Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city's MTC buses

Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city’sAnalysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city’s
Metropolitan Transport Corporation (MTC) busesMetropolitan Transport Corporation (MTC) buses
Jeya Padmanaban*, Ravishankar Rajaraman**, Swastik Narayan**, Bharat Ramesh**Jeya Padmanaban*, Ravishankar Rajaraman**, Swastik Narayan**, Bharat Ramesh**
JP Research India Private LimitedJP Research India Private Limited

JP Research India Pvt Ltd
OverviewOverview
• IntroductionIntroduction
 MTC busses in Chennai cityMTC busses in Chennai city
 The issueThe issue
• Data Collection MethodologyData Collection Methodology
 Detailed Accident Reports (DAR)Detailed Accident Reports (DAR)
 Creation of Analytical DatabaseCreation of Analytical Database
• ResultsResults
• ConclusionsConclusions

Chennai City and MTC busesChennai City and MTC buses
• Chennai CityChennai City
– spans for over 180 sq.kmspans for over 180 sq.km
– population density of 24,683 persons perpopulation density of 24,683 persons per
sq.km.sq.km.
• Metropolitan Transport CorporationMetropolitan Transport Corporation
– Government run bus organizationGovernment run bus organization
– MTC has a fleet of 3267 buses (2009)MTC has a fleet of 3267 buses (2009)
– MTC buses carry 5.5 million passengersMTC buses carry 5.5 million passengers
every day.every day.
Ordinary
Semi-Low Floor (SLF)
Volvo AC

The IssueThe Issue
Year
Number
of buses
Number of
bus crashes
Crashes
Crashes
per bus
Fatal Crashes
per 1000 busesFatal Injury No injury
2006 2773 2837 129 982 1726 1.02 46.52
2007 2934 3857 142 1213 2502 1.31 48.39
2008 3300 4542 145 1419 2978 1.38 43.93
2009 3267 4284 138 1489 2657 1.31 42.24
• Over 40 fatal crashes per 1000 buses per year
• Over 1 crash per bus per year
• Lack of in-depth scientific analysis

Data Collection MethodologyData Collection Methodology
• Detailed Accident Report (DAR)Detailed Accident Report (DAR)
– 2-page handwritten report in local language (Tamil)2-page handwritten report in local language (Tamil)
– Records created and maintained by Accident Branch of MTCRecords created and maintained by Accident Branch of MTC
– Objective is to fix responsibility for the accidentObjective is to fix responsibility for the accident
– Researchers used these reports as the base for analysisResearchers used these reports as the base for analysis

Data Collection MethodologyData Collection Methodology
• Acquisition of Detailed Accident Reports (DARs)Acquisition of Detailed Accident Reports (DARs)
– Using Right To Information (RTI)Using Right To Information (RTI)
– 283 fatal crash reports obtained283 fatal crash reports obtained (2008 - 145; 2009 - 138)(2008 - 145; 2009 - 138)
• Creation of Analytical DatabaseCreation of Analytical Database
– Translation of documents to EnglishTranslation of documents to English
– Extracted information and coded variablesExtracted information and coded variables
– Personal or proprietary information not includedPersonal or proprietary information not included

Distribution of Fatal CrashesDistribution of Fatal Crashes
by Road User Type Involvedby Road User Type Involved
M2Ws, pedestrians and footboard passengers
constitute 89% of fatal MTC bus crashes.

Victim Profile – M2W RidersVictim Profile – M2W Riders
• 92% of the fatal M2W riders and “footboard passengers” were92% of the fatal M2W riders and “footboard passengers” were
malesmales
• 50% of male M2W fatal riders are ages 20-2950% of male M2W fatal riders are ages 20-29
• Helmet usage among the M2W riders are very lowHelmet usage among the M2W riders are very low

Victim Profile – Pedestrians andVictim Profile – Pedestrians and
Footboard PassengersFootboard Passengers
• Pedestrian fatalities about 82% were malePedestrian fatalities about 82% were male
• 85% of male pedestrian fatalities are ages 30 or older85% of male pedestrian fatalities are ages 30 or older
• 38% of “footboard passengers” are less than 19 years old38% of “footboard passengers” are less than 19 years old
– indicating that fatalities involved school/college studentsindicating that fatalities involved school/college students

Crash Interaction TypesCrash Interaction Types
• 11stst
Event: Fall DownEvent: Fall Down
– M2W, Pedestrian or FootboardM2W, Pedestrian or Footboard
Passenger falls downPassenger falls down
• 22ndnd
Event: Run OverEvent: Run Over
– M2W rider, Pedestrian orM2W rider, Pedestrian or
Footboard Passenger subsequentlyFootboard Passenger subsequently
gets run over by tiresgets run over by tires

Crash Interaction Types - Place ofCrash Interaction Types - Place of
DeathDeath
78% of Run Overs result in fatalities
even before victim reaches the hospital

““Run Over” by Tire PositionRun Over” by Tire Position
• Rear tires involved in 82% ofRear tires involved in 82% of
run oversrun overs

““Run Over” by Tire PositionRun Over” by Tire Position
• Run overs involving all footboard passengers
• 88% of M2W riders were due to rear tires

Head injury involved - “Fall Down”Head injury involved - “Fall Down”
onlyonly
• Helmet use for M2Ws can significantly reduce injury severity

Pre-Crash Conditions –Pre-Crash Conditions –
M2W Crash ConfigurationsM2W Crash Configurations
Sideswipe most predominant crash configuration

M2W Crash ConfigurationM2W Crash Configuration
Sideswipe collisions resulted in 80% of M2W run overs
Crash configuration for 5% of fall downs could not be determined

PedestriansPedestrians
• 64% impacts involved pedestrian crossing the road
• 82% pedestrians hit by front of the bus

Footboard PassengersFootboard Passengers
• 59% - Passenger Boarding/alighting a bus59% - Passenger Boarding/alighting a bus
• 31% - Foot board travellers in a moving bus31% - Foot board travellers in a moving bus
• 94% - Run over of foot board passengers from front door94% - Run over of foot board passengers from front door
• Importance of doors?Importance of doors?
– Buses with doors show very low occurrence of foot board passengerBuses with doors show very low occurrence of foot board passenger
crashescrashes

Infrastructure ProblemsInfrastructure Problems
• Crashes on divided roadsCrashes on divided roads
– 63% of M2W sideswipe crashes63% of M2W sideswipe crashes
– 67% of crossing pedestrian impacts67% of crossing pedestrian impacts
• 30% of pedestrian crashes30% of pedestrian crashes
occurred at or near a bus stopoccurred at or near a bus stop

ConclusionsConclusions
• Data does exist but needs to be scientifically analyzedData does exist but needs to be scientifically analyzed
• On-scene crash investigations and in-depth data collection canOn-scene crash investigations and in-depth data collection can
act as a good feedback loopact as a good feedback loop

New buses in 2010New buses in 2010
• Sideswipe with M2W
• Run over prevented due to low ground
clearance of bus
THANK YOU
reachus@jpresearchindia.com

Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city's MTC buses

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Similaire à Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city's MTC buses

Similaire à Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city's MTC buses (20)

Plus de WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities

Plus de WRI Ross Center for Sustainable Cities (20)

Analysis of fatal crashes involving Chennai city's MTC buses