Citation

Morlok EK, Nitzberg BF, Lai L. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2004; 36(2): 261-271.

Affiliation

Electrical and Systems Engineering Department, University of Pennsylvania, Room 229, Towne Building, 220 S. 33rd Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6315, USA. morlok@seas.upenn.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

14642881

Abstract

Commuter railroad systems in the US employ three combinations of station platforms and car entranceways. These are high-level platforms with remotely controlled doors and level entranceway (HL-RC), low-level platforms (just above the rail) with steps and remotely controlled doors (LL-RC), and a mixture of the two platform types with a correspondingly more complex, partly manual, door and entranceway arrangement (ML-MO). Much controversy exists over which type of platform/entranceway is better. This seemingly small feature significantly impacts many performance characteristics of these systems, including cost, speed, and boarding and alighting accidents. Northeastern systems are generally moving toward the mixed platform design or all high-level platforms, while systems elsewhere are generally selecting the low-level design. Data on actual accident experience for 1995-2000 are analyzed to determine the effect of platform/entranceway type on passenger and employee injuries. Passenger injury rates on systems with the HL-RC design are lowest, with LL-RC systems next, and ML-MO systems having the highest rates. Employee injury rates are the least on LL-RC systems, but higher on ML-MO and HL-RC systems. Systems with a mixture of high and low platforms (ML-MO) experience a higher overall (combined passenger and employee) injury rate than the other two designs. The implications of these results for both the modernization of existing systems and the design of new systems, in the US and abroad, are discussed.

Language: en