Rail Industries
Project
Experience
Human Factors and Safety Evaluations
Accident and Incident Investigation
Ergonomic Evaluations
Training and Procedures
Human Factors
and Safety Evaluations
British Railways Board
- Safety aspects of hand-signalling.
- Review of platform equipment provided for driver-only operation.
- Evaluation of safety aspects of driver only train operation.
Docklands Light Railway
- Human factors evaluation of a new control room
and automated train control systems.
European Commission
- Human factors aspects of cross border rail operations
(Human Safe Rail in Europe - HUSARE).
- Further details
London Underground Limited
- Human factors analysis (risk assessment and reduction
programme).
- Comparative safety evaluation of passenger guarding measures on escalators.
- Risk assessment and cost-benefit analysis of escalator replacement strategies.
National Union of Railwaymen
- Evaluation of a proposed visual display unit based
system for signalling trains.
Railtrack
- A human factors assessment of the change in risk due to high speed train
operations.
- Human factors aspects of differential speed limit signs and in-cab displays.
- A human reliability analysis of the detection of multiple speed signs
and the adoption of permitted speeds. Further
details
- Independent Safety Assessor for human factors
elements of the upgrading of the North Staffordshire Signalling Centre.
- Independent Safety Assessor for human factors elements of the upgrading
of the West Coast Main Line.
Back to the top
Accident/Incident
Investigation
British Railways
Board
- Investigation of the Clapham Junction accident
for the Public Enquiry.
British Railways
Research
- Design of reporting form for signals passed at
danger accidents.
London Underground
Limited
- Study of the causes of accidents on escalators.
Railtrack
- Pilot study with Railtrack North East on the analysis
of factors affecting incidents of signals passed at danger (SPADs)
Back to the top
Ergonomic
Evaluations
British Railways
Board
- Ergonomic evaluation of cab design.
London Underground
Limited
- Ergonomic and safety evaluation of guarding methods
in escalator machine rooms.
Back to the top
Training
and Procedures
Arriva Trains Merseyside
- Development and provision of a training course
based Understanding & Preventing Human Error and learning lessons
from incidents.
Connex
- Developed a specification that supported a training
simulator in line with the recommendations of the Uff report into the
Southall rail accident inquiry.
Railtrack
- Summary of documentation guidelines for procedures
& research on information presentation.
Further
Details on Rail Industry Projects
Human
factors aspects of cross border rail operations (European
Commission)
Human Reliability have
participated in a European research project funded by the European Commission
(Directorate General for Transport, DG VII). This project, involving several
European partners including DNV (Norway), SNCF (France), Halcrow Transmark
(UK), and TUV Eurorail (Germany), is entitled 'Managing the Human Factor
in Multicultural and Multilingual Rail Environments'. It has the aim of
increasing both safety and reliability for European cross-border railway
lines.
An integration of the rail
transport system means that trains will increasingly have to operate
across the borders of countries with different systems, rules and procedures.
Such differences may have profound implications for these operations
in terms of the management of safety. For example, the same driver may
be faced with several differences in language, rules and procedures,
roles and responsibilities, signal-positioning etc. during a journey
from, say, Amsterdam-Brussels-Paris. Any such differences will be particularly
significant in degraded conditions and emergencies.
The project aimed to
analyse the risks of rail operations and identify the role of the human
in initiating and mitigating these risks. The outputs of this work will
include an overview of the risks involved in such operations, methods for
evaluating & improving the 'human factor' and suggestions for harmonisation
to reduce risk (for example, of rules and procedures).
Back to the top - Link
to a Report to European Transport Commission
A
human reliability analysis of the detection of multiple speed signs and
the adoption of permitted speeds (Railtrack)
This study was concerned with the impact of the introduction of multiple
speed signs and the ability of drivers to detect and adopt permitted
speeds.
For drivers with substantial
experience on a route, the additional perceptual loading imposed by
the use of multiple speed signs is considered low, because such drivers
rely primarily on route knowledge to determine the appropriate speeds.
For experienced drivers, signs are not read to obtain speed information,
but rather to confirm, in conjunction with route knowledge, that a speed
change is required. During the interviews, drivers maintained that they
were still able to maintain the required speeds even if signs were absent
or illegible due to vandalism. This supports the conclusion that for
experienced drivers, the introduction of multiple speed signs does not
pose a substantial increase in risk. In order to provide objective support
for this conclusion a more extended risk analysis study would be required.
Some potential risks may
arise for drivers who are less experienced on the route, such as newly
qualified drivers, or experienced drivers who are unacquainted with
a route. In this case, the perceptual loading on the driver is likely
to be higher, particularly in situations where multi-tasking is required,
e.g. when approaching complex junctions or intersections. This could
lead to a variety of errors, including failures to observe signals.
Suitable preventative measures should be incorporated in the Group Standard
or Approved Code of Practice including aspects of the training and competency
assessment programme, to ensure that drivers are fully aware of the
location of speed restrictions when training for a particular line.
Another potential hazard
is the danger of 'strong stereotype take-overs'. These arise when drivers
who are primarily experienced with a particular train type with a high
permitted speed, but are occasionally required to drive a train of similar
appearance with a lower permitted speed. This can lead to the driver
reverting to speeds that are inappropriate for the type of train being
driven, if distractions and stress lead to attention being diverted.
Although it may not be appropriate to address the strong stereotype
error in the tilting train standard, measures need to be taken to ensure
that the cabs of different types of trains appear visually distinct,
e.g. by the use of colour (in-cab labelling is not enough to differentiate
between cabs). In addition, there is a need to evaluate the driving
patterns of individual drivers to assess whether these patterns could
give rise to strong stereotype errors.
Back to the top