This article represents the first paper in a two-part series dealing with safety during tram-pedestrian collisions. This research is dedicated to the safety of trams for pedestrians during collisions and is motivated by the increased number of lethal cases. The first part of this paper includes an overview of tram face development from the earliest designs to the current ones in use and, at the same time, provides a synopsis and explanation of the technical context, including a link to current and forthcoming legislation. The historical design development can be characterised by three steps, from an almost vertical front face, to leaned and pointed shapes, to the current inclined low-edged windshield without a protruding coupler. However, since most major manufacturers now export their products worldwide and customisation is only of a technically insignificant nature, our conclusions are generalisable (supported by the example of Berlin). The most advantageous shape of the tram's front, minimising the effects on pedestrians in all collision phases, has evolved rather spontaneously and was unprompted, and it is now being built into the European Commission regulations. The goal of the second part of this paper is to conduct a series of tram-pedestrian collisions with a focus on the frontal and side impacts using a crash test dummy (anthropomorphic test device-ATD). Four tram types approaching the collision at four different impact speeds (5 km/h, 10 km/h, 15 km/h, and 20 km/h) were used. The primary outcome variable was the resultant head acceleration. The risk and severity of possible head injuries were assessed using the head injury criterion (HIC15) and its linkage to the injury level on the Abbreviated Injury Scale (AIS). The results showed increasing head impacts with an increasing speed for all tram types and collision scenarios. Higher values of head acceleration were reached during the frontal impact (17-124 g) compared to the side one (2-84 g). The HIC15 values did not exceed the value of 300 for any experimental setting, and the probability of AIS4+ injuries did not exceed 10%. The outcomes of tram-pedestrian collisions can be influenced by the ATD's position and orientation, the impact speed and front-end design of trams, and the site of initial contact.

2nd Faculty of Medicine Charles University 150 06 Prague Czech Republic

Department of Anatomy and Biomechanics Charles University 162 52 Prague Czech Republic

Department of Designing and Machine Elements Czech Technical University 166 29 Prague Czech Republic

Dopravní Podnik Hlavního Města Prahy 190 22 Prague Czech Republic

Faculty of Mechanical Engineering Jan Evangelista Purkyne University Pasteurova 3544 1 400 96 Usti nad Labem Czech Republic

GIM Oy 02650 Espoo Finland

Institute of Thermomechanics CAS 182 00 Prague Czech Republic

VUKV a s 158 00 Prague Czech Republic

See more in PubMed

Regmi M.B. A review of transport policies in support of climate actions in Asian cities and countries. Earth. 2021;2:731–745.

Huong L.T. Ph.D. Thesis. Technische Universität; Darmstadt, Germany: 2021. Improving Transport-Related Health Impacts by Promoting Active Transport and Public Transport.

International Transport Forum—OECD . ITF Transport Outlook 2021. OECD; Paris, France: 2021.

Mi Z., Guan D., Liu Z., Liu J., Viguié V., Fromer N., Wang Y. The core of climate change mitigation. J. Clean. Prod. 2019;207:582–589.

Centre for Livable Cities . Urban Mobility 10 Cities Leading the Way in Asia-Pacific. Centre for Livable Cities; Singapore: 2017.

Petrescu L., Petrescu A.I. Vehicle-pedestrian collisions—Aspects regarding pedestrian kinematics, dynamics and biomechanics. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017;252:012001.

Teng T.L., Liang C.C., Hsu C.Y., Tai S.F. Kinematic responses and injuries of pedestrian in car-pedestrian collisions. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2017;248:012029. doi: 10.1088/1757-899X/248/1/012029. DOI

Lopot F., Kubový P., Jelen K., Šorfová M., Tlapáková E., Rulc V., Purš H., Ježdík R., Svoboda M. Collision between a pedestrian and tram—Pilot experiment. Manuf. Technol. 2019;19:998–1002. doi: 10.21062/ujep/409.2019/a/1213-2489/MT/19/6/998. DOI

World Health Organization . Global Status Report on Road Safety 2018: Summary (No. WHO/NMH/NVI/18.20) World Health Organization; Geneva, Switzerland: 2018.

Lozano R., Naghavi M., Foreman K., Lim S., Shibuya K., Aboyans V., Abraham J., Adair T., Aggarwal R., Ahn S.Y., et al. Global and regional mortality from 235 causes of death for 20 age groups in 1990 and 2010: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet. 2012;380:2095–2128. PubMed PMC

ITF . Road Safety Annual Report 2020. OECD Publishing; Paris, France: 2020. [(accessed on 11 February 2021)]. Available online: https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/irtad-road-safety-annual-report-2020_0.pdf.

Tiwari G. Progress in pedestrian safety research. Int. J. Inj. Control Saf. Promot. 2020;27:35–43. doi: 10.1080/17457300.2020.1720255. PubMed DOI

Hedelin A., Bunketorp O., Björnstig U. Public transport in metropolitan areas—A danger for unprotected road users. Saf. Sci. 2002;40:467–477. doi: 10.1016/S0925-7535(01)00014-5. DOI

Zegeer C.V., Bushell M. Pedestrian crash trends and potential countermeasures from around the world. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012;44:3–11. PubMed

Horberry T., Osborne R., Young K. Pedestrian smartphone distraction: Prevalence and potential severity. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 2018;60:515–523.

Ou D., Yan H., Yang Y., Xu J. Analysis of tram conflict risk with pedestrian at the intersection based on ATA; Proceedings of the 2016 Prognostics and System Health Management Conference (PHM-Chengdu); Chengdu, China. 19–21 October 2016; pp. 1–6.

Grzebieta R.H., Rechnitzer G. Tram interface crashworthiness; Proceedings of the International Crashworthiness Conference-ICRASH 2000; London, UK. 6–8 September 2000.

Špirk S., Špička J., Vychytil J., Křížek M., Stehlík A. Utilization of the validated windshield material model in simulation of tram to pedestrian collision. Materials. 2021;14:265. doi: 10.3390/ma14020265. PubMed DOI PMC

EuroNCAP . Assessment Protocol–Vulnerable Road User Protection. EuroNCAP; Leuven, Belgium: 2019. [(accessed on 11 December 2019)]. Version 10.0.2. Available online: https://www.euroncap.com/en/for-engineers/protocols/vulnerable-road-user-vru-protection/

Weber T., Muser M., Schmitt K.U. Optimising the design of tramways to mitigate injury risk in pedestrian impacts; Proceedings of the IRCOBI Conference Proceedings (No. IRC-15-45); Lyon, France. 9–11 September 2015.

Nikolaeva R., Vdovin E. Pedestrian safety assessment in the area of tram stops. E3S Web Conf. STCCE. 2021;274:13004.

Demant A.W., Bangard C., Bovenschulte H., Skouras E., Anderson S.E., Lackner K.J. MDCT evaluation of injuries after tram accidents in pedestrians. Emerg. Radiol. 2010;17:103–108. PubMed

Szmaglinski J., Grulkowski S., Birr K. Identification of safety hazards and their sources in tram transport. MATEC Web Conf. GAMBIT. 2018;231:05008.

Sagberg F., Saetermo I.A. Traffic Safety of Tram Transport in Oslo. Norwegian Institute of Transport Economics; Oslo, Norway: 1997.

Pozortramvaj.cz. Prague: Safe Public Transport. [(accessed on 8 December 2021)]. Available online: https://www.pozortramvaj.cz/statistika-nehodovosti.

12th PASSIVE SAFETY of RAIL VEHICLES 2019. IFV Bahntechnik e.V.; Berlin, Germany: 2019.

Railway Applications—Vehicle end Design for Trams and Light Rail Vehicles with Respect to Pedestrian Safety. European Committee for Standardization; Brussels, Belgium: 2020.

Mariotti G.V., Golfo S., Nigrelli V., Carollo F. Head injury criterion: Mini review. Am. J. Biomed. Sci. Res. 2019;5:406–407. doi: 10.34297/AJBSR.2019.05.000957. DOI

McHenry B.G. Head injury criterion and the ATB; Proceedings of the ATB Users’ Conference 2004; Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 29 September 2004.

Eppinger R., Sun E., Bandak F., Haffner M., Khaewpong N., Maltese M. Development of Improved Injury Criteria for the Assessment of Advanced Automotive Restraint Systems—I.I. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; Washington, DC, USA: 2000.

Hayes W.C., Erickson M.S., Power E.D. Forensic Injury Biomechanics. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2007;9:55–86. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.9.060906.151946. PubMed DOI

Gao D., Wampler C.W. On the use of the head injury criterion (HIC) to assess the danger of robot impacts. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 2010;16:71–74. doi: 10.1109/MRA.2009.934824. DOI

Wilde K., Tilsen A., Burzyński S., Witkowski W. On estimation of occupant safety in vehicular crashes into roadside obstacles using non-linear dynamic analysis. MATEC Web Conf. DYNKON. 2019;285:00022.

Golfo S., Mariotti G.V., Carollo F., Argo A., Barbaraci G. Safety considerations on teenage pedestrian-bus impact. Proc. IMechE Part. D J. Automob. Eng. 2019;233:3839–3856. doi: 10.1177/0954407019835617. DOI

Prasad P., Mertz H.J., Dalmotas D.J., Augenstein J.S., Digges K. Evaluation of the field relevance of several injury risk functions. Stapp Car Crash J. 2010;54:49–72. PubMed

Al-Graitti A., Khalid G., Berthelson P.R., Mason-Jones A., Prabhu R., Jones M.D. Auto Rickshaw Impacts with Pedestrians—A Computational Analysis of Post-Collision Kinematics and Injury Mechanics. [(accessed on 27 January 2022)];Int. J. Biomed. Biol. Eng. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2017 131:612–631. Available online: https://publications.waset.org/pdf/10008192.

Han Y., Yang J., Mizuno K., Matsui Y. Effects of Vehicle Impact Velocity, Vehicle Front-End Shapes on Pedestrian Injury Risk. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2012;13:507–518. doi: 10.1080/15389588.2012.661111. PubMed DOI

Svoboda M., Soukup J., Jelen K., Kubovy P. Measurement of Force Impact Taekwondo Athletes, Assessing the Possibility of Injury of Human Head. Procedia Eng. 2016;136:211–215. doi: 10.1016/j.proeng.2016.01.199. ISSN 1877-7058. DOI