Pedestrian Safety in Frontal Tram Collision, Part 1: Historical Overview and Experimental-Data-Based Biomechanical Study of Head Clashing in Frontal and Side Impacts.
collision
crash test
front face design
head injury criterion
pedestrian
safety
tram
windshield
Journal
Sensors (Basel, Switzerland)
ISSN: 1424-8220
Titre abrégé: Sensors (Basel)
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101204366
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 Oct 2023
30 Oct 2023
Historique:
received:
03
04
2023
revised:
02
10
2023
accepted:
18
10
2023
medline:
15
11
2023
pubmed:
14
11
2023
entrez:
14
11
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
This article represents the first paper in a two-part series dealing with safety during tram-pedestrian collisions. This research is dedicated to the safety of trams for pedestrians during collisions and is motivated by the increased number of lethal cases. The first part of this paper includes an overview of tram face development from the earliest designs to the current ones in use and, at the same time, provides a synopsis and explanation of the technical context, including a link to current and forthcoming legislation. The historical design development can be characterised by three steps, from an almost vertical front face, to leaned and pointed shapes, to the current inclined low-edged windshield without a protruding coupler. However, since most major manufacturers now export their products worldwide and customisation is only of a technically insignificant nature, our conclusions are generalisable (supported by the example of Berlin). The most advantageous shape of the tram's front, minimising the effects on pedestrians in all collision phases, has evolved rather spontaneously and was unprompted, and it is now being built into the European Commission regulations. The goal of the second part of this paper is to conduct a series of tram-pedestrian collisions with a focus on the frontal and side impacts using a crash test dummy (anthropomorphic test device-ATD). Four tram types approaching the collision at four different impact speeds (5 km/h, 10 km/h, 15 km/h, and 20 km/h) were used. The primary outcome variable was the resultant head acceleration. The risk and severity of possible head injuries were assessed using the head injury criterion (
Identifiants
pubmed: 37960520
pii: s23218819
doi: 10.3390/s23218819
pmc: PMC10648294
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Subventions
Organisme : Ministry of Education Youth and Sports
ID : CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16_026/0008401
Références
Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2007;9:55-86
pubmed: 17447861
Lancet. 2012 Dec 15;380(9859):2095-128
pubmed: 23245604
Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2020 Mar;27(1):35-43
pubmed: 31983273
Materials (Basel). 2021 Jan 07;14(2):
pubmed: 33430339
Emerg Radiol. 2010 Mar;17(2):103-8
pubmed: 19826844
Accid Anal Prev. 2012 Jan;44(1):3-11
pubmed: 22062330
Stapp Car Crash J. 2010 Nov;54:49-72
pubmed: 21512903
Traffic Inj Prev. 2012 Sep;13(5):507-18
pubmed: 22931181