ight ail Transit systems were reduced in the 1,0s. but since 1,,0 they ha&e beenreintroduced or e6tended in many cities all o&er #urope! nd therefore. the multiplication of lines

has multiplied their interaction with other public space users!

?owe&er in spite of this great spread. and e&en though accidents in&ol&ing tramways usually ha&e a

big impact on the public)s emotions. the (nternational ssociation of ;ublic Transport "U(T;$ has

demonstrated1 that statistics indisputably show that the tram is safer than pri&ate cars! large

proportion of accidents with trams are caused by third parties ignoring or o&erloo'ing rules and

recommendations! Tramway/T urban insertion is the 'ey interaction with third parties! ad or

non%adapted layouts can be reasons for bad understanding or disrespect! Common problems are

encountered all o&er #urope and all tram networ's are facing difficulties. ha&ing bad or goode6periences. trying successful solutions. and all loo'ing for impro&ing more and more their safety

le&el! Their e6perience could be useful for others. in order to get best practices and adapt them to

their local conte6t. than's to access to the 'nowledge and e6perience!

(t is a pioneering wor'< it brings together for the first time in a study of this scale e6perts from across

#urope and from across the spectrum of tramway in&ol&ement< operators. designers. researchers

and national authorities. to share their e6perience on tram safety issues!

The sharing of information. feedbac'. and e6perience is one of the best ways to impro&e tram safety

in urban spaces! Urban insertion of tramways and Ts is not an e6act science but the sharing of

ideas and practical solutions is a good way to gi&e the best clues to a tram networ' to find the bestlayouts for one dangerous interaction place or a new insertion! This is what the TU1103 group has

achie&ed here< to share with you our e6periences!

This is the aim of this final document< not guidance as such. but the sharing of suggestions. good

e6periences and best practices which TU1103 members can gi&e to the profession on safe tram

urban insertion!

aetitia :O+T(+#.

Chair of the COT ction TU1103er&ice Techni9ue des emontDes *Dcani9ues et des Transports EuidDs "T*TE – :rance$

1 U(T; 200, Core rief Aight ail Transit – a safe mean of transportB U(T; information sheet

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

6/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page F/211

A%ailability of deli%erables of the Action

This eport is the deli&erable for final Gor'ing ;hases 2 and 3 of the TU1103 ction! (t is a ;ublic

eport. and is a&ailable on the public part of the ction)s website www!tram%urban%safety!eu! Theeport includes summaries of wor'ing group outcomes and general outcomes of the ction!

The *emorandum of Understanding of the ction presents our methodology. aims and deli&erables<

all details in ppendi6 !

The report of Gor'ing ;hase 1 is a&ailable at< http

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

7/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page /211

&'ec$ti%e S$##ary

The insertion of tramways and ight ail Transit into an urban area so that they can operate safely

and efficiently while interacting with other public space users is one the most important challenges

to the planning principles on urban rail infrastructure design! To find the best adapted and safest

infrastructure design for optimising interactions between tramways and other users of urban space.

is for public transport operators and authorities one of the means to impro&e the le&el of ser&ice.

and thus help to grow the modal shift in fa&our of ;ublic Transport!

>ealing with this issue. this ction enhances this strategy by e6amining how operators and city

authorities can collect. process and analyse accident data and assess safety management

impro&ements. and it gi&es the opportunity to hold a debate about some main safety e6periences in

se&eral #uropean countries and cities!

ather than pro&iding conclusi&e guidance. the report of COT ction TU1103 see's to share

suggestions. successful e6periences and good practices. which can contribute to enhancing a safer

insertion of trams into urban areas!

Ghile the tram is generally a safe mode of transport. all tram networ's are facing the tas' of

maintaining and impro&ing safety. and similar issues are encountered all o&er #urope! Then. there

are both good and sometimes bad e6periences. successful stories. appropriate solutions and

efficient practices! Iarious countries) feedbac' and 'nowledge could be useful for others. if sharing

them leads actors to adapt best practices to local settings!

This ction is 9uite a pioneering wor'< it brings together for the first time in a study of this scale.

e6perts from across #urope and from across the spectrum of tramway in&ol&ement< operators.designers. researchers and national authorities. to share their e6perience on tramway safety issues!

The wor' of the partners began with the collection of regulations. methods of analysis and practices

regarding tramway safety monitoring and layout design= this was done for all in&ol&ed countries and

the field of in&estigation was limited to interactions with urban space!

Then the &arious participating actors went into debates to share e6periences and analysis of all these

materials. from safety data collection and use of indicators to layout configurations and tramway

running conditions! This was organised among specific technical themes and carried out through a

9ualitati&e approach. in order to achie&e analysis based and realistic conclusions!

The results of this process then are summaries of good practices and e6periences for a safer

insertion of tramways in urban spaces! d&ice gi&en in the report aims at a better interaction of

trams with public space. for new tramway systems as well as for e6isting networ's!

The methodological approach led to separate discussions in two parts. with the first one dealing with

data collection. processing and e&aluation tools. and accident scenarios. and the second one

dedicated to tramway infrastructure design and running conditions!

These two parts are presented in the report after an introductory chapter! (t is e6pected that the

reader may see' and find sustainable solutions to tramway layout issues for proceeding with a newtramline proect as well as aiming at impro&ing an e6isting one!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

8/216


This document pro&ides conclusions and possible solutions for a safety management system and

monitoring as well as to upgrade the safety le&els of infrastructure in urban space. both aimed at

ma'ing the tram an e&en safer means of transport than it already is!

tarting with e6isting issues and good practices implemented in local conte6ts to sol&e or a&oid such

'inds of problems. the method. based on lessons learned. consists in identification of the list ofha@ards and of possible solutions. leading to pro&ide good e6amples and ad&ise about less

satisfactory ones! This is done for each interaction point along the tramline with which a designer.

researcher or planner may be confronted!

(n Chapter 2 on safety data collection and monitoring tools. the idea is to propose e6amples of good

practices and suggestions about tools and ways to collect and efficiently use rele&ant data! This

ad&ice should be useful mainly for operators. transport authorities and national or regional safety

regulation bodies dealing with new networ's as well as see'ing impro&ements on e6isting systems!

esearchers ha&e not been forgotten as the report lists some data which can be used for in%depthanalysis!

(n this chapter a template of an Aideal accident reportB is proposed "see J2!1$. which should be

considered as a chec'%list of information to be collected rather than the e6act model to comply with!

The collection of data on accidents. which should be done as soon as possible once the collision has

occurred. is essential and may usefully be complemented with other sources such as CCTI images or

automated e&ent recorders "blac' bo6es$! These can also be used to identify near%misses. as a

complement to dri&ers) reports of emergency bra'ing= this can bring more information to help in

understanding street users) beha&iour and issues lin'ed with some configurations of alignments and

station areas "see J2!2$!(n addition. the collection of a number of accidents in a database at a local le&el. and where possible

also at a national one "see J2!3$. can help to monitor and assess the safety le&el through the usage

of some indicators! The location of accidents and near misses enhances the identification of hotspots

in a tramway networ' "see J2!$!

egarding indicators. some rele&ant indicators which are the most commonly used are suggested

"see J2!4$! They are classified in se&eral types "global. geographical and typological$. with indications

about their ad&antages and limitations in practical use!

ccident data collection and analysis are complementary solutions implemented in the field<

identified hotspots may re9uire layout impro&ements. and data collection allows to monitor new or

impro&ed layouts during the operation of e6isting networ's. as well as implementing new proects

"see J2!- and 2!K$!

(nfrastructure design and operating methods are the topic of Chapter 3! egarding these issues. the

main achie&ement is the compilation and analysis of good and bad safety%related practices about the

interaction of trams with other street users "pedestrians. cyclists. and road &ehicles$ "see J3!2 and

3!3$! tarting from rather similar types of ha@ardous situations which tramways face in e&ery country

"see J3!F$. the study has identified specific design solutions that may be generally considered as safe

or potentially dangerous "see J3!$!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

9/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page -/211

(t is important to consider that no system is 1005 safe and that there always will be people wal'ing.

cycling. and dri&ing around tramways= the obecti&e is to agree on some measures which will protect

those (nteraction ;oints in as natural a way as possible "see J3!4$! Using the e6isting e6amples and

'now%how. analysis has been made of good and bad configurations! Obecti&es ha&e been identified

and a classification made! pecific problems ha&e been in&estigated for each type of interaction

point and ha@ards ha&e been identified!

s for the occurrence of accidents and the in&ol&ement of third parties. a 9uestionnaire sur&ey

carried out within the scope of the action showed that out of K, hotspots identified by operators.

the maority were located on intersections "K5$! smaller proportion "125$ were associated with

running sections. including pedestrian crossings. or with stations "25$! egarding intersections. -25

of all intersection hotspots were located at unctions. while the rest occurred in roundabouts! (n KK5

of the cases. a &ehicle was in&ol&ed in the accident= another 105 of accidents in&ol&ed pedestrians.

and only 25 motorcycles "see J3!$! s the sample of this sur&ey is small and not representati&e of

all e6isting networ's. these figures must ob&iously not be considered as statistically &alid. but the

results gi&e an indication of where the maority of accidents occur!

(n J3!4. the main interaction points between trams and other road users are categorised! The first

main conclusion from this categorisation identified the need to study stations and stops separately

from the rest of the infrastructure "Arunning sectionsB$! This distinction is drawn because of the

important differences between those two types of @ones. both in relation to the operation of the

system and the beha&iour of street users "see J3!4!3$! (n all. fi&e types of interaction points were

identified for study< road intersections. di&ided into unctions and roundabouts as described abo&e.

pedestrian crossings. stops and stations "see J3!4!F$. and running sections "general interactions not

at stations. unctions. and pedestrian crossings$! :or each type of interaction point. possible

solutions are suggested using the following structure< configuration. ha@ard. obecti&e. measure. ande6ample "see J3!4!$!

:or both &ehicles and pedestrians. unawareness of the presence of a tram is a rele&ant cause of

collisions! The main causes of accidents are lin'ed to misbeha&iour and disrespect for road rules by

third parties! n important lesson learned is that cooperation between the public space manager

"the municipality$ and the planner and designer of a tram line is essential to a&oid such misbeha&iour

and disrespect!

Eenerally. four types of approaches can be used< engineering solutions. police or enforcement

authority measures. operational solutions. and educational campaigns. besides a long and

permanent dialogue with the public space manager! (n order to address the maor cause of accidentsat hotspots. tram operators ad&ocate impro&ing traffic light design and efficiency for a better priority

for trams. and stricter enforcement! Other fa&oured engineering solutions include clearer

carriageway mar'ings and modifications to traffic light programming!

:inally. the report deals with lessons learnt and success stories on data collection and analysis and

on infrastructure design "see JF!1 and F!2$! egarding the first topic. some e6amples are presented.

such as the analysis using a bow%tie approach "the case study from russels$. the near%miss analysis

"the case study from tuttgart$ and the :rench e6perience with a tram accident database! (n relation

to the second topic. the report introduces success stories concerning infrastructure design from 1,

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

10/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page K/211

networ's! They are categorised as follows< intersections "left or right%turn. roundabouts. and

unctions$. pedestrian crossings. and general interaction points! :or each entry. a brief description of

the problem is followed by a description of the solution and the lessons that ha&e been learnt! These

success stories ha&e a shared perspecti&e on how it is possible to integrate traffic conditions and

geographical conte6t and increase safety for public transport users as well as to economise on

resources!

>uring the four years of this ction. it was important for all actors to share with and learn from each

others) safety e6periences! s a final recommendation. one would say that safety on a light rail or

tram networ' depends on all sta'eholders being in&ol&ed directly and indirectly. but that the most

important factor for this success is a permanent dialogue between operator and municipality.

sharing the important obecti&e of ha&ing a commitment to reduce or eliminate accidents in order to

contribute to creating li&eable cities!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

11/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page ,/211

Contents

COT :oreword !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2

Chair)s foreword on TU1103 ction – Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with publicspace!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3

&ailability of deli&erables of the ction !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! F

#6ecuti&e ummary !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Contents !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ,

>efinitions !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12

1 (ntroduction!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14

1!1 The Tramway and the city !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14

1!2 Gho should be concerned to impro&e urban tram safetyH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14

1!3 Ghich benefitsH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1K

1!F ?ow the ction has been built!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 20

1! ?ow to read the report!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 21

2 :rom accident to data collection and analysis< tools and methods !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 23

2!1 :irst tool< accident report on the field!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 23

2!1!1 O&er&iew of the contents of e6isting accident reports % approaches and limitations!!!! 23

2!1!2

(deal ccident eport !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 2

2!2 Other data collection tools !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 31

2!2!1 lac' bo6es/logistic recordings !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 32

2!2!2 ;ersonal information from dri&ers. passengers and/or other witnesses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 33

2!2!3 ;ictures of the accident!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3F

2!2!F CCTI % Iideo images!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3

2!2! *ar's left by the e&ent at the scene!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 34

2!2!4 Occurrence boo's!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3-

2!2!-

Ioice recorders and con&ersations !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3-

2!2!K treet (nformation ystems!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3K

2!2!, +ewspapers and other media !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3K

2!3 +ational and #uropean databases!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3,

2!3!1 The current situation in in&ol&ed countries!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 3,

2!3!2 d&antages and difficulties of a national database "regarding tram accidents$ !!!!!!!!!!!! F2

2!3!3 +ecessary criteria to ma'e it successful!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! F3

2!3!F (s a database rele&ant at a #uropean scaleH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FF

2!F ;ost%analysis through integration of all data !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!! F

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

12/216


2! Ghat is a hotspot and why identifying themH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! F

2!4 (ndicators< maor mean to follow urban tram safety!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FK

2!4!1 >efinition and aims !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! FK

2!4!2 imits of use !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1

2!4!3 *ost useful indicators and their pro/cons !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!! 2

2!- afety *anagement % (ssue treatment. e&aluation and monitoring!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 4F

2!K enefits of cooperation with municipalities !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!! -2

2!, Ghat to 'eep in mind when collecting and analysing dataH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -3

3 Tram (nfrastructure design< from safety e6perience to possible measures !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -F

3!1 im and method!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -F

3!2 Users of Urban pace and field e&aluation methods< how do people react to en&ironment

and traffic safety measuresH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -F

3!3 Operating conditions !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -

3!F Common types of safety e&ents !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -

3! *ain obser&ed tram hotspots !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -K

3!!1 Ghere do accidents occur and who is the implicated third partyH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -K

3!!2 Ghat solutions are applied by tram operatorsH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! -,

3!!3 nalysis of situation !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! K0

3!4 afety analysis and proposals !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! K2

3!4!1

(nteraction ;oints (dentification!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! K2

3!4!2 oad unctions and roundabouts with tramway !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! KF

3!4!2!1 Eeneral considerations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!KF

3!4!2!2 oad unctions!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!KK

3!4!2!3 oundabouts !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,1

3!4!2!F ?a@ards. obecti&es and measures !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!,,

3!4!3 ;edestrian crossings!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 11,

3!4!F tops and stations !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12K

3!4!F!1

Eeneral considerations!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!12K 3!4!F!2 pecial cases for stops and stations !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1F-

3!4! unning sections< general interactions between stations. unctions and pedestrian

crossings !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 12

3!4!4 Cyclists and tramways !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 140

3!4!- :rom theory to reality !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 141

F essons learnt and success stories!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 142

F!1 uccess stories on data collection and analysis !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! 142

F!1!1 nalysis with ow%tie approach< the case of russels!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 142

F!1!2 +ear%miss analysis % a study from tuttgart!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 143

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

13/216


F!1!3 The :rench e6perience with a tram accident database!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 144

F!2 uccess stories on infrastructure design!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14K

F!2!1 (ntersections!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 14K

F!2!1!1 eft or right turn "K cases$ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!14K

F!2!1!2

oundabouts "K cases$ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1-F

F!2!1!3 Lunctions "11 cases$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1K0

F!2!2 ;edestrian crossings "4 cases$ !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1KK

F!2!3 unning sections "4 cases$!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1,2

F!2!F *aor lessons learnt from these e6periences!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1,-

Eeneral conclusions from the whole ction !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!! 1,K

4 ibliography!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 201

- Contributors!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 203

K

:igures and Tables !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 20

, ist of ppendices !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 210

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

14/216


(efinitions

:or the purpose of this report. the following definitions ha&e been established<

• Accident< any e&ent which has a physical impact on persons "inside or outside of the tram$.&ehicles "tram or others$ or fi6ed e9uipment of the tram system! The le&el of se&erity is not

considered for determining which occurrences 9ualify as accidents! >ue to the scope of this

report. only collisions in&ol&ing tram and third party "car. pedestrian. bicycle!!!$ are considered as

accidents!

• Accident se%erity: e&el of human and material conse9uences caused by an e&ent!

• ALA)P ! As Low As )easonably Practicable: the le&el to which ris' should be reduced in a afety

*anagement ystem "*$ when the ; obecti&e is chosen! The ; obecti&e should

only be chosen when the complete elimination of ris's is impossible or the costs of doing so aredisproportionately high to the impro&ement gained!

• Cas$alty< is used in this report to denote anyone who is 'illed or inured in an accident! Casualtycan be di&ided into fatalities. seriously inured persons or slightly inured persons! +ormallyaccepted definitions are Mource< Commission egulation "#C$ +o 11,2/2003 of 3 Luly 2003

amending egulation "#C$ +o ,1/2003 of the #uropean ;arliament and of the Council on rail

transport statisticsN<

• Fatality< a person who is immediately 'illed in an accident or who dies within 30 days of

an accident as a result of an inury "e6cept suicide$!

• Serio$sly in*$red "erson< any person who was hospitalised for more than 2F hours afterinury "e6cept suicide$!

• Slightly in*$red "erson< any person who suffered minor inuries which do not re9uire

medical assistance or. if admission to hospital. do not re9uire to stay at the hospital!

• Conflict +one< in a unction. is the area shared by tram and cars and where collisions may occur!(t also applies for bi'es lanes and pedestrian paths crossing a tram line!

:igure 1 – Conflict @one

• (ata: Collected information from different entities in a raw state!

• (atabase: collection of information on one topic in order to describe specific items!

• &%ent,< any occurrence that has an impact on safety! #&ents can be di&ided into accidents or

incidents! >ue to the scope of this report. an e&ent does not include collisions between trams.

2 *ore precise definition and typology can &ary between countries "see also chapter 2!4 and glossary G;1

report in ppendi6 >$!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

15/216


derailments or casualties inside the tram! :urthermore. occurrences which are related to security

such as &andalism. are out of scope!

• -a+ard< a physical situation with a potential for human inury "definition ta'en from #+0124

Aailway pplicationsB$! +ote< #+0124 is only rele&ant for the planning of technical systems andnot for operations!

• -ots"ot: a specific location on the tram networ' defined as a place in the urban area where the

most accidents "collisions$ occurred. in a fi6ed period! :or more details see chapter 2!!

• .ncident< any e&ent with no physical impact on persons. &ehicles or fi6ed e9uipment= any e&entwhere no inuries or damages are produced! :or e6ample. a near%miss accident!

• .ndicator: a tool to 9uantify the le&el of safety. to identify and to ran' the states and to measure

the trend about safety issues!

• .nteraction "oints< the main points of the tramway and T infrastructure whose design has tobe properly studied in order to guarantee the safety of the system in its interaction with public

space! (t should be pointed out that the meaning of Ainteraction pointB in this case is wide.

including interaction locations but other interaction elements as well. such as signalling andsignage!

• /$nction: intersection between tramway and one or se&eral road"s$!

• Left t$rn< a traffic mo&ement in a unction where a &ehicle "car. bicycle. bus. etc!$ changesdirection and crosses the tramway! (n U and (reland. the e9ui&alent is a right turn because of

road traffic rules!

• Light )ail Transit or Light )a"id Transit L)T< in contrast to a tram system. it can ha&e 1005e6clusi&e lanes or a completely segregated trac'! There is no strict differentiation from tram%

systems. though &ehicles can normally be longer than trams! treetcars and trams are subtypesof light rail transit!

• 2ear3#iss accident: any e&ent that was &ery close to becoming an accident but did not turn into

an accident because one or more factors concurred to a&oid it at the last minute! :or e6ample.when the tram dri&er uses the emergency bra'e to a&oid an imminent collision! +ear%miss

accident is a type of incident and not an accident!

• Passenger of the tra#way< people on board. getting in or out of the tram. or waiting at stations!

• Passengers ' 4ilo#etres r$n: (t is the total number of passengers multiplied by the a&eragedistance tra&elled!

• Pedestrian area: space mainly used by pedestrians! The access to pedestrian areas is restricted

for cars and in some countries there are restrictions on tram speed!

• Pedestrian crossing: pecifically designed point of the tramway line where pedestrians areauthorised to cross!

• Post3analysis: ll processes ta'en after an e&ent in order to impro&e safety!

• Predicti%e a""roach: further profound safety analysis that can only be implemented after ha&ing

established a consistent data ac9uisition and e&aluation!

• Proacti%e a""roach: configuration analysis that can only be implemented after ha&ingestablished a consistent data ac9uisition and e&aluation! nticipating e&ents by analysing

incidents. precursors "numerous #mergency ra'es in a specific @oneP$ and proposing changes inthe layout concerned and/or operational rules!

• P$blic S"ace User< any person who uses urban infrastructure. either in a &ehicle "motori@ed ornon%motori@ed &ehicle such as bicycle$ or as a pedestrian!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

16/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 1F/211

• )eacti%e a""roach: is based on the consistent e&aluation of accident data! (ts focus lies on

structured and continuous data ac9uisition in order to deri&e pre&enti&e measures from their

analysis! ;roacti&e and reacti&e approaches are complementary! oth should be followed by anin%depth analysis to udge their efficiency on tram safety!

• )is4: the probable rate of occurrence of a ha@ard causing harm and the degree of se&erity of the

harm "definition ta'en from #+0124 Aailway pplicationsB$! +ote< #+0124 is only rele&ant forthe planning of technical systems and not for operations!

• )$nning section< any part of the networ' with no crossing interaction. generally these are

intersections between stations. unctions and pedestrian crossings!

• Safety< deals with the ris' and precautions ta'en to reduce the le&el of ris' related to accidents

and incidents. such as the urban design insertion and measures. which can be ta'en within the

institutional framewor'!

• Safety 5anage#ent Syste# S5S "not the one from #uropean >irecti&e on ailways$< a

systematic. e6plicit and comprehensi&e process for managing measures to impro&e safety in

public space! * should be wo&en into the ethos of an organi@ation and become part of theculture. the way people carry out their obs!

• Station 6 Sto": a fi6ed location where passengers may board or alight from a tram! (t may or may

not include raised platforms! The terms Qstop) and Qstation) ha&e the same meaning and dependon operator)s normal use!

• Signage< any traffic sign to inform road users of traffic rules or safety ha@ards "e!g! &ertical AstopB

sign$! ignage can be used together with signalling!

• Signalling< any traffic control system that uses lights to help or inform road users of traffic rulesor safety ha@ards "e!g! traffic lights$! ignalling can be used together with signage!

• Swe"t "ath< is the ma6imum width at ground le&el at any location of the tram &ehicle when in

motion. including the effects of tilt. sway. the effects of cur&ature. including superele&ation orcant of trac'. and end and centre throw of the tram. plus a safety margin! (n order to establish

realistically the necessary clearances from street furniture. facilities. cars.!!!

:igure 2 – wept path illustration Mource< *etro do ;orto. CritDrios de ;roecto – TraRado! *;%

,344-/0,SI3!0 "+o&embro 2010$ translated in #nglishN

• Total 4# r$n< the whole distance made by the complete fleet. sum of &ehicle 'm!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

17/216


• Tra#way< is a public guided transport system in urban spaces. sharing its road with other users

at least at crossings. dri&ing on line%of%sight for all or part of its length! Tramway is considered as

a system. comprising three main sub%systems< the infrastructure and the fi6ed installations.rolling stoc' and the operation! Tram is the &ehicle and tramway is the system!

>uring the report. tramway will be identified as a general term to refer to T and tramway!The word ATB will be specifically used for when they are included in the scope of the

ction. see chapter 1!2!

• 7ehicle 4#< distance made by one &ehicle!

• 7ehicle ' 4ilo#etres r$n: (t is the total number of 'ilometres run by the entire fleet incommercial operation!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

18/216


1 .ntrod$ction

181 The Tra#way and the city

Tramway systems follow a new philosophy for a public transit mode. where se&eral ad&antages are

combined such as operating in a specific public space corridor. ha&ing priority o&er all modes of

traffic. and ha&ing the physical and psychological comfort of tra&elling at ground le&el. enoying the

urban landscape in all its fullness!

This philosophy for public transportation meets the policies of land use. mobility and the

en&ironment. which aims to ma'e cities more sustainable by discouraging the use of pri&ate cars and

by proposing 9uality public transport which assures comfortable trips with strict control of tra&el

time!

To reach this aim. both the &ehicles and the infrastructure that ma'e up the new tramway networ's

were de&eloped ta'ing into account an acceptable integration with the city! The &ehicles are

electrically powered. clean. 9uiet. and usually are characteri@ed by a &ery careful design with large

windows to enable its users "dri&er and passengers$ as much as possible a free &isual relationship

with the outside! The infrastructure. such as poles for the o&erhead line e9uipment and cabinets for

switching and signalling gear etc. is carefully implemented ta'ing into consideration the space where

they will be installed! The surfacing of the tramway can be done with the materials commonly used

on pa&ements and roads but also with grass. boosting the creation of new and true green corridors

crossing the cities!

?owe&er. one must be conscious that tramway systems do not interact only with the cityscape!

Once a tramway starts to operate. it will interact with and change the daily habits of the [email protected] bigger impact on the street users! nowing this. an accurate and well%balanced integration of

the Trams in the City will influence positi&ely the performance. comfort and safety conditions of the

system! On the other hand. tramway systems that put the focus only on the Transport ystem or on

the Urban >esign will suffer the stress of the traffic. boosting the number of dangerous e&ents

in&ol&ing cars. motorbi'es. pedestrians and cyclists!

o to merge Tramway performance and urban space. interactions ha&e to be dealt with properly!

18, 9ho sho$ld be concerned to i#"ro%e $rban tra# safety

:rom the perspecti&e of mobility. the city can be seen as a stage used by se&eral actors in their trips!

i'ewise. on the city AstageB. the citi@ens can be considered as actors mo&ing by different modes<

wal'ing. cycling. dri&ing a car. etc= and they interact with &arious e6ternal factors< the si@e and shape

of the streets. the traffic lights. the &ertical and hori@ontal signs and street mar'ings. the green

spaces on the street. etc! nd because each mode of transport has different features and

performance. the a&erage speed and the stopping distance being the main ones. it was decided first

to analyse Tram interactions with other Qactors) separately and systematically!

This report has two main target groups< planners and engineers "for infrastructure$ and operators

"for running on it$! (deally. these two groups should be in&ol&ed at all stages of the design. but

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

19/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 1-/211

mostly this does not happen due to the fragmented and non%integrated process of planning and due

to split responsibilities! +e&ertheless. planners and operators should consult each other! One of the

main purposes of this report is to ma'e the information a&ailable to actors in&ol&ed all along the

process from design to accidents to "re$design<

o super&isory authorities and monitoring organisations at different le&els.

o transport agencies and operators.

o road networ' managers.

o designers. architects. engineering consulting firms.

o research bodies!

:or more institutional and political suggestions on impro&ing tram safety and safety management

systems in #urope. see ppendi6 C!

The main obecti&e here is to bring tools and safety analysis to allow these actors to impro&etram and ight ail Transit safety. through a better management of their insertion in urban

spaces and therefore to minimi@e as much as possible the number and the se&erity of accidents

between Tram and public space users "pedestrians. car dri&ers. cyclists!!!$ and their impacts on

both transport system and society!

:aced with some accidents or some complicated design problems during proects or modifications.

some transport authorities and operators try to sol&e the problems on their own. with greater or

lesser success!

Ghen producing this report. functioning in an organised networ' has fa&oured much more

producti&e e6changes than independent and occasional bilateral contacts! :urthermore. it has

allowed us to sa&e time and efficiency by sharing useful contributions on e6isting 'nowledge and/or

by sharing common problematics. getting away from a 7national7 point of &iew!

There are three different parts of the tramway system that influence safety< the &ehicle. the

infrastructure and the operation management! The infrastructure is the basis of main issues but

is also the most e6pensi&e part of the system and it is &ery hard to change once the system has

been built! On the other hand. the operation management can sol&e some problems generated

by a poor infrastructure design. but this ability is limited and not e&ery infrastructure problemcan be sol&ed in this way!

(n this report. safety deals with the ris' and precautions ta'en to reduce the le&el of ris' related

to accidents and inuries. such as urban design insertion and measures which can be ta'en

within the institutional framewor'! This ction is not tal'ing about security "counter terrorism.

&andalism. etc$. neither about health ha@ards due to pollution and similar!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

20/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 1K/211

tramway is defined here as an urban fully guided method of public transportation which

shares public space with road/bi'e/pedestrian traffic "but! not with hea&y rail or trolleybuses$!

The ction has loo'ed at accidents. and near%misses when they are recorded. and it has

considered the whole tram system. including infrastructure design "within urban. suburban. and

mi6ed @ones$ and e9uipment management. to be important!

ll good ideas or bad e6periences were a&ailable to be shared within these limits!

This report focuses on the interaction between trams and other street users "pedestrians. car

dri&ers. cyclists!!!$ in urban spaces. but it does not include collisions between tram &ehicles or

with trac'side e9uipment. or derailments!

o. accidents which are a conse9uence of an urban insertion issue are only considered! nd

therefore. accidents caused by trac' or signalling or rolling stoc' problems were not included

18 9hich benefits

eep in mind that impro&ing tramway safety will play a part in impro&ing road safety in general

and for &ulnerable users in particular! (t will also decrease the decrease operation and

maintenance costs. contribute to rationalising and optimising the in&estment in the tramway

system. impro&e its insertion. its safety and its efficiency and reliability. and indirectly will go in

the direction of moderating the place of the car in town!

#&en though trams remain the safest mode. e&erywhere safety is a hot issue for tramway systems!

ccidents are sometimes serious. often spectacular and o&ere6posed in the media! eyond the

direct conse9uences for people hurt. safety also has a big impact on the producti&ity and reliability

of transport systems and urban functioning. by affecting operation on a wider scale since tramways

often form strategic lines of the transport networ'! The primary cause of tram accidents is the

conflicts with other users of public space. in relation to their beha&iour and their perception of ris'!

cross most cities and countries. K0%,05 of accidents in&ol&ing trams within public space are caused

by third parties "U(T;. 200,$! (n most cases the accident is attributed to the traffic misbeha&iour bythird parties! Therefore. maor safety impro&ements can be accomplished by reducing the chances

of traffic misbeha&iour by third parties! Operators can achie&e this goal by indi&idually cooperating

with the responsible "local$ authorities! +e&ertheless. operators can achie&e a reduction of accidents

internally by measures such as accident data analysis. training of dri&ers. etc! "U(T;. 201F$!

Thus. 'eeping the tramway part of the urban space without fences and pro&iding an efficient urban

insertion of tramway through infrastructure design. good performance. impro&ed safety and traffic

handling. is a crucial challenge for both transport authorities and operators!

efore starting with the core subect of urban tram safety issues and solutions. it was aimed to bring

to light and 9ualify the impact of an accident on the systems producti&ity and to &erify if a moree6pensi&e in&estment allows economies to be made on the future operation! (n order to do so. it is

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

21/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 1,/211

necessary to assess this producti&ity "the effect on the ourney time. the regularity. the time loss due

to operational disruptions. the repair costs and other financial conse9uences of accidents$ and to

analyse the accidents and their impacts on both the transport system and on the community!

:igure 3 – Classification of accident impacts Mource< osario arresi. T* eport. ccidents) impacts on thesystem)s producti&ity "201F$ – ppendi6 +!2N

The A&aluation of an accident can therefore be di&ided into direct economic costs. indirect economiccosts and a &alue of safety per se! The direct cost is obser&able as e6penditure today or in the future!

The indirect cost is the lost production capacity to the economy that results from premature death

or reduced wor'ing capability due to the accidentB Mource< ?#TCO. >e&eloping ?armonised

#uropean pproaches for Transport Costing and ;roect ssessment "2004$N!

To illustrate. if operators count only the cost of accidents with damage to the tram or specifically

traffic accidents. an a&erage cost is 3.102!2-! ut the ma6imum cost declared by some tram

operators can &ary greatly from .00 to -F.000. and e&en to 1.000.000 for another year! nd

the operators were as'ed if they ha&e e6perienced the same or if derailment always leads to higher

costs! The answer was that derailment and higher costs are Anot necessarily lin'ed and generally.there is no rule concerning the lin' between the type of a single accident and its conse9uences "and

thus its cost$!B The complete analysis report is a&ailable in ppendi6 +!2!

(t could be useful to be able to ustify actions on layout or operation. from an economic point of

&iew! ?owe&er. the cost of an accident is not predictable and the media impact of an accident and its

impact in terms of image of the transport ser&ice is not measurable from an economic point of &iew!

till. it is possible to gain an idea of the range of material bought and man%hours needed! nd of

course. a complete economic assessment. of which the costs of accidents is part. is a complicated

subect and would need economists to research it!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

22/216


18; -ow the Action has been b$ilt

The first Gor'ing ;hase "G;1$ report has dealt with what e6ists in #urope "regulations. indicators.

and layouts$! (t has been separately published and is a&ailable on< http. the GE2 report on an o&er&iew of e6istingindicators is a&ailable in ppendi6 #. and the GE3 report on e6amples of interaction points is

a&ailable in ppendi6 :!

The last Gor'ing ;hases 2 and 3 of this ction deal with best practices and their analysis< particular

attention has been paid to the causes of accidents and efforts ha&e been made to identify the

configurations that<

• pose recurrent problems in terms of operation or safety at intersections. stations and the

running sections between them.

• correspond to sections of line that perform well and/or ha&e no accidents.

• are inno&ati&e in terms of design!

The study then identified methods of analysis and best practices. and formed conclusions after

analysis and debates! This was done through 9ualitati&e research and shared e6perience. and

through debates between operators. researchers. designers and national safety authorities!

:inally. the results of the analysis % and of the ction as a whole % are best practices for the

safest insertion of tramways in urban spaces. through suggestions presented in this report. with

the identification of ha@ards. obecti&es and possible solutions. and design e6amples and

additional measures aimed at a safe interaction of new and e6isting tramway systems with

public space!

The report goes from accidents on a tram networ' to the whole process that leads to impro&ements

in tram safety. and proposes some best solutions for each type of layout. in a future tramway proector an e6isting tramway line!

Garning< (f you want to build a tramway or impro&e one % and 'eep it on surface. there is no

magical recipe to apply to ma'e it systematically safe! (t depends on many parameters and

some belong to geographical aspects. societal beha&iours. global design choices. regulations.

types of signs and how dri&ers respect them! ll proposed measures ha&e to be e6amined in

detail for their compatibility with national rules!

(t is supposed that the reader is loo'ing for solutions to layout problems in probably one of two

situations< creating a new tramline proect or needing to impro&e an e6isting one! The aim of this

document is to gi&e good practices to ma'e tram a safer means of transport than it already is. while

facing some problems that still e6ist and to gi&e good practice in a local conte6t for sol&ing ora&oiding them! This is intended to be done in a simple way< if someone has or needs this

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

23/216


configuration. the report proposes doing it this way "good e6amples$ and to a&oid doing it that way

"bad e6amples$! list of ha@ards and of possible solutions for each interaction point along the

tramline has been therefore pro&ided!

There are no generally good/safe or bad/dangerous solutions when tram layouts are concerned!

#ach case is uni9ue and it should be designed or adapted according to its urban en&ironment

and traffic conditions! (t is better to 'eep tramways integrated with the urban en&ironment. not

separated by fences or placed underground! Ionse9uently. one should be alerted to the

importance of ma'ing a sustainable choice of the type of unction. and once chosen one should

be able to say how to design it and what should be a&oided. gi&ing some practical e6amples!

This report proposes here<

• Operational tools – to better manage accident data and safety "see chapter 2$=

• (nfrastructure design safety analysis – to 'now what ad&antages and disad&antages a type of

layout can bring and which set of solutions can be proposed "see chapter 3$=

• The ris'y places encountered most often– to learn from common problems and pay particular

attention to such places "see chapter 3!$=

• uccess stories – to show e6perience on impro&ements that wor'ed "and still continue to be

successful$ "see chapter F$!

The tram is already a &ery safe mode of transport – how can we ma'e it still saferHV

18< -ow to read the re"ort

(n this report. the reader will find solutions to help with collecting and analysing accident data "one

or se&eral$. assessing safety impro&ements. and solutions to help with finding the best adapted and

safest infrastructure design for tram interactions with users of urban space!

(t is separated into two main parts<

- first chapter on data collection. e&aluation tools "e!g! indicators. hotspotsP$ and accident

scenarios – which is more appropriate to operators! (t will discuss tools for collecting and

analysing the best accident data!

- second chapter on infrastructure design and operating methods – which is more appropriate

to road networ' managers. designers. architects and engineering consulting firms! (t will e6pose

ha@ards and offer solutions for each type of tramway layout. through interaction between

&ehicles and the city. and operating conditions!

esearch bodies and o&ersight/monitoring authorities are concerned at both stages!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

24/216


The structure of the report is as follows<

:igure F – tructure and logic of the report

Concerning content. data from G;1 ha&e been used<

o To gather information on accident recording models that were identified during G;1. and

analyse them in G;2 to build the A(deal ccident eportB "see chapter 2!1$!

o To propose other tools to analyse accident data "see chapters 2!2$!

o To summarise &iews on the &alue of a national accident database. with pro and cons "seechapter 2!3$!

o To list and analyse different possible indicators "see chapter 2!4$!

o To list interaction points and describe e6amples "see chapter 3!4!1$!

(n the second Gor'ing ;hase. participants in the ction inter&iewed tram operators all o&er #urope

to get 'nowledge on and analyse their current hotspots and success stories "see chapter 3!$!

The results from these 9uestionnaires and the most common accident situations obser&ed were

cross%chec'ed with a large analysis which has been made of all the interaction points. based on

e6amples collected in G;1 "see chapter 3!4 and ppendi6 :$! These 9uestionnaires ha&e also

allowed a chec' on the theoretical list of conse9uences and impacts of accidents and set their limits

"see chapter 3!4!-$!

:urther. operators) practices on safety management principles ha&e been identified during our

sessions and synthesi@ed "see chapter 2!-$!

dditionnally. se&eral hort Term cientific *issions "T*$ were conducted as part of the ction to

research more specific topics. results of these ha&e been incorporated in this document and their

reports are oined in ppendi6 +!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

25/216


, Fro# accident to data collection and analysis: tools and #ethods

This chapter is mainly aimed at operators in order to offer them good practice and suggestions on

the best tools which can be suggested in order to collect more. and more accurate. data! This is not acriticism of what already e6ists< this chapter has been produced in order to offer e6periences and

suggestions to a new operator. to an operator see'ing impro&ements in its afety *anagement

ystem. or to a national afety uthority who re9uires operators to maintain and impro&e safety!

esearchers ha&e not been forgotten. and the report lists some data which can be used for in%depth

analysis!

The main contents of the chapter are as follows<

• Tools for accident analysis. including operational ways of collecting data=

• *ethods of data collection and their positi&e or negati&e impact on further analysis=

• Tools for an analysis of a single accident. a panel or all a networ')s e&ents "or e&en larger$=

• uggestions on parameters and rele&ance of the most used indicators=

• >ifferent organisational approaches!

Therefore. the obecti&e of the chapter is to propose the best tools and potential methodologies to

collect % including processing % and to analyse data!

,81 First tool: accident re"ort on the field

,8181 O%er%iew of the contents of e'isting accident re"orts 3 a""roaches and li#itations

ccident reports are different in many countries! They can be from one page to 10 pages! The ;olice

report and operator report are different too "e&en for the same country$ and they use different

databases!

The group has gathered samples of the reports to get an o&er&iew of practices. and to get ideas of

content and 'ey points not to forget! Then. in a brainstorming. an (deal ccident eport was

proposed! :inally. it was chec'ed by all operators and by U(T;!

Table presents e6amples of reports from a few countries "for details see ppendi6 E$<

• U "*etropolitan ;olice oad Traffic Collision/ccident :orm$=

• ;oland ";olice oad ccident Card and Operator (nformation Card$=

• ustria "ustrian Euideline and Giener inien operator report$=

• C@ech epublic "Operator ccident report form and #mergency eport form$=

• +orway ";olice motor%&ehicle accident report form$=

•

Eermany ";olice and operators) accident reports$=• :rance "Operator accident record$!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

26/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 2F/211

Table – ccident report samples for some countries

Princi"al content U=

Police

Accident

For#

Poland

Police

Accident

For#

2orway

Police

Accident

For#

>er#any

O"erator

Accident

For#

C+ech )e"8

O"erator

Accident

For#

18 The occ$rrence:

– date. e6act time and location of the occurrence.

– description of the e&ents and the accident site including the

efforts of the rescue and emergency ser&ices.

– the decision to establish an in&estigation. the composition of

the team of in&estigators and the conduct of the in&estigation!

W

W/+

+

W

W/+

+

W

W/+

+

W

W

+

W

W

+

,8 The bac4gro$nd to the occ$rrence:

– staff and contractors in&ol&ed and other parties and

witnesses.

– the trams and their composition including the registration

numbers of the items of rolling stoc' in&ol&ed.

– the description of the infrastructure and signalling system –

trac' types. switches. interloc'ing. signals. train protection.

– means of communication.

– wor's carried out at or in the &icinity of the site.

– trigger of the emergency plan and its chain of e&ents.

– trigger of the emergency plan of the public rescue ser&ices.

the police and the medical ser&ices and its chain of e&ents!

W

+

W/+

+

W

+

W

W

+

W/+

+

W

+

+

W

+

W/+

+

+

+

+

W

W

W

+

+

+

W

W

W

W

+

+

+

W

8 Fatalities? in*$ries and #aterial da#age:

– passengers and third parties. staff. including contractors.

– goods. luggage and other property.

– rolling stoc'. infrastructure and the en&ironment!

W

W

+

W

W

+

W

W

+

W

W

+

W

W

+

;8 &'ternal circ$#stances:

– weather conditions and geographical references! W W W W W

W % Wes= + % +o= W/+ % information not complete

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

27/216


e&eral ways of collecting data after an accident between a tram and other street users were

obser&ed< different approaches and methods. as well as differences in content and e6tent! ?alf of

the analysed reports are ;olice oad ccident forms. inspired by the #uropean model! Others are

forms used by the operators or national control authorities!

Concerning the inputs collected<

1! >ate. e6act time. location of the occurrence. description of the e&ents and the accident site

including the efforts of the rescue and emergency ser&ices are always gi&en!

ut the decision to establish an in&estigation. the composition of the team of in&estigators and

the conduct of the in&estigation is rarely mentioned!

2! taff and contractors in&ol&ed and other parties and witnesses are always identified! The

trigger of the emergency plan of the public rescue ser&ices. the police and the medical ser&ices

and its chain of e&ents are included for almost all!

ut it is not systematic to record the &ehicles and their composition including the registrationnumbers of the items of rolling stoc' in&ol&ed. the description of the infrastructure and

signalling system – trac' types. switches. interloc'ing. signals. train protection!

*eans of communication and trigger of the emergency plan and its chain of e&ents are not

mentioned!

Gor's carried out at or in the &icinity of the site are rarely mentioned!

3! ;assengers and third parties. staff. including contractors. and damage to goods. luggage and

other property are always identified. but not damage to the rolling stoc'. infrastructure and

the en&ironment!

F! #6ternal circumstances – weather conditions and geographical references are described for

each country!

,818, .deal Accident )e"ort

The aim of this part is to present an (deal ccident eport "($! This is not to critici@e e6isting

models nor to change current practices. but to propose the best and most useful practices for the

collection of all necessary data when in the field after a tram or other street user accident< accident

pre&ention starts with ac9uisition of accident data on site!

#&en though the ( does not focus on liability. the conser&ation of e&idence builds the basis for any

further legal claims concerning. for e6ample. the clarification of liability and possible insurance

claims! This tas' has to be e6ecuted with great accuracy! #&ery detail can ha&e a crucial importance

for subse9uent in&estigations! n error during the ac9uisition can hardly be corrected at a later

stage of data ac9uisition!

The ( model/template is a suggestion. adaptable for each operator)s needs. internal and

e6ternal data! (t is based on GEF wor'. on U(T; wor' and on the comments on the template by

the operators participating in the COT ction! ut it is more than a suggestion. it is a detailed

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

28/216


list of pertinent data strongly suggested to tramways operators to collect in order to<

• llow post%analysis and best understanding by operators but also researchers.

• Use data for e&aluation for accident pre&ention!

:or many operators the use of template chec'lists and accident report forms has been pro&ed

successful! :urther additional documents include clear s'etches of the accident scene. testimonies of

the dri&ing personnel and witnesses. blac' bo6 recordings. pictures "sur&ey of accident scenario.

damage of &ehicle and other details$ and % if possible % &ideo recordings etc! homogeneous design

of these documents within the operating company can assure consistent data ac9uisition and

e&aluation!

The ( should<

•how whether the ac9uired data is complete or not=

• ummarise essential information and 'eep it easy to understand=

• e self%e6planatory. with a clear picture of the accident. as well as the rele&ant parameters!

ummari@ing. this template should allow the in&estigator to clearly describe one accident. to

understand the e&ent and to collect 'ey data that facilitates further analyses by e6perts .

This template is intended for<

•

Operators. infrastructure managers "on%site report and post%analysis$!• ;ossibly other entities "transport authorities. control authorities. national databases.

go&ernmental authorities$!

• esearch bodies. related research "further in%depth national/local analysis$!

• Others< health and safety departments. mobility managers!

The intended use of the report can be for on%site in&estigation. post%analysis and/or statistics!

(f time permits. someone from the tram company other than the dri&er should ta'e information

from tram dri&er and other sources about the accident. location. and circumstance in order to allow

the dri&er to deal with passengers and to restart the operation! This person should reach the

accident site as soon as possible!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

29/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 2-/211

Table 4 – The (deal ccident report< our suggested chec'%list

.dentification 6 location

- ine +umber. stop. unction. time and date. &ehicle number

-

;recise address / house number / E; / satellite map / networ' map / o&erhead poleTy"e of location

- *ultiple choice< Lunction "roundabout. left turn. with/without traffic lightsP$ / pedestrian

crossing / station / running section

- Type of alignment "pedestrian area / completely segregated trac' / mi6ed traffic / lane shared

with bus$ and segregation "physical or &isual$

:igure - – ocation. type of interaction and type of trac's position. e6ample in Iienna

:igure K – #6ample in arcelona – photo of location

&n%iron#ent

- :og. snow/ice. rain/storm. lea&es on trac's

- Operational disturbances< degraded ser&ice. wor's. temporary speed limits. maintenance.

manifestations

.n%ol%ed "ersons

- (dentification of tram &ehicle. type of third party "if possible. category of age. gender!!!3$

- Tram dri&er)s name

3 :or adapting safety campaigns. ma'ing precise studies!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

30/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 2K/211

- (n&ol&ed persons or &ehicles "passengers. third parties$

- Gitnesses "if possible$

(escri"tion of accident

-

>rawing or s'etch "of intersection. &ehicle and person)s mo&ements. place of impact on&ehicles. sign and signal type –dynamic/static% and location$. pictures

:igure , – #6ample from Iienna – accident s'etch – end position of &ehicles in&ol&ed Mource< Giener inienN

:igure 10 – #6ample in yon – s'etch o&er photo Mource< Dolis yonN

- >irection of tra&el "trac' 1 or 2 for tram$. road "for other in&ol&ed party$

- *ar' accurately on the ground the final position of the part of the tram in&ol&ed

:igure 11 – #6ample in Iienna – mar's made on the carriageway made by the operator Mource< Giener inienN

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

31/216

Operation and safety of tramways in interaction with public space – TU1103 page 2,/211

- (nter&iew with tram dri&er. description of any unusual facts "consider collecting data for human

factor post%analysis$

- (nter&iew with car dri&er and witnesses "if possible$. description

- Classification of accident! Use local scheme "if a&ailable$

- Causes< eft turn. distraction. red light crossing. forbidden manoeu&re. &isibility "influenced by

geometry. obstacles. traffic and/or weather. lightening conditions$ etc!

- (f ris' management is in place % assign ris' to incident

:igure 12 – #6ample in arcelona – classification of accident Mource< www!icc!catN

:igure 13 – #6ample in Iienna – classification of accident Mource< Giener inienN

Technical data

- lac' bo6< peed. emergency bra'es. bell. turning signal.

- adio e6change recordings

- CCTI

- witches and trac'side signalling systems

- Traffic light state "phases$

Conse@$ences

-

;ersonal "se&erity of the inuries "light. medium. se&ere. deceased$$ for staff. passengers andthird parties

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

32/216


- *aterial damage "to tram. to third party &ehicle. or element$ "se&erity of the damage "light.

medium. se&ere$ technical report if a&ailable$

- Classification proposal of conse9uences<

1! accidents with inuries or hea&y material damage.

2! "AregularB$ accidents. no inuries

3! #&ents with no further safety related rele&ance

- (nfrastructure damage "se&erity of the damage "light. medium. se&ere$$

- Operational effects "cancelled ourneys. delays. o&erspills$

odies in%ol%ed in res"onse

- ;olice. fire brigade. ambulance. other resources needed to restore normal operation "internal

maintenance. crane$. inspector

-Trigger of the emergency plan "alert. information to passengers. measures for passengers and

third party protection. coordination with responsible bodies$

- #6pose immediate correcti&e measures ta'en by the operator "lower speedP$ or other

implicated authorities "the city!!!$

A""arent res"onsibility

- (nternal. e6ternal

S"ecial circ$#stances

-

(nternal fire. suicide. &andalism. terrorism threat. etcPossible contin$ation

- >ecision to establish a further in&estigation or not

A$thor and date of re"ort

- (nspector)s name. date and signature

The ( form should include the complete information about the incident. concerning e&ery

obligation of operation "information which is pro&ided during further in&estigation by the regulatoryauthorities or other go&ernmental institutions$! The amount of detail and data pro&ided will depend

on the seriousness of the incident or accident!

(t is necessary to ensure consistent professional e6ecution of data ac9uisition and documentation by

the operator! ppropriate commitment by the employees is re9uired to a&oid conflicts between

data ac9uisition and other duties on site "e!g! passenger information. organi@ing replacement

ser&ices. support for dri&er$! Therefore. in theoretical and practical training. employees need to

ac9uire the re9uired abilities to ta'e appropriate measures in case of an accident! #mployees in

charge ha&e to e6ercise and practice their s'ills in data ac9uisition in order to ensure a high 9uality

of permanent and structured internal data!

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

33/216


*inimum data to be tabulari@ed<

• >ata on date. time. characteristic of the location "unction. trac' characteristics. spatial

situation$. in&ol&ed parties. accident cause. physical inury/fatality. material damage

and 9uestion of apparent accident responsibility! dditionally. it can be useful to

ac9uire further information. e!g! line. age and gender of the person"s$ hurt and weather

conditions!

• ;lace and time of accident should be described in detail to allow cross%referencing and

completion of data!

• eport authority)s official signature. date and stamp!

• afe storage of the original accident report should be guaranteed for a gi&en amount of

time!

,8, Other data collection tools

>ata collection in the field is the main tool but others e6ist for impro&ing the post%analysis! (n this

paragraph an o&er&iew is gi&en of tools and information sources that fulfil two needs<

• long with the standard accident report that is made soon after the e&ent< sources that gi&e

supporting e&idence about accidents!

• Ghen standard or formal accident reports ha&e not been made. or are confidential orotherwise una&ailable< to find accident information &ia other routes!

The most important tools and sources for accidents are<

5ore ob*ecti%e tools 5ore s$b*ecti%e tools

Iideo images ;ersonal information of dri&ers. passengers and/or witnesses

;ictures Occurrence boo's

utomatic recording "Qblac' bo6es)$ +ewspapers and other news channels

Ioice recording

Trac's and traces in the incident area

:or near%misses or ris'y situations<

5ore ob*ecti%e tools 5ore s$b*ecti%e tools

#mergency bra'e e&ents >ri&er)s accounts

Occurrence boo's

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

34/216


(f one is loo'ing at more than one specific accident. or at ust one particular accident within an

o&er&iew with others. se&eral sources can also be a&ailable. such as for e6ample operators) yearly

reports. safety reports or analyses of federal/national agencies or inspectorates. chains of e&entswith timing. traffic light phases. tram signal status at time of incident. detailed or additional

inter&iews. control centre information "log files. interaction between dri&er and controller.

emergency calls. reaction times$. possible use of police reports. traffic &olume at accident location.speed limits "cars / trams$P

,8,81 lac4 bo'es6logistic recordings

The Qblac' bo6) is a popular name which is commonly used. e&en when the bo6 is actually colouredorange "as in a&iation and often also in railway applications$! ?ere it co&ers the technical systems in

the &ehicles that record the main characteristics such as speed and bra'ing processes! Other names

are in use. e!g! e&ent recorders. on%tram data recorders and uridical recording units "LU)s$! e&eral

&ariations are included. e!g! tachographic or purely electronic systems!

Tramway rolling stoc' has been e9uipped in recent years with se&eral digital recording systems!

These systems range<

• from internal parameter measurements. li'e emergency bra'ing actions.

deceleration/acceleration and traction status

• to e6ternal recordings li'e front%&iew camera or e&en in%cab &iews!

:or the internal parameters. most legal issues ha&elong been ta'en care of. and other ser&ices li'e

signalling or rolling stoc' maintenance use them

e6tensi&ely too! This is not the case for the camerarecordings. although more and more networ's areallowed to film the frontal &iew! (n rare cases.

internal cab images of dri&er beha&iour are alsorecorded! (n the case of accident analysis. this &ideo

data is considered &ery informati&e!

:igure 1F – #6ample of the commercially a&ailable blac' bo6es % lac' bo6 type Teloc 100 from ?asler ail E

Mource< www!berner@eitung!ch/region/bern/>ieser%pion%faehrt%in%&ielen%Xuegen%mit/story/2F,40-23N

Ad%antages (isad%antages Legal iss$es

o ;ossibility to reconstruct

an accident with details

o ?igh performance

o ?igh data protection

o Technical re9uirements

o >ifficult to analyse

o elati&ely small number of

parameters

ensiti&e data. pri&acy

rules "if CCTI$. can be

re9uested by authorities!

Foc$s: ergency bra4e #onitoring

:or the full safety management of tram and T operations it is not sufficient ust to record. monitorand analyse incidents and accidents! +ear misses can be addressed as well! Therefore other tools

8/20/2019 TU1103 Report

35/216


e6ist or can be applied to get a better insight of the ris's in the networ' on the one hand. or about

the dri&er)s beha&iour on the other hand!

Tram dri&ers are trained in defensi&e dri&ing techni9ues and are constantly &igilant of pedestrians

and cyclists. and bra'e to pre&ent a collision! #&idence suggests that these emergency bra'eapplications are often made because of acts by third parties. e!g! the road &ehicle dri&er. pedestrians

and cyclists!

useful indicator of a precursor to an incident "near miss$ is the number of emergency bra'eapplications tram dri&ers ha&e to ma'e! ?owe&er. communication with the dri&er is needed to a&oid

the possible negati&e implications of recording emergency bra'ing! (f for e6ample the dri&er is

concerned that a sanction might be imposed on him. the number of emergency bra'e applications

might decrease. compromising safety!

The numbers of #mergency ra'e applications by uas dri&ers below illustrates this important

information<

ergency bra4e origin ,00< ,00B ,00 ,00D ,00E ,010 ,011 ,01, ,01

# applications by dri%er ,F0 -F- F0 F3 30 3-F F-K F1F FF4

Table 1 – nnual statistics of emergency bra'e e&ents at uas. >ublin

(n 2013. road &ehicles were the cause of 3K5. pedestrians 2-5. and cyclists F5 of all emergency

bra'e applications! :or a further e6ample. a success story of near%miss analysis in tuttgart based on

the amount of emergency bra'ing is presented in chapter F!1!2!

Ad%antages of & analysis (isad%antages Legal iss$es

o rings more data to supplement rare

accident data. so pro&iding better statistics

o ;recursor to an incident

o Thus. allows identification of ris'y places –

no accident yet but potential

o >ifficult to collect data

"blac' bo6 gi&es no clearidentification of location

or dri&ers) declaration$

+one!

,8,8, Personal infor#ation fro# dri%ers? "assengers and6or other witnesses

s noted pre&iously. less obecti&e tools are also worth collecting! (nter&iews with people in&ol&ed in

the incident or in the &icinity certainly can gi&e &aluable information! (t is clear that people 'now alot about what actually happened "e!g! the road was slippery$ and that such information is notalways a&ailable at a later time if no inter&iews were made! Therefore. e&en if a person is in&ol&ed in

the accident "and then might perhaps be a guilty party$. his story is worth recording!

(n certain cases important information could be obtained from noises such as "emergency$ warning

or "emerg

TU1103 Report

Documents

Transcript of TU1103 Report