Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract
The Loharu rail level crossing was selected for managing level crossing safety in terms of installing rail over bridge (ROB) for minimizing
railway accidents, delay time and fuel consumption through determining its economic viability by benefit cost ratio (B/C ratio) and net present
value (NPV) economic evaluation methods. The volume count survey from Loharu-Parvezpur and Parvezpur-Loharu gave almost similar values
of TVU, thereby signifying the presence of rail over bridge at level crossing. The data involving frequency and duration of gate closure along
with delay time of vehicle affected by gate closure showed that total 6549 vehicles were affected in both directions due to gate closure 3.05
h/day. 1315259.2 h delay of passengers per year, wastage of 59012.7 L petrol/day and 111404.9 L diesel/day was observed. It was concluded
that the construction of rail over bridge would lead to total savings of Rs. 49655706 yearly, thereby focusing towards the total construction cost
estimation for rail over bridge as Rs. 48153461. Using economic evaluation methods, the B/C ratio and NPV value was observed 1.03 (i.e. ~1)
and 1502245 (i.e. positive value) respectively, therefore concluding that the project of constructing rail over bridge at Loharu rail level crossing
as feasible.
Keywords economic evaluation; rail level crossing; NPV; B/C ratio; fuel consumption
1. INTRODUCTION
The railway department has one of the largest rail networks in India. There are 31254 Level Crossings (LC) of which 18672 are manned and
12582 are unmanned railway crossings [1]. Most of the accidents at level crossings are primarily due to negligence of road vehicle users and it is
a clear violation of section 131 of motor vehicle act. Human life is so precious and its loss has to be prevented from all sources and this project
report is an attempt to identity the reasons for Unmanned/Manned level crossing accidents and remedial measures/actions which can be taken to
prevent such accidents and to safeguard accident free travel to Rail and Road user. Railway is losing 3 to 5 % train punctuality on level crossing
accounts. Level crossings are potentially unsafe locations, congestion points for road-rail users and operationally bottlenecks for Railways.
Hence for the safety of the users its become necessary to eliminate rail level crossing by rail over or under bridge. This will result in decline in
the rate of accidents between vehicles and trains, Travel time and fuel consumption of the vehicles. Economic evaluation has become important
for verifying that whether the ROB is economical feasible or not.
Rail level crossing provides a path for the users to cross over the railway line. To minimize the risk of accidents of the train with users while
crossing the level crossing there many techniques adopted by Indian railways such as:
a. Gates at manned level crossings are provided to facilitate road user for crossing the railway Line. These Barriers or Gates may be operated
by Gate Man available at Level Crossing.
b. At Unmanned level crossing there is no availability of gate man, these level crossing are generally provided at Remote prone area where
daily traffic is very less.
Railroad crossing are safe when used in proper manner. Over 90 % of the risk in recent years resulted from misuse by users in the form of errors
or abuses. The rest is due to other causes such as equipment failure, reduced visibility or failure of the railway operator. Typical examples of
user errors are incorrect operation, incorrect timing of the train to reach the intersection, or false assumptions about the priority of the use,
direction of travel, or presence of a second train, normally coming from the opposite direction. Typical examples of user abuse include users
driving around half barriers or when the cross light is red. The analysis of 5 year data of accidents for the period 2007 to 2012 shows that large
parts of 779 deaths (58 %) and 670 injuries (27.5 %) are attributable to unmanned railway crossing caused by negligence of road users by 36.4 %
of total train accidents and manned rail crossing resulted in 4.8 % deaths and 5.5 % injuries. The reasons for casualties at level crossings involve:
Figure 1: Accident Data at Manned and Unmanned Level Crossings of Indian Railways [2]
The most effective way to reduce the risk of level crossing is to completely eliminate the crossroad. In addition, the closure of a public pedestrian
crossing may cause an alternative route to be provided either in the form of a bridge over the railway line, an underpass or by providing a
deflection path to a nearby existing bridge. The Indian railways systematically checked for the security control of the railway crossing and the
justification for improved cross-border protection. In general, the train vehicle unit (TVU) is used as the criterion to identify which rail level
crossing will have a priority over modernization. The TVU, as known in India, is identical to the traffic moment indicators used in other
countries because it is a result of the multiplication of the daily traffic volume at a train crossing with the daily number of trains passing through
that intersection. The TVU criteria adopted in India is listed in the Table 1.
The broad gauge railway line runs through the connecting route of Haryana and Rajasthan. This railway line is of very great importance because
most of the passenger and freight movement take place through Rajasthan-Haryana-Delhi and due to the connection of the main road to the city
of Haryana. The traffic at this junction is also high as shown in the following Figure 2.
At a manned railway crossing during the closure of the gate, some of the drivers of the vehicle were asked to find their reaction to the obstacles
caused by the closure of the gate, most of the cyclists and pedestrian tried to sneak the closed railway gate. Since the four-wheelers had no
choice but to stop at the closed railway gate, there is more congestion problem at level crossing because a large queue is made to cross level
crossing which result in collisions of vehicles, thereby leading to more consumption of fuel while idling standing of vehicles at level crossing
when gates are closed. This also results in the delay travel time of the passengers. The passengers have to travel 1 km (approx.) additionally to
cross level crossing. Some of Level Crossing accidents occur due to carelessness or human error of both road user and Railway staff.
This data is taken from the Railway Police Force (RPF) Station. The Police station is located at the Loharu Railway Station. The Table 2 shows
the accident scenario at Loharu rail crossing in the year 2014.
The Table 3 below shows the PCU values for the various vehicle types.
3. COLLECTION OF DATA
Appropriate data is required to carry out the work. The different types of traffic surveys conducted are:
3.1: Volume Count Survey: This survey is done for 7 days to calculate the number for trains and vehicles passes through the rail level
crossing. The survey is conducted for whole day (24 hrs.). The Table 4 shows the volume count survey to calculate traffic vehicle unit from
Loharu to Parvezpur.
Traffic vehicle unit (TVU) = Total average no. of vehicle unit Total avg. no. of trains = 62819.97.
Similarly, the Table 5 shows the volume count survey to calculate traffic vehicle unit from Parvezpur to Loharu.
Table 5: Volume Count Survey from Parvezpur to Loharu [4]
Date No. of Trains Total No. of Total No. of Total No. of Total No. of
Heavy-Vehicles Light-Vehicles of Camel Cart etc. Half Vehicles
of Full Units Full Units of Full Units Units (Auto, etc.)
1-03-2015 18 560 2320 350 110
2-03-2015 20 543 2858 218 132
3-03-2015 19 574 2522 350 143
4-03-2015 19 559 2278 236 152
5-03-2015 18 643 2534 342 99
6-03-2015 19 648 2498 449 109
7-03-2015 16 540 2512 475 112
Total 129 4067 17522 2420 857
Average 18.429 575.571 2503.14 345.71 61.21
Traffic vehicle unit (TVU) = Total avg. no. of vehicle unit Total avg. no. of trains = 64236.69
It can be analyzed that from Loharu to Parvezpur the TVU is 62819.97 in the junction on the other hand from Parvezpur to Loharu the TVU
is 64340.23. Which is the almost equal in both directions and sum of these TVUs is coming more than 1 lakh i.e. 1, 27,160. Hence, rail over
bridge could be provided at the railway crossing.
Total 6549 vehicles are affected due to closure of railway gate for a period of 3.05 hr in a day. The highest value of Volume Count Survey for
Heavy Vehicles (LHU-PVZ) has been considered from Table 1 as 654. Therefore, vehicles affected by gate closer for heavy vehicles = (6543)
i.e. 218 whereas passenger car unit (PCU) for heavy vehicles is 3. All the others values could be calculated in a similar fashion.
Figure 3: Per Minute Vehicle Delay for Various Vehicle Types [6]
4. ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
Collected data from the field is analyzed by keeping in view the primary objective which involves the computation of the total average delay of
vehicles for analyzing the idling fuel consumption cost. The computed vehicle hrs are converted into passengers hrs, based on occupancy of
vehicles.
4.3: Calculations
Here total no. of heavy vehicles per day = 434
Delay time for heavy vehicle (Bus) per minute (from Figure 3) = 7.82 Delay in vehicle hrs = (Total no. of heavy vehicles per day Delay time-
vehicle per minute) i.e. = (434 7.82) / 60 = 56.3 vehicle-hrs.
Similarly, delay in passenger hrs per day = Occupancy of the vehicle delay time in vehicle-hrs i.e. 64 56.3 = 3603.45 passengers-hrs per day.
Delay in passenger hrs per annum = (3603.45 365) = 1315259.2 passengers-hrs per year.
Fuel consumption delay due to idling standing of vehicle is done by calculating the overall delay of vehicle in hrs of each vehicle category by the
respective Idling fuel consumption coefficient [6]. Coefficients of idling fuel consumption of vehicles are given below in Table 9.
According to PCRA study it has been analyzed that at the selected intersection on an average daily 59012.7 liters of petrol and 111404.9 liters of
diesel is calculated to be wasted because of idling of vehicles. The Table 10 shows the average fuel loss per day on each category of traffic
intersection.
Table 10: Fuel consumption cost of delayed vehicles at the study area in the area of 2015
The calculated vehicle hour is converted based on the vehicle occupancy in passenger hour. The following average occupancy value is
determined for different modes of transport taking into account the type of land use in the investigated area.
The Table 11 below shows the monetary savings in terms of travel time i.e. rupees/passenger-hr.
Table 11: Monetary Savings in Terms of Travel Time [6]
The Table 12 represents the travel time savings evaluation in terms of passenger-hr travel time savings (in rupees) along with savings in travel
time per annum (in rupees).
Table 12: Travel time Savings Evaluation
Passenger-Hr Delay Per Passenger-Hr Savings in Travel Time in
Vehicle Type
Annum Travel Time Savings in Rs. Rs. Per Annum
Heavy Vehicles 1315259 10.23 13455099.57
Light Vehicles 418290 62.48 26134759.2
Camel Carts and Others
15330
Vehicles
Auto 31755 34.81 1105391.55
Total 1780634 40695250.32
From the above table it can be analyzed that by the implementation of ROB, the following benefit can be achieved, as shown in Table 13.
Table 13: Travel Time and Fuel Time Savings
Sr. No Savings Value (in Rupees)
1 Travel Time saving 40695250
2 Fuel Time Saving 89, 60, 456
Total 4,96,55,706
6. CONCLUSION
As per the observation we can provide rail over bridge at Loharu level crossing to minimize the accident rate, delay in travel time and fuel
consumption. The project is economical feasible as the B/C Ratio is obtained as 1 whereas Net present value (NPV) as positive. Here by
constructing rail over bridge the extra distance of 1 km, can be cut down which a user has to travel while crossing level crossing. Same method
can be applied for eliminating level crossing by economic evaluation for rail over bridge on other level crossing, because according to Indian
railway all level crossings must be eliminated by rail over or under bridge by 2020.
REFERENCES
[1] http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railwayboard/uploads/codesmanual/IRPWM/PermanentW ayManualCh9_data.htm (accessed on 29th
August, 2017)
[2] http://railtec.illinois.edu/GLXS/presentations/B/12B4-GLXS2014-1027-KUMAR_GARG.pdf (accessed on 7th September, 2017)
[3] S. Jain, A. Kumar Level crossing scenario of Indian Railways International Railway Safety Conference 2012. 810 October, London,
England.
[4] Loharu Police Station, Loharu, Biwani, Haryana. (Personal communication)
[5] Senior Section Engineer (Permanent Way), Loharu Railway Station, Loharu, Biwani, Haryana. (Personal communication)
[6] A.M. Patel, Economic Evaluation for Proposed Highway Railway Over Bridge-A Case Study of Naroda Rail Crossing, Global Research
Analysis 1(2012) 8688.
[7] R.K. Gupta Economics of steel bridges v/s concrete bridges Indian Institute of Bridge Engineers 2002. 119, April.