Brief Overview of New ALCAM

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Improving safety of older road users Challenges and opportunities from a road infrastructure perspective Fred Wegman SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research.
Advertisements

Department of Infrastructure JRA ALGA National State of the Assets Project.
Land Transport Paul Zealand Land Transport – A Key Risk Increasing exposure with increase in onshore Project and Facilities growth Close interaction.
National Rail Safety Investigations in Australia International Rail Safety Conference Vancouver – Oct 2013 Tony Simes Manager - Rail Coordinator.
Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority Safety Overview March 1, 2007 Exposition Light Rail Transit Project.
Spring  Types of studies ◦ Naïve before-after studies ◦ Before-after studies with control group ◦ Empirical Bayes approach (control group) ◦ Full.
Spring INTRODUCTION There exists a lot of methods used for identifying high risk locations or sites that experience more crashes than one would.
Road Safety Audits Ghazwan al-Haji PhD student ”On whats goes wrong in road design and how to put it right safely”
Chapter 2-Safety Analysis A Statistical Approach.
ARTSA Improving Heavy Vehicle Safety Summit Chain of Responsibility and its potential to improve safety Marcus Burke National Transport Commission 16 April.
Tony Gould Quality Risk Management. 2 | PQ Workshop, Abu Dhabi | October 2010 Introduction Risk management is not new – we do it informally all the time.
Safety Audit Components Safety assessment for risk Management.
Research on the Use of Motorized Mobility Devices Daniel Blais, Project Officer, Accessibility and Human Factors.
Safe systems approach for mining road safety Damir Vagaja Manager Mining and Resources ARRB Group.
Using functional analysis to determine the requirements for changes to critical systems: Railway level crossing case study Joe Silmon, Clive Roberts Centre.
Incorporating Temporal Effect into Crash Safety Performance Functions Wen Cheng, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE Civil Engineering Department Cal Poly Pomona.
6 th AASHTO International Day Stockholm International Fairs & Congress Centre 21 September 2009 Cooperative Vehicle Systems Progress from Around the World.
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users SAFETEA-LU Key Safety Provisions Federal Highway Administration.
Hypothesis 1: Narrow roadways and roadways with higher speed limits will increase risk of vehicle/bicycle crash Hypothesis 2: Bicycle lanes and signage.
Railtrack PLC Safety & Standards Directorate Railway Safety: Analysing Risks and Causes Sally Brearley Railtrack Safety and Standards Directorate 8 December.
Human factor, road-rail safety policies, available technologies at level crossing. Towards a model to evaluate LCs risk. Emilio Cosciotti Massimo Costa.
Cooperative Intersection Collision Avoidance Systems Initiative May 2005, ITS America Annual Meeting Mike Schagrin ITS Joint Program Office U.S. Department.
Driver Distraction: Results from Naturalistic Teenage Driving Studies Charlie Klauer, Ph. D. Research Scientist Group Lead: Teen Risk and Injury Prevention.
THE PROTOTYPING MODEL The prototyping model begins with requirements gathering. Developer and customer meet and define the overall objectives for the software.
AT Benefit Cost Analysis Model Highway Design, Project Management and Training Section Technical Standards Branch Presented by Bill Kenny, Director: Design,
Network Screening 1 Module 3 Safety Analysis in a Data-limited, Local Agency Environment: July 22, Boise, Idaho.
IOPS Toolkit for Risk-based Supervision Module 4: Risk Mitigation and Scoring.
Evaluation of Alternative Methods for Identifying High Collision Concentration Locations Raghavan Srinivasan 1 Craig Lyon 2 Bhagwant Persaud 2 Carol Martell.
1 CEE 763 Fall 2011 Topic 1 – Fundamentals CEE 763.
IOPS Toolkit for Risk-based Supervision Module 4: Risk Mitigation and Scoring.
Railway Safety Commission An Coimisiún Sábháilteachta Iarnróid The Management of Third Party Generated Risk in Ireland International Railway Safety Conference.
Road Safety Management Dakar Workshop Dec. 5, 2013 Justin Runji.
1 Review and Assessment of the Korea Rail ’ s Safety Performance using Risk Assessment Models International Railway Safety Conference 2009, Sweden Chan-Woo.
9-1 Using SafetyAnalyst Module 4 Countermeasure Evaluation.
1 Element 1: The Systemic Safety Project Selection Process Element 1: 4-Step Project Selection Process.
Managing Change 1. Why Do Requirements Change?  External Factors – those change agents over which the project team has little or no control.  Internal.
Research Project #5 Develop Common Data on Accident Circumstances.
Analyzing Changes to Truck Size and Weight Regulations Methods for States presented to AASHTO Subcommittee on Highway Transport presented by Donald Ludlow,
IntelliDrive Safety Workshop July 20, 2010 Stephanie C. Binder National Highway Traffic Safety Administration US Department of Transportation Human Factors.
Calibrating Highway Safety Manual Equations for Application in Florida Dr. Siva Srinivasan, Phillip Haas, Nagendra Dhakar, and Ryan Hormel (UF) Doug Harwood.
Transport Rail Safety & the Railway Safety Directive Frank Jost Single European Rail Area EU Commission 1.
Erman Taşkın. Information security aspects of business continuity management Objective: To counteract interruptions to business activities and to protect.
IAEA Training Course on Safety Assessment of NPPs to Assist Decision Making Temelin NPP Risk Panel A PSA and Safety Monitor Application Workshop Information.
姓名 : 許浩維 學號 :M 日期 : Road Accident: Driver Behaviour, Learning and Driving Task 1.
Using functional analysis to determine the requirements for changes to critical systems: Railway level crossing case study Joe Silmon, Clive Roberts Centre.
A sustainable safety performance for railways Angelo Pira Project Officer at the European Railway Agency (ERA)
SCATS Congestion Improvement Program. The Scope of the SCATS Congestion Improvement Program.
Road Accident Investigation Teams in Finland Jaakko Rahja Managing Director, M.Sc.
HIGH SPEED RAIL ASSESSMENT NORGE
Traffic Management Rok Safety Seminar The statistics Why do accidents occur What is workplace transport The problems Possible solutions Worked examples.
LOW COST SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS Practitioner Workshop The Tools – Identification of High Crash Locations – Session #2.
2013 WORKPLACE ROAD SAFETY TOWARDS ZERO THE WESTERN AUSTRALIAN ROAD SAFETY STRATEGY
National Road Safety Strategy Update Joe Motha General Manager Safety Research and Education Australian Transport Safety Bureau.
1 Address: UIC Safety Database (SDB) System and Results.
DETECTION AND ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY PROBLEMS WITHIN ROAD TRANSPORT DECISION MAKING Prof. Dr. Nikolay Georgiev eng. Violina Velyova ‘Todor Kableshkov’ University.
The Management of Third Party Generated Risk in Ireland
Risk Assessment OSHA 21/09/ WHAT IS RISK ASSESMENT? Risk Assessment is the process of determining the possibility of short and long term unfavorable.
Caldwell and Wilson (1999) 1. Determine primary rating factor for a road section based on traffic volume and user types 2. Primary rating factor is then.
ANNEX 4 : EXAMPLE STANDARDISED LEVEL CROSSING SYSTEM
Interdisciplinary teams Existing or new roadway
Quality Risk Management
Air Carrier Continuing Analysis and Surveillance System (CASS)
A Guide to Determining Accident Preventability
Before-After Studies Part I
Mike Schagrin ITS Joint Program Office
Network Screening & Diagnosis
Safety Audit Components
Operational Excellence - Transforming our operations
Traffic Management Rok Safety Seminar 2007.
Presentation transcript:

Brief Overview of New ALCAM DRAFT Brief Overview of New ALCAM

DRAFT History & Background Australian Level Crossing Assessment Model (ALCAM) is an assessment tool used to identify key potential risks at level crossings and to assist in the prioritisation of crossings for upgrades. It provides a rigorous defensible process for decision making for level crossings safety improvements; ALCAM, originally known as ‘Risk Scoring Matrix’, was developed in 1999. In 2002, the matrix was re-named as ALCAM, and a national committee was established to ensure its consistency of development and implementation; ALCAM was endorsed at the May 2003 Australian Transport Council Meeting. All State & Territory Ministers agreed to adopt this innovative method of level crossing risk assessment; In 2004, a Microsoft Access database was developed (Level Crossing Management System – LXM) to maintain data and run assessments. This LXM system was adopted formally by the ALCAM committee. The LXM is currently being developed into a SQL database with internet interface; Significant redevelopment of the ALCAM has taken place over last 3 years. A new ALCAM comprising new Traffic Exposure Model, Infrastructure Model and Consequence Model has been developed and accepted by the national committee; Both the new ALCAM and the new LXM (i.e. online database) are expected to be released in late 2013.

Structure of Current ALCAM DRAFT Structure of Current ALCAM Likelihood Factor Exposure Factor Consequence Factor ALCAM Risk Score (ARS) X X X = Trains Vehicles Speed Environment

DRAFT Likelihood Factor CURRENT ALCAM In the current ALCAM, a likelihood factor of a level crossing is determined by a Characteristics Matrix and a Controls Matrix: The Characteristics Matrix is used to determine the effect that each characteristic would have on each accident mechanism; The Controls Matrix is used to determine the effect that controls will have on reducing the likelihood of an accident mechanism occurring; A likelihood factor is a number between 0 and 800. This number is useful for comparisons between level crossings, but is not directly expressed as an accident likelihood/probability. Any feature of a roadway or railway which may have an influence on pedestrian or driver behaviour, e.g. sighting distance, speed of train Any significant pedestrian or driver behaviour that increases the potential for a collision with a train to occur Devices that reduce the risk of an accident by changing pedestrian or driver behaviour, e.g. flashing lights, boom gates, signage

Infrastructure Factor NEW ALCAM DRAFT Infrastructure Factor In the new ALCAM, both Characteristics Matrix and Controls Matrix have been refined and the output from the matrix has been renamed as Raw Infrastructure Factor; An Infrastructure Modifier has been introduced in the new ALCAM to turn the Raw Infrastructure Factor into a real accident probability. The Infrastructure Modifier is a liner equation that was determined by correlating 10 years of Australian and New Zealand level crossing crash data against the Raw Infrastructure Factors for all jurisdictions (normalised by vehicle and train volumes); Multiplying the Raw Infrastructure Factor by the Infrastructure Modifier will produce an Infrastructure Factor. It is expressed as a scalar e.g. 1.08, which represents the expected effect that the crossing condition will have on the accident probability.

DRAFT Exposure Factor CURRENT ALCAM In the current ALCAM, the exposure factor is produced by multiplying the road traffic volume (V) and the rail traffic volume (T) of a level crossing; This approach gives the traffic volumes the most influential parameters on the ranking of crossings with the highest risk predicted at the extremes of vehicles per day and trains per day.

DRAFT Exposure Factor NEW ALCAM In 2011, the National ALCAM Committee commissioned a study to assess the relationship between vehicle (V) and train (T) volumes in respect to the risk of an accident; The study investigated different exposure modelling approaches from Australia, UK, and US, and compared their predictions with 10 years of Australian and New Zealand level crossing crash data; The study found that conventional ‘linear’ approach (V x T) used in the current ALCAM did not best replicate the observed collision record; The study recommended that ALCAM adopt the Peabody-Dimmick Formula, which is an accident predication model widely used in the US; The study further recommended to apply an adjustment factor to the result in order to produce more contemporary crash rate predictions. This has been done by many users of the formula in the US; The adjustment factor was calculated using 10 years of Australian and New Zealand crash data. This ensures the formula is applicable to Australian and New Zealand conditions; The Exposure Factor in the new ALCAM is expressed as an accident probability per year, e.g. 0.12. It represents the baseline likelihood of an accident at a level crossing, excluding site-specific conditions that are captured in the Infrastructure Factor.

DRAFT Consequence Factor CURRENT ALCAM In the current ALCAM, the consequence factor is determined as a relationship between an environmental factor and a train speed factor; It works as a modification factor to inflate or deflate the exposure factor (V x T) for the level crossing by up to a factor of 10.

DRAFT Consequence Factor NEW ALCAM In the new ALCAM, the consequence factor is the expected outcome in the event of a collision. This includes deaths and injuries on both the train and vehicle; The core component of the new consequence model is an event tree that estimates the likelihood that a given level crossing collision will escalate into more serious consequences, e.g. derailment, overturn, and secondary collision. This approach involves assigning probabilities to a sequence of events occurring, and hence the model produces a number of possible outcomes, each with an associated probability of occurrence; Each outcome at the end of the event tree has an associated number of fatalities, serious injuries, and minor injuries. These are combined to produce a single consequence factor, which is expressed in terms of equivalent fatalities per collision, e.g. 2.3; The probability of occurrence and possible outcomes used in the event tree are based on 10 years of Australian and New Zealand level crossing crash data and assumptions from UK data.

NEW ALCAM DRAFT Consequence Factor Structure of event tree

DRAFT Consequence Factor NEW ALCAM Further development to the new consequence model is currently underway. This will extend and refine the consequence model by: adding a road vehicle speed element to the existing model; reviewing Australian and New Zealand level crossing crash data, in comparison with UK data; recommending a “best available” combined dataset for use in the model. This development is being managed by the TfNSW on behalf of the National ALCAM Committee, and is expected to be completed by the end of this financial year.

NEW ALCAM DRAFT Structure of New ALCAM

DRAFT Questions?