Human Factors Guidelines for Locomotive Cabs

Multer, Jordan; Rudich, R A; Yearwood, K

doi:10.1037/e664852007-001

Cited by 2 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Today most locomotives are diesel/electric or electric (very few working steam-powered trains remain, mostly in parks and exhibitions). An excellent discussion of human-centered locomotive cab ergonomics design can be found in Multer, Rudich, and Yearwood (1998).…”

Section: Locomotive Cab Ergonomics and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The designs often do not take into account the impact of extreme operating environments on the job. Multer et al (1998) stated, "Noise is one of the most intrusive aspects of locomotive operations. The largest source is the engines; the noise levels and spectrum vary with speed and engine load.... Additional sources of noise are interior brake air venting in older cabs, the horn, and wheel/rail noise at cruising speeds.... Open windows, especially in reflective areas like tunnels and between structures, increase noise.…”

Section: Locomotive Crew Safety and Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Because the crew must remain in the cab for extended periods, the cab must provide fresh airflow strong enough to ensure protection from internal and external fumes while maintaining temperature and noise levels within a habitable range. Multer et al (1998) provided useful discussions of airflow requirements and guidance for airflow rates, temperature, noise management, and even the placement of crew toilet facilities.…”

Section: Acoustic Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Railroad Human Factors

Sussman¹,

Raslear²

2007

Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the reader to the human factors concerns of the railroad enterprise as it exists in the United States and Canada and to provide an overview of human factors research related to railroads. The railroad enterprise is complex and, in many ways, distinct from other forms of transportation. Differences found between railroading and other modes are arguably more profound in internal organization and tradition than in equipment and technologies. Because of this, a significant portion of this chapter is given over to a description of context. Understanding this context is critical in understanding the need for and relevance of the human factors research cited. We also cover research concerns and efforts in a number of key areas, including safety legislation versus regulation, safety and productivity, perceived versus measured safety, close call confidential reporting, the social environment of the U.S. railroad industry, operator fatigue and alertness, locomotive ergonomics and cab design, the locomotive engineers' and dispatchers' roles, remotely controlled locomotives, and trespassing and grade-crossing accidents.The railroad, one of the basic technologies that drove the Industrial Revolution and a key to the continuing development of industrialized nations, is a very specialized world. It has traditions, rules, working conditions, and human performance requirements that are qualitatively different from those in other industries. For these reasons, in the first part of this chapter, we provide an extensive contextual background of the railroad enterprise.Internationally, the human role in the railroad enterprise is both broad and varied, but the context of this chapter will be limited to U.S. operations. Where relevant, the international research will be discussed. Wilson and Norris (2005) provided a good overview of railroad human factors from the British and European perspectives.Arguably, today's railroad represents the most integrated system of any transportation mode. Unlike in other modes, safe and efficient operation depends entirely on a tightly coupled operational approach:• Railways are different from all other transport systems in that the routes of the trains are determined by the road, not by the driver. Trains cannot take evasive action or move to avoid each other. Speed cannot be reduced abruptly, and stops cannot usually be made in the distance visible to the driver when the train is moving at normal speed (Calvert, 2005). • Railroad operations require the synchronized contributions of train crews, dispatchers, maintenance-of-way workers, traffic planners, train crews, and signalmen, among others. The level of individual-and often independent-decision making found in aviation, maritime, and highway operation is not possible in railroad operations. Whereas this inherently required integration has been widely recognized, taking a human-centered systems approach 148 at GEORGIAN COURT UNIV on April 5, 2015 rev.sagepub.com Downloaded from Railroad Human Factors nic...

show abstract

Section: Locomotive Cab Ergonomics and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Locomotive Crew Safety and Healthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Acoustic Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Railroad Human Factors

Sussman¹,

Raslear²

2007

Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition to this cab survey, a report on "The Human Factors Guidelines for Locomotive Cabs" recommends that the train motion controls be placed directly in front of the engineer with the brake module on the left [7]. While this baseline design is for a cab car, not a locomotive, the brake and the throttle and reverser are placed accordingly.…”

Section: Table 2 Cab Layout Measurementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prototype Design of an Engineer Collision Protection System

Muhlanger

Severson

Perlman

et al. 2012

2012 Joint Rail Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research program was sponsored by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Office of Research and Development in support of the advancement of improved safety standards for passenger rail vehicles. In a train collision, the cab or locomotive engineer is in a vulnerable position at the leading end of the vehicle. As cars with increased crashworthiness are introduced into service, there is a greater potential to preserve the space occupied by the engineer following an accident. In particular, full-scale impact tests have demonstrated the engineer's space can be preserved at closing speeds up to 30 mph. When sufficient survival space is preserved, the next objective is to protect the engineer from the forces and accelerations associated with secondary impacts between the engineer and the control cab. Given the hard surfaces and protruding knobs in a control cab, even a low speed collision can result in large, concentrated forces acting upon the engineer.Researchers have designed a passive (i.e., requiring no action by the operator) interior protection system for cab car and locomotive engineers. The occupant protection system will protect engineers from the secondary impact that occurs following a frontal train impact, when the engineer impacts the control console. The protection system will result in compartmentalization of a 95th percentile anthropomorphic test device (ATD), and measured injury criteria for the ATD's head, chest, neck, and femur that are below those currently specified in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 208 [1].The system that has been developed to protect the engineer includes a specialized airbag and a knee bolster with energy absorbing honeycomb material and deformable brackets. Finite element and lumped mass-spring analyses show the effectiveness of the system in limiting the injury criteria to survivable limits. Component tests have measured the key characteristics of the airbag and the knee brackets and have provided test data necessary to validate the analyses.Two tests were conducted to validate the airbag model. A static deployment test of the airbag measured the inflation progression, the inflated shape and the internal pressure of the airbag. A drop tower test of the airbag measured the force-crush and energy absorbing characteristics of the airbag. The knee bolster assembly consists of two components. Separate quasistatic tests of the aluminum honeycomb and the knee bolster bracket measured the force-crush and energy absorbing characteristics. The component test results were used to improve the computer model and permit analysis of the entire system. This paper discusses the prototype design, including background research, baseline definition and prototype development. The initial prototype design is analyzed using computer models. The components are tested to verify and improve the computer models. The test and analysis results are presented. Future work is planned for fabrication of the cab desk and prototype system to be used in a sled test with a 95 th ...

show abstract

Human Factors Guidelines for Locomotive Cabs

Cited by 2 publications

References 12 publications

Railroad Human Factors

Railroad Human Factors

Prototype Design of an Engineer Collision Protection System

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About