没有合适的资源?快使用搜索试试~ 我知道了~
PPR992 公交车安全标准:乘员友好内饰(英)TRL 2022.pdf
1.该资源内容由用户上传,如若侵权请联系客服进行举报
2.虚拟产品一经售出概不退款(资源遇到问题,请及时私信上传者)
2.虚拟产品一经售出概不退款(资源遇到问题,请及时私信上传者)
版权申诉
0 下载量 196 浏览量
2022-12-22
17:12:35
上传
评论
收藏 4.68MB PDF 举报
温馨提示
试读
147页
PPR992 公交车安全标准:乘员友好内饰(英)TRL 2022.pdf
资源推荐
资源详情
资源评论
PUBLISHED PROJECT REPORT
PPR992
The Transport for London (TfL) Bus
Safety Standard: Occupant Friendly
Interiors
Mervyn Edwards, Josh Appleby, Krishnan
Venkateswaran, Brian Robinson, Alix Edwards,
Phil Martin, Mike McCarthy
BSS - Occupant friendly interiors
Version 1.1 i PPR992
Report details
Report prepared for:
Transport for London (TfL)
Project/customer reference:
tfl_scp_001593
Copyright:
© TRL Limited
Report date:
30/07/2022
Report status/version:
Version 1.1
Quality approval:
Anna George
(Project Manager)
Mike McCarthy
(Technical Reviewer)
Disclaimer
This report has been produced by TRL Limited (TRL) under a contract with Transport
for London (TfL). Any views expressed in this report are not necessarily those of
Transport for London (TfL).
The information contained herein is the property of TRL Limited and does not
necessarily reflect the views or policies of the customer for whom this report was
prepared. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the matter presented in
this report is relevant, accurate and up-to-date, TRL Limited cannot accept any
liability for any error or omission, or reliance on part or all of the content in another
context.
When purchased in hard copy, this publication is printed on paper that is FSC
(Forest Stewardship Council) and TCF (Totally Chlorine Free) registered.
Contents amendment record
This report has been amended and issued as follows:
Version
Date
Description
Editor
Technical
Reviewer
1.1
30/07/2022
Corrections to Table 2-1
Added reference to TfL for latest specification in
the executive summary and recommendations
AE
PSM & DH
BSS - Occupant friendly interiors
Version 1.1 i PPR992
Executive Summary
Bus Safety Standard (BSS)
The Bus Safety Standard (BSS) is focussed on vehicle design and safety system
performance and their contribution to the Mayor of London’s Transport Strategy. This
sets targets to for deaths and serious injuries from road collisions to be eliminated
from London’s streets by 2041 and to achieve zero deaths in accidents involving
buses in London by 2030.
To develop the standard a large body of research and technical input was needed,
so Transport for London (TfL) commissioned TRL (the Transport Research
Laboratory) to deliver the research and consult with the bus industry. The delivery
team has included a mix of engineers and human factors experts, to provide the
balance of research required.
All TfL buses conform to regulatory requirements. TfL already uses a more
demanding specification when contracting services and this requires higher
standards in areas including environmental and noise emissions, accessibility,
construction, operational requirements, and more. Many safety aspects are covered
in the specification such as fire suppression systems, door and fittings safety,
handrails, day time running lights, and others. However, the new BSS goes further
with a range of additional requirements, developed by TRL and their partners and
peer-reviewed by independent safety experts. Accompanying the specification there
are guidance notes to help inform the bus operators and manufacturers of what the
specification is aiming to achieve and some practical tips on how to meet the
requirements.
For each safety measure considered, a thorough review was completed covering the
current regulations and standards, the specification of the current bus fleet and
available solutions.
Full-scale trials and testing were also carried out with the following objectives. Firstly,
the tests were used to evaluate the solutions in a realistic environment to ensure that
a safety improvement was feasible. Secondly, the testing was used to inform the
development of objective test and assessment protocols. These protocols will allow
repeatable testing according to precise instructions so that the results are
comparable. The assessment protocol provides instructions for how to interpret the
test data for a bus or system, which can be a simple pass/fail check, or something
more complex intended to encourage best practice levels of performance. These
assessment protocols will allow TfL to judge how well each bus performs against the
BSS, and will allow a fair comparison in terms of safety if they have a choice
between models for a given route.
It is important to ensure the money is spent wisely on the package of measures that
will give the most cost-effective result. TRL has developed a cost-benefit model
describing the value of implementing the safety measures, both in terms of
casualties saved and the technology and operational costs of achieving that. Input
from the bus industry has formed the backbone of all the research and the cost-
benefit modelling. This modelling has helped inform the decisions of TfL’s bus safety
development team in terms of implementing the safety measures on new buses.
BSS - Occupant friendly interiors
Version 1.1 ii PPR992
This research was completed in 2018. The detailed specification, assessment
procedures and guidance notes have been incorporated into the Transport for
London specification for buses, which is a continuously updated document to keep
pace with the latest technological and research developments. This report is not the
specification for a bus and should not be used as such. Bus operators,
manufacturers, and their supply chain should consult with TfL for the specification.
Occupant Friendly Interiors
Overall, the occupant-friendly interiors measure has been particularly challenging.
Current regulations heavily constrain designs for reasons of accessibility, so making
safety improvements without conflicting with regulations and other priorities such as
passenger flow and comfort is difficult. Nevertheless, beneficial changes have been
identified. The process has been to examine CCTV footage to help understand how
passengers are injured in harsh manoeuvres (e.g. emergency braking) and collision
events. Following this, existing bus designs were reviewed to identify potentially
injurious features and how they could be redesigned to reduce the risk of injury, e.g.
move the handrail to reduce risk of a head strike. An assessment scheme for
occupant-friendly interiors has been developed to allow bus manufacturers to
incorporate safety considerations alongside the existing constraints from regulation,
accessibility, flow etc. It is hoped that this will give the manufacturers a guide for
producing the best compromise, without being too design prescriptive.
In summary, the methodology consisted of four main steps:
• Problem size: Analysis of UK national data to determine the number and
nature of casualties in the London region.
• Injury mechanisms and identification of potential hazards: Analysis of
CCTV footage and examination of current buses to understand passenger
injury mechanisms better and identify potential hazards and design
changes to help mitigate injury.
• Assessment procedure: Development of a procedure to assess a bus’s
interior safety based on a visual inspection. Additionally, development of
potential design changes to improve the safety of bus interiors to support
the development and implementation of the assessment procedure.
• Cost-benefit: Analysis to estimate break-even costs, discounted payback
period and benefit-to-cost ratios for implementation of the assessment
procedure.
Problem size
Analysis of the national Stats19 data for London showed that on London
buses/coaches the majority of the bus occupant casualty problem is associated with
non-collision events (83% of serious injuries) and standing passengers (51% of
serious injuries), although a significant proportion of casualties are seated (29% of
serious). The bus is often accelerating or braking at the time of the incident.
Injury mechanisms and potential hazards
The CCTV analysis and bus examinations highlighted issues with:
BSS - Occupant friendly interiors
Version 1.1 iii PPR992
• Handrails, mainly in relation to their position.
Examples included, for standing passengers, vertical and horizontal
handrails in the head impact zone in the wheelchair area and, for seated
passengers, handrails behind middle doors in alignment with the likely
trajectory of an aisle-seated passenger
It should be noted that, generally, handrails in roughly these positions are
required by regulation. The main regulatory requirement (Regulation 107)
is for the fitment of an adequate number of handrails such that a standing
passenger can reach at least two, at least one of which is not more than
1.5 m above floor level.
• Restraint, i.e. inadequate restraint of a passenger’s movement in the event
of a braking or collision event in terms of compartmentalisation.
Examples included passengers sat on seats: behind the wheelchair area –
no partition to restrain movement; above the rear wheels – seat backs in
front not high enough to restrain movement; rear middle seat – nothing to
restrain movement; and aisle forward facing bay seat – passenger falls
into aisle.
• General injurious features, i.e. protrusions, sharp corners and edges.
Examples included protrusions such as bolt heads and sharp corners and
edges on items such as steps and passenger information displays
It should be noted that not all the issues identified above were observed on all the
buses examined. Indeed, many of the buses exhibited good features, although,
usually, all buses exhibited at least one issue.
The CCTV analysis also showed that a smaller proportion of seated passengers
were injured (2%) compared to standing passengers (6%), indicating a smaller risk
of injury for seated passengers. For seated passengers, the results showed a
smaller proportion of those seated on the upper deck were injured (0.3%) compared
to those seated on the lower deck, (1.5% to 6%), indicating a much smaller risk of
injury for passengers seated on the upper deck. Likely contributory factors to this
result were that this area contained more features associated with injury and that
persons with reduced mobility have greater exposure in this area, i.e. the more
vulnerable passengers currently sit in the less safe areas of the bus.
For seated passengers an issue with low backed seats was also identified, in terms
of lack of head / neck support for rear facing seats and problems with restraint for
some forward facing seats.
Assessment procedure
An assessment procedure was developed with the aim of minimising the main
potential hazards identified above (handrails, restraint, general injurious features).
Considering standing and seated passengers separately, the procedure developed
uses a visual inspection to identify hazards, awards points for each one identified on
the bus, with weighting applied to increase the number of points for hazards with
greater injury causing potential and/or exposure. The aim for manufacturers is to
剩余146页未读,继续阅读
资源评论
samLi0620
- 粉丝: 955
- 资源: 1万+
下载权益
C知道特权
VIP文章
课程特权
开通VIP
上传资源 快速赚钱
- 我的内容管理 展开
- 我的资源 快来上传第一个资源
- 我的收益 登录查看自己的收益
- 我的积分 登录查看自己的积分
- 我的C币 登录后查看C币余额
- 我的收藏
- 我的下载
- 下载帮助
安全验证
文档复制为VIP权益,开通VIP直接复制
信息提交成功