2003Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardRequires access

Evaluation of Rail Passenger Equipment Crashworthiness Strategies

David Tyrell, Amotz Perlman

Open publisher page 29 citations

Abstract

Comparisons are made of the effectiveness of competing crashworthiness strategies—crash energy management (CEM) and conventional passenger train design. CEM is a strategy for providing rail equipment crashworthiness that uses crush zones at the ends of cars. These zones are designed to collapse in a controlled way during a collision, distributing the crush among the train cars. This technique preserves the occupied spaces in the train and limits the decelerations of the occupant volumes. Two scenarios are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the crashworthiness strategies—( a) a train-to-train collision of a cab-car–led passenger train with a standing locomotive–led passenger train and ( b) a grade-crossing collision of a cab-car-led passenger train with a standing highway vehicle. The maximum speed for which all the occupants are expected to survive and the predicted increase in fatalities and injuries with increasing collision speed are determined for both train designs. Crash energy management is shown to significantly increase the maximum speed at which all the occupants could survive for both grade crossing and train-to-train collisions for cab-car–led trains, at the expense of modestly increasing the speeds at which occupants impact the interior in train-to-train collisions.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Comparisons are made of the effectiveness of competing crashworthiness strategies—crash energy management (CEM) and conventional passenger train design. CEM is a strategy for providing rail equipment crashworthiness that uses crush zones at the ends of cars. These zones are designed to collapse in a controlled way during a collision, distributing the crush among the train cars. This technique preserves the occupied spaces in the train and limits the decelerations of the occupant volumes. Two scenarios are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the crashworthiness strategies—( a) a train-to-train collision of a cab-car–led passenger train with a standing locomotive–led passenger train and ( b) a grade-crossing collision of a cab-car-led passenger train with a standing highway vehicle. The maximum speed for which all the occupants are expected to survive and the predicted increase in fatalities and injuries with increasing collision speed are determined for both train designs. Crash energy management is shown to significantly increase the maximum speed at which all the occupants could survive for both grade crossing and train-to-train collisions for cab-car–led trains, at the expense of modestly increasing the speeds at which occupants impact the interior in train-to-train collisions.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 29 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Comparisons are made of the effectiveness of competing crashworthiness strategies—crash energy management (CEM) and conventional passenger train design. CEM is a strategy for providing rail equipment crashworthiness that uses crush zones at the ends of cars. These zones are designed to collapse in a controlled way during a collision, distributing the crush among the train cars. This technique preserves the occupied spaces in the train and limits the decelerations of the occupant volumes. Two scenarios are used to evaluate the effectiveness of the crashworthiness strategies—( a) a train-to-train collision of a cab-car–led passenger train with a standing locomotive–led passenger train and ( b) a grade-crossing collision of a cab-car-led passenger train with a standing highway vehicle. The maximum speed for which all the occupants are expected to survive and the predicted increase in fatalities and injuries with increasing collision speed are determined for both train designs. Crash energy management is shown to significantly increase the maximum speed at which all the occupants could survive for both grade crossing and train-to-train collisions for cab-car–led trains, at the expense of modestly increasing the speeds at which occupants impact the interior in train-to-train collisions.

Key concepts: Crashworthiness, Passenger train, Train, Collision, Automotive engineering, Crash, Engineering, Transport engineering

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Evaluation of Rail Passenger Equipment Crashworthiness Strategies — Research Paper | ScholarLens