EuclidElimination of the flangeway hazard can only be accomplished by perfecting a safe flangeway or developing an entirely different wheelchair.
Have to be mindful that the expense of reaching perfection does not exceed the cost of the risk.
As in so many of these type discussions, a train runs over a conductor, so "we" embark upon devising a ruleset so strenuous that such occurance can NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN, ..or an engineer is found intoxicated on thejob, so "we" attempt to design a system so elaborate that any engineer will be unable to start his locomotive without satisfying a lockout device.
And now here we are designing the "perfect" handicap grade crossing appliance?
I supect that the principle of diminishing returns need neccessarily factor into these deliberations, where we recognize that reaching a reasonable level of protection is worthwhile, whereas expecting "perfection" is a folly.
BaltACD.Ah yes - The disabled need to be vetted, supervised and trained more effectively.
From the post you were responding to: Perhaps better vetting of caregivers is an answer?
Convicted One Euclid Such a law would require that the wheelchair user be tested for their ability to get out the chair and into the clear in time. I don't believe that is gonna happen. The whole ADA thing is about freeing the disabled to become independant by removing barriers. They aren't IMO going to add a layer of restriction. It would be seen as a step backwards. One would think that any chair-bound individual who was unable to enter and exit the chair on their own would have a care giver. And it does seem questionable that a responsible caregiver would allow such a person to go out in public unattended. Perhaps better vetting of caregivers is an answer?
Euclid Such a law would require that the wheelchair user be tested for their ability to get out the chair and into the clear in time.
I don't believe that is gonna happen.
The whole ADA thing is about freeing the disabled to become independant by removing barriers. They aren't IMO going to add a layer of restriction. It would be seen as a step backwards.
One would think that any chair-bound individual who was unable to enter and exit the chair on their own would have a care giver. And it does seem questionable that a responsible caregiver would allow such a person to go out in public unattended. Perhaps better vetting of caregivers is an answer?
Ah yes - The disabled need to be vetted, supervised and trained more effectively.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The stark reality of this situation is that, depending on the crossing flangeways, a wheelchair rider may become locked into a position where it is impossible to yield to a train, and it will also impossible for the train to yield to the wheelchair rider. Even if a rider is extremely careful, it is too much of a risk. I cannot think of another traffic situation that is comparable. The accommodation in this case can only be the elimination of the flangeway hazard. Otherwise the crossing has to either be closed to wheelchairs or closed to trains.
Elimination of the flangeway hazard can only be accomplished by perfecting a safe flangeway or developing an entirely different wheelchair. It would not be safe enough to allow cars and trucks to pass over a grade crossing if there was no possibility of the drivers to extricate themselves from their vehicles.
EuclidSuch a law would require that the wheelchair user be tested for their ability to get out the chair and into the clear in time.
Something the Canadian accident demonstrated rather dramatically is, as with some firearm trauma, even just contact with the train will produce immediate damage. The inertia of the woman's arm was enough to cause the loss of her hand.
A key phrase in the ADA is "reasonable accomodations", which implies that the accomodations should not adversely affect safety. For example, how many airliners are equipped to handle motorized wheelchairs in the cabin?
Another question is who pays for the installation and maintennance of these accomodations?
EuclidI too noticed that the person in the trapped wheelchair seemed unalarmed as the train was approaching. I want to review that video again. It poses the question of what such a person might do to evade the train.
Or, at minimum,.. assist the police officer trying to rescue them. Doesn't appear to be one stitch of cooperation there. And that one fleeting glimpse we get of the person's face, didn't really look like an expression of enthusiasm.
That last comment is perhaps unfair, because I have no way of knowing what's going on in the person's mind. But I know that if it was me in that position, I'd be overflowing with gratitude.
We'll never know.
Euclid... Such a law would require that the wheelchair user be tested for their ability to get out the chair and into the clear in time. If they cannot do that and require the assistance of others, those people would be tested for their ability to assist the wheelchair user in case of getting the wheelchair stuck in grade crossing flangeways. In that crossing death of a wheelchair user in Canada, that I posted earlier, there were two other people working together to get the wheelchair unstuck or get the person out of the chair and into the clear. They failed to accomplish that and the person in the chair was killed. Also, one of the two helpers was struck by the train and injured in the attempt to rescue the person in the wheelchair.
Such a law would require that the wheelchair user be tested for their ability to get out the chair and into the clear in time. If they cannot do that and require the assistance of others, those people would be tested for their ability to assist the wheelchair user in case of getting the wheelchair stuck in grade crossing flangeways.
In that crossing death of a wheelchair user in Canada, that I posted earlier, there were two other people working together to get the wheelchair unstuck or get the person out of the chair and into the clear. They failed to accomplish that and the person in the chair was killed. Also, one of the two helpers was struck by the train and injured in the attempt to rescue the person in the wheelchair.
Just what is needed - a 'Wheelchair License'. [/sarcasm] Since we are in a Covid-19 world, should 'the authorities' issue a 'Breathing License'?
I too noticed that the person in the trapped wheelchair seemed unalarmed as the train was approaching. I want to review that video again. It poses the question of what such a person might do to evade the train.
I assume that people using wheelchairs may have some bodily mobility in their limbs that might enable them to get out of the chair and clear of the track. I also assume that some people are so disabled that getting out of the chair and into the clear would be absolutely impossible. If this is the case, it is too dangerous to allow them to pass over a railroad grade crossing without the assistance and protection of one or more able bodied persons.
Otherwise, if they are incapable of exiting the chair and moving themselves into the clear, and considering that it is impossible for the train to yield in many cases, crossing the track in a wheel chair is a risk that should be legally prohibited. It is a known and demonstrated fact that wheel chairs can and do get stuck in crossing flangeways.
Euclid. This patent reduces that maximum flangeway depth to about 1 inch. The width appears to be about 2.5” maximum. And there is some angular and fillet radius easing of the flangeway wall opposite the flange.
Well, I certainly wish them well. Finding a material that is resilient at 120 degrees, as well as -20 degrees.......that is also impervious to UV degradation, I expect will be challenging. And then you throw in 10,000 wheelsets passing per week...I expect maintenance will be important.
I looked at the crossing on the UP mainline today. It is flush with the railhead on the outside, depressed somewhat, then slanting up on flangeway . You can even see where a flange on a heavy car that bounced left a depression. Seems safe for all. But I don't know the maker.
charlie hebdo Euclid Open this link to the patent on SHALLOW FLANGEWAY RAIL SEAL. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20120000987 Below the abstract are 8 illustrations. Open the one nearest the left side of the page. That is image 1 of 8. The other images show various separate details, but image 1 shows everything assembled with all detail shown. The image can be blown up to very large size if necessary. The main point is that it is not the width of the flangeway that is the safety issue for small wheels. It is the depth that is the issue. Much current practice is a flangeway that is the full height of the rail, such as maybe 8-10 inches. This patent reduces that maximum flangeway depth to about 1 inch. The width appears to be about 2.5” maximum. And there is some angular and fillet radius easing of the flangeway wall opposite the flange. It seems to me that casters of wheel chairs could be forced to climb out of this flangeway. Because the flangeway is so shallow, it does not need a lot of width to allow the caster to turn on its swivel. With a 6” caster wheel dropping into a 1” deep flangeway, the caster would probably be able to pivot say 45 degrees before it encountered any interference with the flangeway sides. Also, wheel chair wheels could probably be design optimized to ideally interact with these new shallow flangeways. Altogether, I believe this new shallow flangeway coupled with improved wheel chair wheels completely solves the wheelchair problem for grade crossings. What is does not solve completely is the ability to catch and track a bicycle wheel off its course and cause the bicycle to tip over sideways. It also does not prevent pedestrians from stepping on a rail. Seems pretty good.
Euclid Open this link to the patent on SHALLOW FLANGEWAY RAIL SEAL. https://patents.google.com/patent/US20120000987 Below the abstract are 8 illustrations. Open the one nearest the left side of the page. That is image 1 of 8. The other images show various separate details, but image 1 shows everything assembled with all detail shown. The image can be blown up to very large size if necessary. The main point is that it is not the width of the flangeway that is the safety issue for small wheels. It is the depth that is the issue. Much current practice is a flangeway that is the full height of the rail, such as maybe 8-10 inches. This patent reduces that maximum flangeway depth to about 1 inch. The width appears to be about 2.5” maximum. And there is some angular and fillet radius easing of the flangeway wall opposite the flange. It seems to me that casters of wheel chairs could be forced to climb out of this flangeway. Because the flangeway is so shallow, it does not need a lot of width to allow the caster to turn on its swivel. With a 6” caster wheel dropping into a 1” deep flangeway, the caster would probably be able to pivot say 45 degrees before it encountered any interference with the flangeway sides. Also, wheel chair wheels could probably be design optimized to ideally interact with these new shallow flangeways. Altogether, I believe this new shallow flangeway coupled with improved wheel chair wheels completely solves the wheelchair problem for grade crossings. What is does not solve completely is the ability to catch and track a bicycle wheel off its course and cause the bicycle to tip over sideways. It also does not prevent pedestrians from stepping on a rail.
Open this link to the patent on SHALLOW FLANGEWAY RAIL SEAL.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US20120000987
Below the abstract are 8 illustrations. Open the one nearest the left side of the page. That is image 1 of 8. The other images show various separate details, but image 1 shows everything assembled with all detail shown. The image can be blown up to very large size if necessary.
The main point is that it is not the width of the flangeway that is the safety issue for small wheels. It is the depth that is the issue. Much current practice is a flangeway that is the full height of the rail, such as maybe 8-10 inches. This patent reduces that maximum flangeway depth to about 1 inch. The width appears to be about 2.5” maximum. And there is some angular and fillet radius easing of the flangeway wall opposite the flange.
It seems to me that casters of wheel chairs could be forced to climb out of this flangeway. Because the flangeway is so shallow, it does not need a lot of width to allow the caster to turn on its swivel.
With a 6” caster wheel dropping into a 1” deep flangeway, the caster would probably be able to pivot say 45 degrees before it encountered any interference with the flangeway sides.
Also, wheel chair wheels could probably be design optimized to ideally interact with these new shallow flangeways.
Altogether, I believe this new shallow flangeway coupled with improved wheel chair wheels completely solves the wheelchair problem for grade crossings.
What is does not solve completely is the ability to catch and track a bicycle wheel off its course and cause the bicycle to tip over sideways.
It also does not prevent pedestrians from stepping on a rail.
Seems pretty good.
Yes, I think that if that Shallow Flangeway Rail Seal were installed in the flangeways of a crossing, no existing wheelchair could get stuck in a flangeway of that crossing. Even that wheelchair shown in Balt's post on the previous page would not get stuck in a flangeway that was equipped with the Shallow Flangeway Rail Seal. The product solves 100% of the problem for wheelchairs.
The only problem is that, as I understand it, the product is not yet approved for use. Such approval will require extensive testing, not only for the passage of wheelchairs, but also for the ability of passing trains to demonstrate a reliable ability for the Shallow Flangeway Rail Seal to be self-cleaning of ice frozen into the flangeway. If that is proven to be successful, not only will the crossing be safer for pedstrians, but it will also require less maintenance.
Overmod The AARP 'chair' pictured a few posts up would need more substantial redesign for safe structural integrity, but that is laughably far from a true zero-turn 'mobility' scooter...
There is no doubt a considerable inventory of chairs already in use that would, IMO, present problems in modifying. So I envision a plethora of "bolt on" upgrades, that likely would widen the track of the chairs.
And I already get "clipped" from time to time as I am picking merchandise off bottom shelves in stores, without so much as an "excuse me" from the chair operator, so I must insist upon seeing such upgrades as potentially making a bad situation worse.
You might think that risk to be unlikely, but my local library has actually thrown out a couple users for their serial disregard for the patrons around them....
Convicted OneI suppose you could put tires on all chairs that are sufficiently sized to prevent this problem, but then you are going to create other problems such as clearances in grocery store aisles, and such.
Widening both caster wheels on the other hand involves no external clearance issues at all; they are internal to the horizontal 'envelope' of the machine. The AARP 'chair' pictured a few posts up would need more substantial redesign for safe structural integrity, but that thing is laughably far from a true zero-turn 'mobility' scooter...
Widening both caster wheels on the other hand involves no external clearance issues at all; they are internal to the horizontal 'envelope' of the machine. The AARP 'chair' pictured a few posts up would need more substantial redesign for safe structural integrity, but that is laughably far from a true zero-turn 'mobility' scooter...
charlie hebdoAre you saying the guy in the video was faking?
What was actually at the core of my thought process was, the only thing I can imagine that would be more embarrasing than killing ones self, would be to try, and fail. So, I believe that some people actually go an extra step to make their planned departure appear accidental.
I don't propose to know that was this individual's plan. But I know if I was in his predicament and was not intent upon ending it all, I'd be doing considerably more to try and capture someone's attention (a motorist, perhaps) than it appears he was doing in the video. Flailing arms....even go so far as to topple myself out of the seat and drag myself with my arms to a distance.
And it didn't appear to me that the guy was doing any of that. So, absent tangible evidence to the contrary, my answer to your question would be "can't rule that out"
And, how that keys into the conversation, I do not believe it is possible to design a "same grade" solution to this problem that would prevent a determined person from succeeding.
I suppose you could put tires on all chairs that are sufficiently sized to prevent this problem, but then you are going to create other problems such as clearances in grocery store aisles, and such.
Jumps right out at you that in 1998 nobody had a clue about Hoveround zero-turn power-chair entrapment issues. Be interesting to run this and the other incidents past those people and see how their opinions would change!
"The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requires that public buildings provide harrier-free access to mobility impaired individuals and may apply to grade crossings in areas where such individuals are likely to require access. The Architectura.l and Transportation Compliance Board has proposed standards, not yet officially adopted, setting Out minimum requirements for new construction of public sidewalks over railroad tracks. Among other things, the standards specify that the public sidewalk surface must be level and flush with the rail top at the outer edge and between the rails, with a horizontal gap on the inner edge of each rail (necessary to allow passage of rail-vehicle wheel flanges) not exceeding 2.5 in. (64 mm). Figure 15c shows the design of an accessible crossing surface at the Opryland theme park in Nashville, Tennessee, which includes an insert in the flangeway of sufficient length to accommodate wheelchairs and motorized carts. The passage area is clearly marked for safe use. More than one-third of the respondents to this synthesis questionnaire reported that ADA requirements are not considered in the construction and maintenance of grade crossings. The MTJTCD and the Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook say little about the design or signing for bicycle paths or for motorcycles crossing railroad tracks. The Handbook states that surface materials and the flangeway width and depth should be evaluated for safety, noting that the more the crossing deviates from the ideal 90-degree crossing, the greater the potential is for a cycle wheel to be trapped in the flangeway. If the crossing angle is less than 45 degrees, consideration should be given to widening the hikeway to allow sufficient width to cross the tracks at a safer angle. The bicyclist should be warned with suitable markings and signs that the trail is approaching a grade crossing. While motorcyclists use the regular roadway, there are similar concerns for skidding and tire width." TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1998
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_250.pdf
Convicted Onepeople who want to make it look like they got stuck there.
Are you saying the guy in the video was faking?
The following chair - among others is advertised in the AARP magazine
While, I my view, this may be perfectly adequate for indoor and smooth paved outdoor surfaces - it is patently dangerous when facing a railroad crossing. Front wheels are WAY too small in both diameter and width and the rear wheels are a little on the narrow width when considering flange openings at road/side walk crossings.
I don't believe that it is possible to design a total solution that will eliminate the last 1/000th of one percent risk.
I'm sure that my choice of words will not set well with some people, but I believe that "acceptable loss" ...or "acceptable risk" is going to be necessarily a part of the equation, unless you want to build grade separated pedestrian crossings at every location.
Build to best reasonable standard you can attain, supplement that with education, and hope for the best.
EuclidAlso, because the flangeway is so shallow, sloping back of that wall from vertical will not much improve the ability to operate the wheelchair in attempt to climb a caster out of the flangeway.
The issue, as noted, is that bicycles are still going to bust up engaging that irremediable flange face. Aside from flangeway fillers, the only real 'solution' is that mentioned in my old ROTC manual of railway operations: using a locomotive to form the 'flangeway' in asphalt to conform to its own dimensions, and relying on any other equipment with slightly larger flanges to press the material just that little more out. Such an opening is smaller than even power-chair casters can lock into, and even on a hot day I doubt the weight on a power scooter will sink the casters irremediably into the resulting groove. Of course that was in 1974 to 1980...
(As an aside, 'plastic' flangeway fillers were a known and documented thing in those manuals...)
One must also remember that those scooters don't have much ground clearance, unless they are built for rough terrain. In the Lodi incident, I would opine that this wide opening would have been almost as much trouble as the narrower flangeway.
Keeping as narrow a flangeway as possible would be the best option. Some form of trolley flange filler could be used where necessary.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Plus, as a bicyclist I woud absolutely HATE that "spoke buster" profile.
Well, I know that it's not readily apparent from my original sketch because I reduced the size of the image when posting, but please reference the following in conjunction with the amended sketch at the bottom.
The dimension I have circled in red is 1 7/8 inches, so the depth of the flangeway left remaining by my insert is very nearly 1 3/4 inches.
I think there is a problem because the vertical ridge along the railhead (emphasized by the two red arrows) exceeds the 3/4 inch maximum specified in the ADA standards (door thresholds and floor leveling)
So, unless you are creative, I believe the exposed 1 3/4 inch offset that you need for your flange, is not going to be permitted by the ADA.
Convicted One Euclid So overall, an ideal flangeway would be 3-4” wide and 1.5” deep. The depth would be just enough to clear the flange tip. Are you talking about something like this?: (original image is public domain)
Euclid So overall, an ideal flangeway would be 3-4” wide and 1.5” deep. The depth would be just enough to clear the flange tip.
Are you talking about something like this?: (original image is public domain)
It would be similar to that, but this is what I am referring to, using your diagram for reference:
The flangeway floor would be higher, to about half way up the side wall of the rail head. So the flangeway would just deep enough to accommodate the flange. And if there were occasional, slight interference, the rail seal elastomeric material would yield to the flange without any issues. One could say it would be prudent to give the flange tip say ½” of clearance, but the key to the success of this shallow flangeway rail seal is to have the flangeway as shallow as possible.
Regarding the side of the flangeway furthest from the flange, there are several issues involved. The angle that you show looks like about 30 degrees up from horizontal. The closer to horizontal that angle is, the softer the bump would be as vehicles wheels moving from left to right drop down into the flangeway and then are elevated back up to level with the crossing surface.
However, as that angle becomes closer to horizontal, a vehicle tire will drop deeper into the flangeway, and the deeper it drops in, the greater is the return to roadway surface level.
Likewise this effect also applies to the vehicle tire moving right to left. The deeper it drops into the flangeway, the harder will be the bump impact against the side of the rail head. And that bump cannot be eased by the same angle or ramp effect applied to the flangeway on the side opposite the rail.
So the vehicle wheel striking the rail will become more uncomfortable as the flangeway wall opposite of the rail is sloped back from vertical. Also, because the flangeway is so shallow, sloping back of that wall from vertical will not much improve the ability to operate the wheelchair in attempt to climb a caster out of the flangeway.
Also, the shallow flangeway rail seal product has several “tunnels” running lengthwise through it for the purpose of conserving material and making the structure more pliable to flange pressure as ice and snow builds and is packed by the flanges.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.