Accident and hazard prediction models for highway–rail grade crossings: a state-of-the-practice review for the USA

Abstract

Highway–rail grade crossings (HRGCs) are one of the most dangerous segments of the transportation network. Every year numerous accidents are recorded at HRGCs between highway users and trains, between highway users and traffic control devices, and solely between highway users. These accidents cause fatalities, severe injuries, property damage, and release of hazardous materials. Researchers and state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) have addressed safety concerns at HRGCs in the USA by investigating the factors that may cause accidents at HRGCs and developed certain accident and hazard prediction models to forecast the occurrence of accidents and crossing vulnerability. The accident and hazard prediction models are used to identify the most hazardous HRGCs that require safety improvements. This study provides an extensive review of the state-of-the-practice to identify the existing accident and hazard prediction formulae that have been used over the years by different state DOTs. Furthermore, this study analyzes the common factors that have been considered in the existing accident and hazard prediction formulae. The reported performance and implementation challenges of the identified accident and hazard prediction formulae are discussed in this study as well. Based on the review results, the US DOT Accident Prediction Formula was found to be the most commonly used formula due to its accuracy in predicting the number of accidents at HRGCs. However, certain states still prefer customized models due to some practical considerations. Data availability and data accuracy were identified as some of the key model implementation challenges in many states across the country.

References

[1.] Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (2015) Highway–rail grade crossing safety. https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety/rail-crossing/highway-rail-grade-crossing-safety. Accessed 06 June 2019

[2.] Kavoosi M, Dulebenets MA, Pasha J . Development of algorithms for effective resource allocation among highway–rail grade crossings: a case study for the State of Florida. Energies 2020, 13 6 1419

[3.] FDOT (2010) The Florida rail system plan: investment element. http://www.fdot.gov/rail/PlanDevel/Documents/FinalInvestmentElement/A-2010FLRailPlan-InvestmentElement.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[4.] FRA (2018) Accident/incident data. https://safetydata.fra.dot.gov/OfficeofSafety/publicsite/on_the_fly_download.aspx. Accessed 10 Oct 2018

[5.] Austin RD, Carson JL. An alternative accident prediction model for highway–rail interfaces. Accid Anal Prev 2002, 34 1 31-42

[6.] Hu S, Li C, Lee CK. Investigation of key factors for accident severity at railroad grade crossings by using a logit model. Saf Sci 2010, 48 2 186-194

[7.] Yan X, Richards S, Su X. Using hierarchical tree-based regression model to predict train–vehicle crashes at passive highway–rail grade crossings. Accid Anal Prev 2010, 42 1 64-74

[8.] Chadwick S, Zho N, Saat MR. Highway–rail grade crossing safety challenges for shared operations of high-speed passenger and heavy freight rail in the U.S. Saf Sci 2014, 68 128-137

[9.] Rezvani AZ, Peach M, Thomas A . Benefit-cost methodology for highway–railway grade crossing safety protocols as applied to transportation infrastructure project prioritization processes. Transp Res Procedia 2015, 8 89-102

[10.] Lu P, Tolliver D. Accident prediction model for public highway–rail grade crossings. Accid Anal Prev 2016, 90 73-81

[11.] Elzohairy Y, Benekohal R (2000) Evaluation of expected accident frequency formulas for rail–highway crossings. A technical report prepared for Illinois Department of Transportation. http://www.idot.illinois.gov/Assets/uploads/files/Transportation-System/Research/Illinois-Transportation-Research-Center/2000.09.01%20-%20Evaluation%20of%20Expected%20Accident%20Frequency%20Formulas%20for%20Rail-Highway%20Crossings%20-%20VC-HR1%20FY98.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[12.] Dulebenets MA, Moses R, Sobanjo J et al (2020) Development of the optimization model for improving safety at rail crossings in Florida. A technical report prepared for Florida Department of Transportation. https://fdotwww.blob.core.windows.net/sitefinity/docs/default-source/research/reports/fdot-bdv30-977-26-rpt.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2020

[13.] Oh J, Washington SP, Doohee N. Accident prediction model for railway–highway interfaces. Accid Anal Prev 2006, 38 2 346-356

[14.] Fu B, Giossi RL, Persson R . Active suspension in railway vehicles: a literature survey. Railw Eng Sci 2020, 28 1 1-33

[15.] Zeng J, Wei L, Wu P. Safety evaluation for railway vehicles using an improved indirect measurement method of wheel–rail forces. J Mod Transp 2016, 24 2 114-123

[16.] Al-Douri YK, Tretten P, Karim R. Improvement of railway performance: a study of Swedish railway infrastructure. J Mod Transp 2016, 24 1 22-37

[17.] Zhao Y, Chen S, Tan X . New technologies for high-risk tunnel construction in Guiyang–Guangzhou high-speed railway. J Mod Transp 2013, 21 4 258-265

[18.] Celebi BT, Kaymakci OT. Verifying the accuracy of interlocking tables for railway signaling systems using abstract state machines. J Mod Transp 2016, 24 4 277-283

[19.] Faghri A, Demetsky M (1986) Evaluation of methods for predicting rail–highway crossing hazards. A technical report prepared for Virginia Department of Transportation. http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/86-r32.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[20.] Bowman BL (1994) Assessment of the State of Alabama rail–highway safety program. A technical report prepared for Alabama Department of Transportation. http://www.eng.auburn.edu/files/centers/hrc/Multimodal%20Transportation.pdf. Accessed 01 Oct 2018

[21.] Qureshi M, Virkler M, Bernhardt K et al (2003) highway rail highway–rail grade crossing project selection. A technical report prepared for Missouri Department of Transportation. https://library.modot.mo.gov/RDT/reports/Ri01010/RDT03017.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[22.] Dulebenets MA (2012) Highway–rail grade crossing identification and prioritizing model development. Master thesis, University of Memphis

[23.] U.S. DOT (2007) Rail–highway grade crossing handbook, second edition 2007. https://www.fra.dot.gov/Elib/Document/1464. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[24.] Weissmann AJ, Weissmann J, Kunisetty JL et al (2013) Integrated prioritization method for active and passive highway–rail crossings. A technical report prepared for Texas Department of Transportation. https://static.tti.tamu.edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-6642-1.pdf. Accessed 01 Oct 2018

[25.] Iowa DOT (2006) Use of a benefit-cost ratio to prioritize projects for funding. https://www.iowadot.gov/iowarail/assistance/130/130SelectionProcess_final.pdf. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[26.] Hans Z, Albrecht C, Johnson P et al (2015) Development of railroad highway grade highway–rail grade crossing consolidation rating formula. A technical report prepared for Iowa Department of Transportation. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1061&context=intrans_techtransfer. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[27.] Ryan C, Mielke A (2017) Development of revised grade highway–rail grade crossing hazard index model. A technical report prepared for Nevada Department of Transportation. https://www.nevadadot.com/home/showdocument?id=9133. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[28.] Sperry B, Naik B, Warner J (2017) Evaluation of grade crossing hazard ranking models. In: Ohio transportation engineering conference. http://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineering/OTEC/2017Presentations/75/Sperry_75.pdf. Accessed 30 Sept 2018

[29.] Hao W, Daniel J. Motor vehicle driver injury severity study under various traffic control at highway–rail grade crossings in the United States. J Saf Res 2014, 51 41-48

[30.] Hao W, Kamga C, Yang X . Driver injury severity study for truck involved accidents at highway–rail grade crossings in the United States. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 2016, 43 379-386

[31.] Hao W, Moghimi B, Yang X . Effects of foggy conditions on driver injury levels in US highway–rail grade crossing accidents. Case Stud Transp Policy 2017, 5 4 627-633

[32.] Khan I, Lee E, Khan M. Developing a highway rail grade crossing accident probability prediction model: a North Dakota case study. Safety 2018, 4 2 22

[33.] Saccomanno F, Fu L, Miranda-Moreno L. Risk-based model for identifying highway–rail grade crossing blackspots. Transp Res Rec 2004, 1862 127-135

[34.] Saccomanno F, Park P, Fu L. Estimating countermeasure effects for reducing collisions at highway–railway grade crossings. Accid Anal Prev 2007, 39 2 406-416

[35.] Evans AW. Fatal accidents at railway level crossings in Great Britain 1946–2009. Accid Anal Prev 2011, 43 5 1837-1845

[36.] Dent M, Marinov M. Fraszczyk A, Marinov M. Introducing automated obstacle detection to British level crossings. Sustainable Rail transport 2019 Cham Springer

[37.] Borsos A, Gabor M, Koren C. Safety ranking of railway crossings in Hungary. Transp Res Procedia 2016, 14 2111-2120

[38.] Laapotti S. Comparison of fatal motor vehicle accidents at passive and active railway level crossings in Finland. IATSS Res 2016, 40 1 1-6

[39.] Liang C, Ghazel M, Cazier O . Risk analysis on level crossings using a causal Bayesian network based approach. Transp Res Procedia 2017, 25 2167-2181

[40.] Liang C, Ghazel M, Cazier O . A new insight on the risky behavior of motorists at railway level crossings: an observational field study. Accid Anal Prev 2017, 108 181-188

[41.] Larue GS, Wullems C. Human factors evaluation of a novel Australian approach for activating railway level crossings. Procedia Manuf 2015, 3 3293-3300

[42.] Beanland V, Salmon PM, Filtness AJ . To stop or not to stop: contrasting compliant and non-compliant driver behaviour at rural rail level crossings. Accid Anal Prev 2017, 108 209-219

[43.] Larue GS, Naweed A, Rodwell D. The road user, the pedestrian, and me: investigating the interactions, errors and escalating risks of users of fully protected level crossings. Saf Sci 2018, 110 Part B 80-88

[44.] U.S. DOT (2016) Federal-aid policy guide. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/cfr23toc.htm. Accessed 24 Sept 2018

[45.] Pasha J, Dulebenets MA, Abioye OF . A comprehensive assessment of the existing accident and hazard prediction models for the highway–rail grade crossings in the State of Florida. Sustainability 2020, 12 10 4291

[46.] FRA (2010) Accident prediction and resource allocation procedure normalizing constants 2010. https://www.fra.dot.gov/Elib/Document/1488. Accessed 02 Oct 2018

Funding

Florida Department of Transportation(BDV30-977-26)