Proceedings of the ASME IEEE ASCE 2016 Joint Rail Conference

PDFIn ProceedingsJRC2016-5811CrashworthinessAccident investigationRailroad safetyRailcar structural componentsEmergenciesPassenger carsIntercity passenger carsCommuter carsCouplersUnited StatesAmerican Society of Mechanical EngineersWilson, BruceTyrell, DavidJohn A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center (U.S.)AGR-SAFETY AND SECURITY-SAFETY AND SECURITYNTL-RAIL TRANSPORTATION-RAIL TRANSPORTATIONNTL-RAIL TRANSPORTATION-Rail SafetyNTL-SAFETY AND SECURITY-AccidentsNTL-SAFETY AND SECURITY-Rail SafetyNTL-SAFETY AND SECURITY-Vehicle DesignAGR-PASSENGERS-PASSENGERSVolpe National Transportation Systems Center, Technical Reference CenterTwenty-three commuter and inter-city passenger trainaccidents, which occurred over the past twenty years, have beenanalyzed. The analysis has assessed the potential effectivenessof various injury mitigation strategies. The strategies with thegreatest potential to increase passenger safety are interioroccupant protection, coupler integrity, end structure integrity,side structure integrity, and glazing system integrity. Werecommend that these strategies be researched further.Three types of accidents were analyzed: train-to-traincollisions, derailments, and grade-crossing collisions. Train-totraincollisions include the commuter train-freight train collisionin Chatsworth, California on September 12, 2008. In Chatswortha commuter train collided with a freight train at a closing speedof ~80 mph, fatally injuring twenty-five people and injuringmore than 100 others. Derailments include the commuter trainderailment in Spuyten Duyvil, New York on December 1, 2013,fatally injuring four people and injuring more than fifty others.Grade-crossing accidents include the commuter-SUV collisionin Valhalla, New York on February 3, 2015, which resulted in sixfatally injured people, including the SUV driver, and thirteenseverely injured people.Four categories of mitigation strategies were considered:train crashworthiness, wayside structure crashworthiness, firesafety, and emergency preparedness. Within each of thesecategories are equipment features, which may potentially bemodified to further mitigate injuries. The features are simplenoun phrases, e.g., \ue2\u20ac\u153floor strength,\ue2\u20ac? implying that the floorstrength should be increased. Train crashworthiness includesfeatures such as end strength, floor strength, coupler separation,and numerous others. Wayside structure crashworthinessincludes features such as frangible catenary poles and third railend caps. Fire safety includes train interior and train exteriorfeatures for minimizing the potential for fire and for reducing therate at which fire might spread. Emergency preparednessincludes features for emergency egress, access, lighting, signage,and on-board equipment, such as fire extinguishers.Overall, rail passenger travel has a high level of safety, andpassenger train accidents are rare events. The numbers are lowfor expected casualties per passenger-mile and casualties perpassenger-trip. A high level of safety, however, does not meanefforts to improve it should cease. But it does mean that crashesare rare events. Rare events in complex systems are notoriouslydifficult to analyze with confidence. There are too few accidentsto provide the data needed for even a moderate degree ofmathematical confidence in statistical analysis. Analyses ofsimilar data in medical and scientific fields have been shown tobe prone to the biases of the researchers, sometimes in subtle anddifficult-to-detect ways. As a means of coping with the sparsedata and potential biases, the goal has been to evaluate theaccidents transparently and comprehensively. This approachallows a wide audience to understand how injuries and fatalitiesoccur in passenger train accidents and, most importantly, allowsus to prioritize mitigation strategies for research