Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces (2017)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

1 Introduction The objective of this research was to develop a manual for practitioners to improve safety at rail transit platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces. The manual provides treatment strategies to prevent incidents and improve safety at platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces. The research focused on rail transit systems with level or near level boarding where the vehicle floors are level or near level with the platform. Travel by public transit is one of the safest modes of transportation, yet incidents have resulted in injuries and sometimes fatalities at rail transit platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interfaces. This manual is based on a comprehensive literature review, site visits to rail transit agencies, incident data analysis, and multiple conversations with members of the transit industry. The research showed that the mode of rail transit and the height of the platform from the top of rail were the most significant factors involved in platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interface incidents. Heavy rail transit operating with high height from top of rail or high level platforms and commuter rail systems that operate on shared use track with freight rail had more incidents that impacted safety at rail transit platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interfaces than light rail or streetcar transit had. The treatment strategies developed by rail transit agencies to improve safety at platform/ guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces include platform edge and surface treatments, vehicle door treatments, operational improvements that include additional staff on the plat- form, and the use of platform cameras. Rail transit agencies have also invested in public outreach and education to raise awareness and improve safety at platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces. Five heavy rail transit systems in the United States provided platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incident data for analysis. The amount and structure of the data limited the analysis. Based on the data provided, platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents are infrequent and make up less than 10% of the total number of incidents. More common incidents include general slips and falls on the platform and falls on stairs and escalators. The height of the platform from the top of rail influences the severity of platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents. A high height platform (common to heavy and commuter rail) is generally considered to be greater than 36 in. from top of rail. A low height platform (common to light rail and streetcars) are those that are less than 15 in. from top of rail. Low height or low level platforms have fewer reportable incidents than high height platforms (27). S U M M A R Y Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Guideway and Platform/Vehicle Interfaces

2 Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces Platform Treatment Strategies The platform treatment strategies and best practices involve the platform edge and sur- face infrastructure. They also include special treatments for curved platforms as well as shared use high height platforms. Static gap fillers are the most common treatment to reduce the horizontal gap between the platform and the vehicle. In addition to static gap fillers, mechanical moving platform edge sections are used on extremely curved platforms with large horizontal gaps. Other platform treatments to reduce incidents include (a) electronic systems for guideway intrusion detection and (b) platform screen doors for guideway intrusion prevention. Vehicle Treatment Strategies The rail transit vehicles considered for platform/guideway and platform/vehicle inter- faces include heavy rail transit such as commuter and subway trains; light rail transit; and streetcars and trams. All vehicles vary in width, length, height, suspension, door types, configurations, and propulsion systems. This project focused on vehicles that have level boarding with no interior steps at the boarding door. The most common vehicle-based treatments include fixed door threshold extensions and mechanically deployed bridges and ramps. Passenger Characteristics and Behaviors That Impact Platform Safety The research revealed that the primary passenger characteristics that contribute to platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents are the gender and age of passengers. Female passengers, older passengers, and young children are more highly impacted by gaps. Disruptive behavior, distracted behavior, and trespassing are the major passenger behaviors that contribute to interface incidents. Rail Transit Operations Factors That Influence Platform Safety Rail transit agencies identified a number of factors that influence the safety of platform/ guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces. These factors include adjusting station dwell times, providing specific door locations on platforms, zonal door closing schemes, and increasing staff at stations with curved platforms during peak hours and on crowded platforms. Public Outreach, Marketing, Training, and Education Treatments Rail transit agencies have developed outreach, marketing, employee training, and public education programs to improve safety and reduce platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents. Some of these programs include the following: • Onboard vehicle and platform visual and audio gap warning systems • Collaborating with public and private organizations to conduct education and outreach programs to reduce passenger incidents • Employee training to recognize and mitigate risk factors associated with platform/ guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents

Summary 3 The media used for public outreach include the following: • Printed materials may be used. These include brochures that are multilingual and cultur- ally appropriate for a specific audience or safety slogans printed on the back of a ticket or fare card. • Posters may be displayed in stations to alert passengers. One of the most recognized public relation campaigns about platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interfaces is “Mind the Gap” from the London Underground. Railway systems in the United States have slightly modified this statement to “Watch the Gap” for their own public relation campaigns. Many U.S. rail transit systems have stenciled warnings on the edge of the platform to “Watch the Gap.” Key Findings Heavy rail transit has more platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface incidents than light rail or streetcar transit have. Some of the common reasons for this include high ridership, older or legacy stations, high platforms, diversity of vehicles operating on the sys- tem, and maintenance issues. The platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface factors that a specific rail transit agency encounters vary throughout the transit system and even on the same rail line. The most common treatments to improve safety at platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interfaces developed for heavy rail include platform edge extensions, extended door thresholds, platform screen doors or fences, and public outreach programs. Platform screen doors, however, are more common on European and Asian transit systems. Commuter rail platform/guideway and platform/vehicle interface factors pertain to operations that occur on shared use track. Federal and state standards regulate freight car clearances on shared use track corridors. Commuter rail operators have developed treatments to reduce the impact of both horizontal and vertical gaps between the plat- form and the train cars. These treatments include manually operated bridges, moving platforms, platform edge extenders, hydraulically operated gangways, separate sidings, and gauntlet tracks. There are distinct advantages and disadvantages associated with each method. Light rail and streetcars generally operate with low height platforms and very few incidents or issues with the physical gap between the vehicles and the platform have been reported. However, streetcar and light rail operators do report passenger intrusions into the guideway and between cars. Some of the treatments for between-car intrusions include warning placards; platform-based bollards; and between-car flexible paddles, belts, or chains. Possible Improvements and Further Research The following suggestions for further study are the result of TCRP Project A-40 activities conducted while developing this manual. • New stations constructed on tangent track would be beneficial for minimizing gaps at platform/vehicle interfaces that occur when the track is curved.

4 Manual to Improve Rail Transit Safety at Platform/Vehicle and Platform/Guideway Interfaces • More research about solutions for between-car barrier systems would be beneficial for light rail and streetcars that operate with more than one car and cannot use any of the existing treatments. • Transit agencies have made significant progress instituting policies that improve overall system safety. It has been suggested that transit agencies lead with safety and create a safety culture that puts a priority on system safety at platform/guideway and platform/ vehicle interfaces and throughout the transit system. • Safety departments at rail transit agencies suggested there is a need for more harmoniza- tion of FTA and FRA safety incident reporting requirements. In particular, research about the importance of consistency in the reporting of intentional trespasses and suicides on all rail transit mode would be beneficial.