Two-Half-Barrier Level Crossings Versus Four-Half-Barrier Level Crossings: A Comparative Risk Analysis Study

Safety is a key issue in railway operation. In this context, level crossings (LCs) are one of the most critical points in railway networks. In some countries, accidents at LC account for up to 50% of railway accidents. In this paper, we conduct a risk assessment comparative study involving two main types of Automatic Protection Systems (APSs), the first using a pair of half-barriers and the second with four half-barriers. So far, the choice of such LC protection systems has been exclusively done on the basis of qualitative expertise. The study we carry out here is based on some parameterizable behavioral models we have developed, which describe the global dynamics within the LC area. In contrast to existing studies on LC safety, our models take into account not only railway and road traffic but also the risk due to human factors while focusing on two major risky situations. The simulation results clearly show the potential risk with each of the investigated APSs, according to various features of the dynamics within the LC area. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work dealing with a quantitative comparison between different types of LCs. The developed models can be easily accommodated in order to describe existing infrastructures.

[1]  Armand Toguyéni,et al.  State Observer for DES Under Partial Observation with Time Petri Nets , 2009, Discret. Event Dyn. Syst..

[2]  Loren D. Lutes,et al.  Counting level crossings by a stochastic process , 2007 .

[3]  Yassine Ruichek,et al.  1th World Level Crossing Symposium toward Further Improvement of Level Crossing Safety - Coordinated Approach and Individual Efforts Pansafer Project : towards a Safer Level Crossing , 2010 .

[4]  Christina M. Rudin-Brown,et al.  Driver behaviour at rail level crossings: responses to flashing lights, traffic signals and stop signs in simulated rural driving. , 2011, Applied ergonomics.

[5]  Marc Heddebaut,et al.  Towards safer level crossings: existing recommendations, new applicable technologies and a proposed simulation model , 2009 .

[6]  Armand Toguyéni,et al.  Validation of a New Functional Design of Automatic Protection Systems at Level Crossings with Model-Checking Techniques , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[7]  Sidney Dekker,et al.  SIX STAGES TO THE NEW VIEW OF HUMAN ERROR , 2007 .

[8]  Lars Michael Kristensen,et al.  Coloured Petri Nets and CPN Tools for modelling and validation of concurrent systems , 2007, International Journal on Software Tools for Technology Transfer.

[9]  Li-Sian Tey,et al.  Measuring driver responses at railway level crossings. , 2011, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[10]  Eckehard Schnieder,et al.  Traffic Control Systems Case Study: Problem Description and a Note on Domain-based Software Specific , 2000 .

[11]  Em El-Koursi,et al.  Harmonising Safety Management Systems in the European Railway Sector , 2007 .

[12]  MengChu Zhou,et al.  Critical Scenarios and Their Identification in Parallel Railroad Level Crossing Traffic Control Systems , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[13]  Mohamed Ghazel,et al.  Using Stochastic Petri Nets for Level-Crossing Collision Risk Assessment , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

[14]  Peter J. Haas,et al.  Stochastic Petri Nets , 2002 .