EN15227 - Crashworthiness of Railway Vehicle Body

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010: Railway
applications - Crashworthiness
requirements for railway vehicle bodies
[Required by Directive 2008/57/EC]

6TRFAPCKH CTAHQAPT

6TRFAPCKH HHCTHTYT
3A CTAHQAPTH3AHR

" 6HC Bnrapckns: nuc:n:y: sa c:aupap:nsans e uocn:en ua
aa:opckn:e npaaa" Bcsko asnponsaexpaue# aknkun:enuo n uac:nuuo#
e asMoxuo caMo c nncMeuo:o paspemeune ua BHC# $%&% Coqns#
ka" Hsrpea# yn" 'Puesap C:auuea( N1)

2010
!"# EN 15227:2008+A1
!"#"$%&' 2010
ICS: 45.060.01
()$"*+:
,!- EN 15227:2008.
$%&%'()*+,- +%.,/0-. 1'/203-,/4 '- 52+(67/3(2+ ,- 58-9 ,-
0(:(3%+% ,- 3-;(,/+% ,- <%&%'()*+,(+( )9%3(',( 29%82+3(
Railway applications - Crashworthiness requirements for railway vehicle bodies
=39()%620/4+ 2+-,8-9+ EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 />- 2+-+5+ ,- ?*&;-920/ 2+-,8-9+
(+ 2010-12-17.
./0' 12)*3)&2 " /4'5')6*/2/ '03)*'" *) ,768)&1#'+ '*12'292 0) 12)*3)&2'0)5'+ *)
)*86':1#' "0'# *) "%&/;":1#'+ 12)*3)&2 EN 15227:2008+A1:2010.
41 12&.
<)5'/*)6"* = 0) ;/0/%)%)*":,!- EN
15227:2008+A1:2010
This document is personalized for {Public Resource, !nc.), Order: {2570+), Purchased: {28.07.2013)

3a nopuka n sakynyaaue ua c:aupap:n" c:aupap:nsanouun Ma:epnann n cnenannsnpaun nspauns ua
BHC Moxe pa nsnonsaa:e epnu o: nocoueun:e uaunun#
$ B nuqopManouuns eu:p ua BHC ua appec# Coqns" ka% Hsrpea" yn% Puesap C:auuea" N1&" ' e:ax
$ ()$*+), ua uama:a nu:epue: c:pauna# ---%./0$.1%231
$ Ho qakc 4&56 7 89&$55$69
$ Ho enek:pouua:a noa# +):2;./0$.1%231

@AB1C@AD=@ EF="GCHCF
./0' 12)*3)&2 " ;/38/2%"* 1 9>)12'"2/ *) ,?-/TK 70 "@"6"0/;72"* 2&)*1;/&2".
-6"3%)2 39 12&)*'5' *) EN 15227:2008+A1:2010.

EUROPEAN STANDARD
NORME EUROPENNE
EUROPISCHE NORM

EN 15227:2008+A1

November 2010
ICS 45.060.01 Supersedes EN 15227:2008
English Version
Railway applications - Crashworthiness requirements for railway
vehicle bodies

Applications ferroviaires - Exigences en scurit passive
contre collision pour les structures de caisses des
vhicules ferroviaires
Bahnanwendungen - Anforderungen an die
Kollisionssicherheit von Schienenfahrzeugksten
This European Standard was approved by CEN on 12 December 2007 and includes Amendment 1 approved by CEN on 28 September
2010.

CEN members are bound to comply with the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations which stipulate the conditions for giving this European
Standard the status of a national standard without any alteration. Up-to-date lists and bibliographical references concerning such national
standards may be obtained on application to the CEN Management Centre or to any CEN member.

This European Standard exists in three official versions (English, French, German). A version in any other language made by translation
under the responsibility of a CEN member into its own language and notified to the CEN Management Centre has the same status as the
official versions.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland,
Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMI T EUROPEN DE NORMALI SATI ON
EUROPI SCHES KOMI TEE FR NORMUNG

Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
2010 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved
worldwide for CEN national Members.
Ref. No. EN 15227:2008+A1:2010: E
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
2
Contents Page
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................. 4
Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 5
1 Scope ...................................................................................................................................................... 5
2 Normative references ............................................................................................................................ 6
3 Terms and definitions ........................................................................................................................... 6
4 Crashworthiness design categories of railway vehicles ................................................................... 8
5 Design collision scenarios ................................................................................................................... 9
6 Structural passive safety .................................................................................................................... 11
6.1 General principles ............................................................................................................................... 11
6.2 Overriding ............................................................................................................................................. 12
6.2.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 12
6.2.2 Explanatory notes (informative) ......................................................................................................... 12
6.3 Survival space, intrusion and egress ................................................................................................ 13
6.3.1 Requirements ....................................................................................................................................... 13
6.4 Deceleration limit/collision pulse ....................................................................................................... 14
6.4.1 Requirement ......................................................................................................................................... 14
6.5 Obstacle deflector ............................................................................................................................... 15
6.5.1 Requirement ......................................................................................................................................... 15
7 Validation of crashworthiness ........................................................................................................... 17
Annex A (informative) Parameters of design collision scenarios ................................................................ 19
A.1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 19
A.2 Determining the design collision scenarios for collision risks which differ from the
normal European operations .............................................................................................................. 20
A.2.1 Design collision scenarios ................................................................................................................. 20
A.2.2 Risk analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 20
A.2.3 Factors to be considered in the risk assessment ............................................................................ 21
A.2.4 Collisions following derailment ......................................................................................................... 21
A.2.5 Bibliography of relevant accident information ................................................................................. 22
Annex B (normative) Requirements of a validation programme.................................................................. 23
B.1 Test specifications .............................................................................................................................. 23
B.1.1 Test programme ................................................................................................................................... 23
B.1.2 Acceptance criteria for calibration/validation tests ......................................................................... 23
B.2 Numerical simulations ........................................................................................................................ 24
B.2.1 Numerical model validation ................................................................................................................ 24
B.2.2 Simulation modelling .......................................................................................................................... 24
Annex C (normative) Reference obstacle definitions ................................................................................... 26
C.1 80 t wagon ............................................................................................................................................ 26
C.2 C-III Reference obstacle ...................................................................................................................... 27
C.3 Large deformable obstacle ................................................................................................................. 29
C.4 C-IV Corner collision obstacle ........................................................................................................... 31
Annex D (normative) Reference train definitions Defined formations ..................................................... 32
D.1 Reference trains for locomotive, power head, driving trailer and coach design .......................... 32
D.2 Locomotive design .............................................................................................................................. 32
D.3 Power head and driving trailer design .............................................................................................. 32
D.4 Individual coach design ...................................................................................................................... 33
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
3
Annex E (informative) Migration rule for this European Standard ............................................................... 35
Annex ZA (informative) ! !! !Relationship between this European Standard and the Essential
Requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 17 June 2008 on the interoperability of the rail system within the Community
(Recast)" "" " ........................................................................................................................................... 36
Bibliography ...................................................................................................................................................... 39

Figures
Figure 1 Example for clearance requirement of crumple zones in areas of temporary
occupation (e.g. vestibule) ................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 2 Driver's seat clearance zone ........................................................................................................ 14
Figure 3 Obstacle deflector load application ............................................................................................ 16
Figure C.1 Buffered wagon interface ......................................................................................................... 26
Figure C.2 Wagon buffer characteristic ..................................................................................................... 27
Figure C.3 Peri-urban tram obstacle .......................................................................................................... 28
Figure C.4 Coupler characteristic .............................................................................................................. 28
Figure C.5 Deformable obstacle geometry ................................................................................................ 30
Figure C.6 Deformable obstacle stiffness ................................................................................................. 30
Figure C.7 Tram corner collision obstacle ................................................................................................ 31
Figure D.1 Locomotive reference train ...................................................................................................... 32
Figure D.2 Power head/driving trailer reference train .............................................................................. 33
Figure D.3 Coach simplified assessment .................................................................................................. 34

Tables
Table 1 Crashworthiness design categories of railway vehicles .............................................................. 8
Table 2 Collision scenarios and collision obstacles ................................................................................ 10
Table 3 Obstacle deflector performance requirements ........................................................................... 11
Table ZA.1 Correspondence between this European Standard, the HS TSI RST published in
the OJEU dated 26 March 2008 and Directive 2008/57/EC .............................................................. 37
Table ZA.2 Correspondence between this European Standard, the CR LOC and PASS RST
TSI (final draft Rev 4.0 dated 24 November 2009) and Directive 2008/57/EC ................................ 38

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
4
Foreword
This document (EN 15227:2008+A1:2010) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 256
Railway applications, the secretariat of which is held by DIN.
This European Standard shall be given the status of a national standard, either by publication of an identical
text or by endorsement, at the latest by May 2011 and conflicting national standards shall be withdrawn at
the latest by May 2011.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
This document includes Amendment 1, approved by CEN on 2010-09-28.
This document supersedes EN 15227:2008.
The start and finish of text introduced or altered by amendment is indicated in the text by tags ! ".
!This document has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN/CENELEC/ETSI by the European
Commission and the European Free Trade Association, and supports essential requirements of EU Directive
2008/57/EC.
For relationship with EU Directive 2008/57/EC, see informative Annex ZA, which is an integral part of this
document."
According to the CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations, the national standards organizations of the following
countries are bound to implement this European Standard: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus,
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy,
Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia,
Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and United Kingdom.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
5
Introduction
The objective of the passive safety requirements described in this European Standard is to reduce the
consequences of collision accidents. The measures considered in this European Standard provide the last
means of protection when all possibilities of preventing an accident have failed. It provides a framework for
determining the crash conditions that railway vehicle bodies should be designed to withstand based on the
most common accidents and associated risks.
The requirements are compatible with those of EN 12663. The static compression load requirements on the
vehicle ends, required by EN 12663, are intended to provide a basic structural integrity to the occupied areas
in a collision-type accident. This European Standard adds to the basic strength requirement by setting
additional requirements for structural passive safety in order to increase occupant safety.
1 Scope
This European Standard applies to new designs of locomotives and passenger carrying rolling stock as
defined in categories C-I to C-IV of Clause 4 taking into consideration the recommendations given in
Annex E on the application of the standard (migration rule). It is intended to protect vehicle occupants,
through the preservation of structural integrity, and does not extend to other railway employees and
customers who are not in vehicles, or to third parties. The specified requirements relate to the technical and
operational conditions of use that prevail in the CEN member countries. The design of new vehicles for use
in passenger trains is based on operations with compatible rolling stock that also meet this standard. It is
recognised that operational requirements will require new crashworthy and existing non-crashworthy vehicles
to exist in the same train unit but such combinations of vehicles are not required to comply with this
European Standard.
The requirements apply to the vehicle body, and to those mechanical elements directly associated with it that
may be used to absorb energy in a collision, such as couplers, buffing systems etc. They do not cover the
safety features of doors, windows, system components or interior features except for specific issues relating
to the preservation of survival space.
The requirements do not cover all possible accident scenarios but provide a level of crashworthiness that will
reduce the consequences of an accident, when the active safety measures have been inadequate. The
requirement is to provide a level of protection by addressing the most common types of collision that cause
injuries and fatalities.
The applicable design collision scenarios, and suitable parameters for normal European operations, are
given in Clause 5. Annex A gives additional information regarding the derivation of the scenarios and
describes situations when they may need to be modified and the processes that should then be followed.
This European Standard identifies common methods of providing passive safety that may be adopted to suit
individual vehicle requirements. This European Standard also specifies the characteristics of reference
obstacle models for use in the design collision scenarios. Not all vehicles in a train unit have to incorporate
energy absorption provided that passenger train configurations formed entirely of new vehicle designs
comply as a whole with this European Standard.
This European Standard also specifies the requirements for demonstrating that the passive safety objectives
have been achieved by comparison with existing proven designs, numerical simulation, component or
full-size tests, or a combination of all these methods.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
6
2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are necessary for the application of this document. For dated
references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced
documents (including any amendments) applies.
EN 12663, Railway applications Structural requirements of railway vehicle bodies
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
3.1
active safety
systems and measures which take actions that aim to prevent a collision occurring
3.2
broadly acceptable risk
level of risk that is regarded as not significant in the context in which it is experienced
3.3
collision mass
is taken as the design mass in working order plus the mass of 50 % of seated passengers
3.4
crashworthiness
ability to mitigate the consequences of a collision in a controlled manner and reduce the risk of injury to the
occupants
3.5
crumple zone
part of the vehicle body (usually at the vehicle ends) which is designed to deform in a controlled manner and
absorb energy
3.6
crushing
excessive plastic deformation that significantly reduces the volume created by the vehicle structure
3.7
design collision scenario (= limiting collision scenario/case)
most severe collision/case for each given scenario that it is appropriate to protect against and so is
applicable for design purposes on the basis of the collision accident analysis; see [1], [5]
3.8
driving trailer
non-powered vehicle fitted with a driving cab and which is designed to operate in general traffic and not as
part of a fixed configuration train unit
3.9
energy absorbing device
device which is attached to, but not part of the vehicle structure and is designed to deform in a controlled
manner and absorb energy (e.g. energy absorbing coupler)
3.10
fixed seat
permanent seat in the cab that is occupied during normal operation (e.g. cannot be folded away when not in
use)
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
7
3.11
full size test
test on the structure of interest with the test specimen formed from all relevant full size components
3.12
locomotive
self-propelled vehicle with an operational driving cab at both ends (or single cab for operation in both
directions), the function of which is only to provide motive power for a rake of vehicles, and which is designed
to operate in general traffic and not as a permanent part of a fixed configuration train unit
3.13
net contact force
difference between the longitudinal forces acting on opposite ends of the vehicle (i.e. the algebraic sum of
the longitudinal force) at any instant of time
3.14
normal European operating conditions
operating conditions comparable to those described by the documents listed in the bibliography
3.15
operator
organisation which has responsibility for defining the technical requirements for the railway vehicle in order
that it will perform the intended operation and meet the acceptance criteria
3.16
passive safety
systems which reduce the consequences of an accident should it occur
3.17
plastic deformation/permanent deformation
deformation associated with stresses above the material yield or proof stress and which is not recoverable
when the load is removed
3.18
power head
self-propelled vehicle with an operational driving cab at one end only, the function of which is only to provide
motive power for a rake of vehicles, and which is designed to operate in general traffic and not as a
permanent part of a fixed configuration train unit
3.19
reference train
train configuration that is used for the assessment and validation of vehicles (including locomotives, power
heads and driving trailers) that do not form part of a fixed rake
NOTE See Annex D.
3.20
regulations
requirements stipulated in legislation, standards and other documents mandated by legislation
3.21
supplier
organisation which has responsibility for supplying the railway vehicle to satisfy the regulations and functional
requirements of the operator
3.22
survival space
volume of the vehicle body containing the occupants which has to be maintained during the limiting collision
(e.g. the occupied areas, but not including flexible gangways)
NOTE See also 6.3.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
8
3.23
TEN
Trans European Network as defined in EC Directives 1996/48/EC, 2001/16/EC and 2004/50/EC
3.24
train unit
operational configuration of a single rake of coupled vehicles to be considered by this European Standard
3.25
V
lc
maximum train unit operational speed at a level crossing (the lower of the maximum train unit speed and the
designated line speed)
4 Crashworthiness design categories of railway vehicles
For the application of this standard railway vehicles are classified into crashworthiness design categories.
These categories depend on the main characteristics of the railway infrastructure and on the type of
operation. The operator has to define the appropriate vehicle design category in the procurement documents
of new projects.
Railway vehicles are divided into four categories as indicated in Table 1, with an indication of the type of
operation and vehicles generally associated with each.
Table 1 Crashworthiness design categories of railway vehicles
Category Definition Examples of vehicle types
C-I Vehicles designed to operate
on TEN routes, international,
national and regional
networks (which have level
crossings)
Locomotives, coaches and fixed train
units
C-II Urban vehicles designed to
operate only on a dedicated
railway infrastructure, with no
interface with road traffic
Metro vehicles
C-III Light rail vehicles designed to
operate on urban and/or
regional networks, in track-
sharing operation, and
interfacing with road traffic
Tram trains, peri-urban tram
C-IV Light rail vehicles designed to
operate on dedicated urban
networks interfacing with
road traffic
Tramway vehicles

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
9
5 Design collision scenarios
It is recognised that it is impractical to design the vehicle structure to protect the occupants in all possible
accident situations or to consider all possible vehicle combinations. The requirement is to provide a level of
protection consistent with the common collision risks.
The design collision scenarios specified below are not the only cases occurring on the infrastructure of public
rail transport in Europe, but they represent the most common collision situations and those that result in most
of the casualties. Annex A discusses the derivation and application of the collision scenarios in more detail.
1) A front end impact between two identical train units;
2) a front end impact with a different type of railway vehicle;
3) train unit front end impact with a large road vehicle on a level crossing;
4) train unit impact into low obstacle (e.g. car on a level crossing, animal, rubbish).
Table 2 summarises these design collision scenarios with respect to the different vehicle crashworthiness
design categories and the different operational conditions that are to be used for the crashworthiness
validation. Table 3 lists the performance requirements for obstacle deflectors.

E
N

1
5
2
2
7
:
2
0
0
8
+
A
1
:
2
0
1
0

(
E
)

1
0

T
a
b
l
e

2

C
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o
s

a
n
d

c
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e
s

D
e
s
i
g
n

c
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

s
c
e
n
a
r
i
o

C
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

O
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l

c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
s
t
i
c
s

o
f

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t

C
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

S
p
e
e
d

-

k
m
/
h

C
o
l
l
i
s
i
o
n

p
a
r
t
n
e
r

a
n
d

c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s

C
-
I

C
-
I
I

C
-
I
I
I

C
-
I
V

1

I
d
e
n
t
i
c
a
l

t
r
a
i
n

u
n
i
t

A
l
l

s
y
s
t
e
m
s

3
6

2
5

2
5

1
5

I
d
e
n
t
i
c
a
l

t
r
a
i
n

u
n
i
t

2

8
0

t

w
a
g
o
n

M
i
x
e
d

t
r
a
f
f
i
c

w
i
t
h

v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s

e
q
u
i
p
p
e
d

w
i
t
h

s
i
d
e

b
u
f
f
e
r
s
.

3
6

n
.
a
.

2
5

n
.
a
.

S
e
e

C
.
1

f
o
r

w
a
g
o
n

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

1
2
9

t

r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l

t
r
a
i
n

M
i
x
e
d

t
r
a
f
f
i
c

w
i
t
h

v
e
h
i
c
l
e
s

w
i
t
h

a

c
e
n
t
r
a
l

c
o
u
p
l
e
r

n
.
a
.

n
.
a
.

1
0

n
.
a
.

S
e
e

C
.
2

f
o
r

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

r
e
g
i
o
n
a
l

t
r
a
i
n

3

1
5

t

d
e
f
o
r
m
a
b
l
e

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

T
E
N

a
n
d

s
i
m
i
l
a
r

o
p
e
r
a
t
i
o
n

w
i
t
h

l
e
v
e
l

c
r
o
s
s
i
n
g
s

V
l
c

5
0

1
1
0

n
.
a
.

2
5

n
.
a
.

S
e
e

C
.
3

f
o
r

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

l
a
r
g
e

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

3

t

r
i
g
i
d

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

U
r
b
a
n

l
i
n
e

n
o
t

i
s
o
l
a
t
e
d

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

r
o
a
d

t
r
a
f
f
i
c

n
.
a
.

n
.
a
.

n
.
a
.

2
5

S
e
e

C
.
4

f
o
r

r
e
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

4

S
m
a
l
l
,

l
o
w

o
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

O
b
s
t
a
c
l
e

d
e
f
l
e
c
t
o
r

r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s

t
o

b
e

a
c
h
i
e
v
e
d

S
e
e

T
a
b
l
e

3
n
.
a
.

S
e
e

T
a
b
l
e

3

n
.
a
.

S
e
e

a
l
s
o

6
.
5

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
11
Table 2 application rules:
colliding train units and obstacles are un-braked on straight and level track;
when assessing a train unit with different vehicles at each end, only impacts between identical vehicles
shall be considered under Scenario 1, but both ends shall be considered;
heavy haul locomotives used only for freight operations and fitted with centre couplers conforming to the
Willison (e.g. SA3) or Janney (AAR standard) principle are omitted from meeting the requirements of
Scenarios 1 and 2.
Table 3 Obstacle deflector performance requirements
Operational speed
a
160 km/h 140 km/h 120 km/h 100 km/h 80 km/h
Static load at centre line
b
300 kN 240 kN 180 kN 120 kN 60 kN
Static load at 750 mm lateral distance
from centre line
b

250 kN 200 kN 150 kN 100 kN 50 kN
a
For operational speeds different from the given values, the force values may be interpolated.
b
Details of the application of these loads and the performance characteristics of the obstacle deflector are given in
6.5.1.

If there are no crashworthiness requirements specified in regulations and the normal European operating
conditions assumed by this European Standard do not apply, it shall be the responsibility of the operator to
determine the applicable scenarios and the appropriate limiting design case for each (see Annex A).
The vehicles shall be designed to satisfy those design collision scenarios that correspond to the operational
conditions they are expected to experience. If the operational conditions are such that a design collision
scenario cannot occur, or there is evidence that the probability of it occurring or the associated risk is so low
as to be broadly acceptable, there is no need to consider the scenario in the vehicle design.
NOTE Train control systems which segregate different types of traffic on the same system may satisfy this
requirement. Locomotives with centre cabs may have an inherent broadly acceptable risk under Scenario 3.
If the system has characteristics that result in significant collision risks (relative to the above) not already
covered, they shall also be considered in the form of additional design collision scenarios.
If vehicles cannot operate up to the collision speeds specified in this European Standard (e.g. shunting
locomotives) the crashworthiness requirements need not be applied.
If assessing a single locomotive, power head, driving trailer or coach, which is not part of a fixed train unit, a
reference train shall be used for design purposes in each of the above scenarios. Annex D specifies the
choice of reference trains and the scope of approval that is possible without further re-assessment.
6 Structural passive safety
6.1 General principles
To the extent required by this European Standard the following measures shall be employed to provide
protection of occupants in the event of a collision:
reduce the risk of overriding;
absorb collision energy in a controlled manner;
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
12
maintain survival space and structural integrity of the occupied areas;
limit the deceleration;
reduce the risk of derailment and limit the consequences of hitting a track obstruction.
The application of these principles in the design collision scenarios is considered in more detail in the
following clauses.
NOTE As a by-product of providing occupant protection the level of damage to the vehicle body is likely to be reduced
in less severe accidents (with lower repair costs). If the operator wishes to specify more restrictive damage limitations for
any of the design collision scenarios of Clause 5 to reduce repair costs, this should be part of the contractual requirements
and does not form part of the safety requirements of this European Standard.
6.2 Overriding
6.2.1 Requirements
Overriding shall be resisted at the train unit extremities and between the vehicles comprising the train unit.
The override constraint shall be capable of engaging with a vertical offset between colliding train units.
The acceptance criterion for the overriding limitation for Scenario 1 is that the validation process (simulation)
demonstrates that, with an initial vertical offset of 40 mm at the point of impact (with the standing train unit at a
lower level than the moving train unit) the criteria for deceleration and survival space are achieved.
Furthermore
at least one wheelset of every bogie should be maintained in effective contact with the track throughout
the collision simulation. This may be established by showing that at all times the vertical displacement
above the rail of at least one wheelset on each bogie is no more than 75 % of the nominal flange height,

or, if this cannot be achieved,
the wheel lift-off distance of up to 100 mm is permitted if the anti-climb units stay fully engaged over the
relevant part of the collision simulation and provide a steady interlocking feature between the colliding
vehicles and the maximum interface forces induced are properly transferred into the interlocking feature.
It shall also be demonstrated that the anti-climb units, as well as any subsequent crash energy absorption
modules, absorb the required amount of energy.
The demonstration shall be performed by calculation using a detailed model of the crumple zones at the
vehicle ends. It is acceptable to have simplified equivalent mass and stiffness modelling for the residual parts
of the vehicles provided that the survival space behaviour is correctly represented.
6.2.2 Explanatory notes (informative)
Overriding constraint is necessary to limit the vertical displacements arising at vehicle interfaces and resist
those vertical forces that are induced, so that the collision loads are directed to the energy absorbing
structure. Vertical displacements and forces arise due to offsets between the interface contact/reaction points
and the inertia forces associated with vehicle decelerations and accelerations.
Vertical offsets can be caused by wheel wear, pitching, differences of vertical load etc. An initial vertical offset
of 40 mm is regarded to be sufficient for this demonstration.
Overriding constraint may be provided by:
a) provision of anti-climb units (with associated coupler collapse/shear out);
b) bar couplers between vehicles with movement constraint;
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
13
c) train unit configuration (e.g. articulated vehicles at intermediate interfaces).
6.3 Survival space, intrusion and egress
6.3.1 Requirements
The structure forming the survival spaces shall remain intact and resist the maximum forces exerted upon it
during the full collapse sequence of the energy absorbing elements. Local plastic deformation and local
buckling are acceptable if it is demonstrated that they are sufficiently limited, so as not to reduce the survival
spaces beyond the limits specified below.
When subject to the defined scenarios, the reduction in length of passenger survival spaces shall be limited to
not more than 50 mm over any 5 m length or the plastic strain shall be limited to 10 % in these areas. If a 5 m
length is located right to the end of the vehicle structure it can reduce in length up to 100 mm. In areas of
temporary occupation, such as access vestibules, that are utilised as crumple zones, the longitudinal
clearance in an area with a lateral dimension greater than 250 mm shall not be reduced by more than 30 % in
that zone. Figure 1 gives an example of areas where longitudinal clearance requirements apply and those
where they do not.

Key
1 vehicle end 4 maximum lateral dimension of 250 mm
2 seating area (passenger survival space) 5 longitudinal clearance not required
3 area of temporary occupation (e.g. end vestibule) 6 longitudinal clearance required
Figure 1 Example for clearance requirement of crumple zones in areas of temporary occupation
(e.g. vestibule)
There shall be a survival space for the driver (and other cab occupant). This shall either:
surround each fixed seat with a minimum clearance ahead of the seat (measured on its centreline) as
shown in Figure 2 (with the seat in its median position),
or
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
14
adjacent to the main seating position maintain a length and width of at least 0,75 m and at least 80 % of
the original height between the nominal floor and ceiling levels.
NOTE One adjacent survival space per cab is sufficient. The survival space may be located outside the nominal cab
area provided that there is immediate access to it.

Key
h = 300 mm
1 clearance profile
Figure 2 Driver's seat clearance zone
The inside face of the windscreen shall be supported along its edges by overlapping the structure of the
drivers cab to limit intrusion in case of a collision.
At least one escape route (via a designated egress door or escape window) shall be maintained for every
survival space. The deformation of the structure under the defined collision scenarios shall not prohibit the use
of the escape routes.
The deformation of the structure should not obviously cause any vehicle equipment or parts (e.g. drivers
desk, windscreens) to encroach into the designated survival spaces during the design collision scenarios. The
structure immediately ahead of the drivers survival space should, as far as practical, not fail in a manner that
itself creates an additional hazard (e.g. exposed fracture surfaces and protrusions should be avoided).
The driver should be located behind the designated structural collapse zone.
The provision of support to the windscreen does not require that the windscreen has to remain intact during a
collision.
6.4 Deceleration limit/collision pulse
6.4.1 Requirement
The mean longitudinal deceleration in the survival spaces shall be limited to 5 g for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2
and 7,5 g for Scenario 3.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
15
The method of determining the mean deceleration for each considered vehicle in the train unit shall
correspond to the time from when the net contact force on the vehicle exceeds zero to the time when it next
falls again to zero.
The ultimate strength of the equipment attachments shall be consistent with the highest mean deceleration
level that the vehicle experiences due to the above scenarios.
NOTE For decelerations up to 5 g the difference between the proof and ultimate strength requirements of many
engineering materials will ensure that this requirement is achieved without detailed analysis. For accelerations above
5 g the attachments of critical items of equipments should be analysed.
The deceleration of a vehicle is determined by the magnitude of the net contact force. Force levels
significantly higher than the average are permissible provided they are not sustained. If an excessive time
elapses before the net contact force falls to zero then the time in which it falls to 10 % of the maximum force
should be used.
The ultimate strength requirements consistent with the above acceleration levels may be greater than the
strength requirements specified in EN 12663.
6.5 Obstacle deflector
6.5.1 Requirement
An obstacle deflector shall be fitted to leading vehicles of category C-I. For other categories an obstacle
deflector shall be fitted unless the main vehicle structure is sufficiently low to perform the same function or the
risk due to this scenario is broadly acceptable.
The obstacle deflector needs to be of sufficient size to sweep obstacles clear of the path of the bogie. It shall
be a continuous structure and shall be designed so as not to deflect objects upwards or downwards. Under
normal operating conditions, the lower edge of the obstacle deflector shall be as close to the track as the
vehicle movements and gauge line will permit.
The structural performance requirements for the obstacle deflector and its attachment to the vehicle structure
are specified in Table 3 and below, namely:
each static load shall be applied independently in the vehicle longitudinal direction. The force shall be
applied over an area of 0,5 m wide and up to 0,5 m high from the bottom edge of the obstacle deflector.
(Note that the available height may be limited by cut-outs for the coupler or other equipment). The line of
action of the resultant force shall be horizontal and through the centre of each loaded area up to a
maximum height of 500 mm above rail level. Figure 3 illustrates these requirements;
there shall be no significant permanent deformation (as defined in EN 12663) of the obstacle deflector
and its fixations to the car body due to each static load applied separately;
if the obstacle deflector is overloaded it shall not deform plastically in such a way that it becomes
detached or itself becomes a danger. This can be shown, for example, by demonstrating that the
deflector can absorb the energy corresponding to the specified central static load acting over a
deformation of 120 mm.
The obstacle deflector shall remain clear of track and other local infrastructure features when deforming under
load to the extent required by this European Standard.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
16
Dimensions in metres

Key

loaded area 0,25 m
2

1 centre load resultant position
2 side load resultant position (both sides)
3 top of rail
4 coupler clearance (if applicable)
Figure 3 Obstacle deflector load application

The obstacle deflector should be placed as near to the front of the leading vehicle as the functional design will
permit so that it sweeps aside debris from the initial impact and reduces the risk of them falling beneath it and
into the path of the wheels.
In plan view the deflector should approximate to a V profile with an included angle of not more than 160. It
can be designed with a compatible geometry to function also as a snow plough.
In some operating conditions there is a significant risk of derailment from substantial obstacles that will pass
under an obstacle deflector. To address this risk, bogie-mounted guards may be fitted immediately in front of
the wheels on leading bogies. If such guards are required they should be designed in accordance with
national standards, infrastructure controllers regulations or operators specifications where such exist.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
17
7 Validation of crashworthiness
The passive safety objectives are given for a complete train unit. It is impractical to evaluate the complete train
unit behaviour by testing therefore the achievement of the objectives can be validated by dynamic simulation,
which corresponds to each of the design collisions scenarios. The use of numerical simulation alone is
sufficient for accurate prediction of structural behaviour in areas of limited deformation. However, for areas of
large deformation only, the validation programme shall include the validation of the numerical models by
appropriate tests (combined method). Annex B describes the model validation requirements in more detail.
Conformance to the requirements of Scenario 4 can be demonstrated directly by test.
The main steps for this combined method for a new design of structure are given below.
Step 1: Test of energy absorbing devices and crumple zones:
Testing on full-size test specimens shall be carried out in order to assure the performance of the crashworthy
elements and give inputs for calibration of the models.
The test configuration shall be defined with respect to the following objectives:
reflect as close as possible to one of the scenarios;
make calibration easy;
utilise the maximum capacity of energy absorption;
show relevant/particular behaviour of the design.
It is permissible to verify the performance of inter-vehicle devices, energy absorption elements and anti-
climbing devices or arrangements by appropriate individual full-size tests.
Step 2: Calibration of the numerical model of the structure:
After carrying out the full size tests described in Step 1, the supplier shall calibrate the numerical model by
comparing the test results and the corresponding numerical simulation.
The validation of the model shall use two essential conditions for the comparison between test and numerical
simulation:
the behaviour of the energy absorption devices, crumple zones as tested, and the sequence of the
phenomena of energy absorption;
detailed analyses of all test results and more especially of the force levels and displacements of the
important features of the structure.
Step 3: Numerical simulation of the design collision scenarios:
A 3D model of each type of vehicle structure that will be subjected to permanent deformation shall be created.
This model shall include the calibrated model of the driver's cab or vehicle end deforming structures from
Step 2, and a complete 3D model of the rest of the car body structure. Normally only the first or the first two
vehicle models shall incorporate energy absorbing elements and deforming structure in detail. The remaining
vehicles of the train unit can be represented as lumped mass/spring systems etc. representing their overall
behaviour.
If the car bodies are symmetric about the longitudinal centre line, it is permissible to consider a half-model.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
18
Finally simulations of the whole design collision scenarios (unless demonstrated directly by test) shall be
carried out in order to have the vehicles approved against the requirements of this European Standard. The
complete train unit model shall contain the validated vehicle models as described above.
It is permissible to use a reduced validation programme if the key features of the design have been previously
validated and if:
any modifications do not significantly change the mechanisms providing the passive safety,
or
the safety margins against the requirements will accommodate any resulting uncertainties.
However, in this case the crashworthiness performance shall be validated to a level appropriate to the degree
of change by:
comparisons with a similar solution (via engineering drawings, test results and other technical data),
or
a combination of computer simulations/calculations (e.g. FEA or multi-body modelling) and appropriate
testing.
Data from quasi-static tests shall only be used to determine the behaviour of the energy absorbing
mechanisms where the result is not rate dependent, or where appropriate adjustment or validation can be
made to ensure the correct dynamic characteristics.
The use of a reduced validation programme shall be justified. This justification shall demonstrate that the
programme used is equivalent to a complete validation programme as outlined above.
NOTE In any practical structure there are likely to be significant perturbations in the collapse force but it should have a
generally increasing trend. It is usually necessary to control the material properties to tighter limits than is normal in the
material specifications (with more closely defined upper and lower bounds) in order to achieve consistent collapse
behaviour.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
19
Annex A
(informative)

Parameters of design collision scenarios
A.1 Introduction
To enable the crashworthiness requirements for a vehicle to be defined and assessed it is necessary to
determine the design collision scenarios in terms of impact speed and the type and mass of potential
obstacles.
For normal European operating conditions comparable with those of the collision accident analysis, see [1],
[2], [4] and [5], the parameters of the design collision scenarios and their related crashworthiness
requirements listed in Clause 5 are applicable. The parameters are presented for each of the vehicle
categories specified in Clause 4.
Scenario 1 was chosen since train-to-train collisions result in the highest number of serious injuries. The
considered collision is between identical train units.
Scenario 2 represents a collision with current classical buffered rolling stock when working in a mixed traffic
environment (or with buffer-stops).
Scenario 3 is a type of accident that is more difficult to prevent by active safety measures. The significance of
this type of collision is dependent on the prevalence of level crossings, the operating speed and emergency
braking rate of the train and the sighting distance.
Scenario 4 applies when a train unit collides with an obstacle having its centre of mass located below the level
of the train unit headstock. There is an increased risk of derailment that can be reduced if an obstacle
deflector is provided on the train unit.
The design limiting case for each scenario depends on the train control and active safety systems and the
features of the infrastructure as well as the masses and operational speeds of the rail vehicles themselves.
No specific requirements are set to cover side impacts and ejection or intrusion through the side structure.
The appropriate requirements for the specific technical and operational conditions of the former Soviet states
(e.g. use of SA-3 automatic couplers) should be derived on a case-by-case agreement.
In some cases the design collision scenarios and their parameters for some operations may be contained in
regulations. In such cases the regulations should be complied with and may be taken as the appropriate
limiting case.
Where there are no regulations specifying the limiting conditions and where the design collision scenario
parameters in Table 2 are not applicable, the operator should demonstrate that suitable and sufficient
provision has been made to protect staff and passengers from the risks addressed by this European
Standard, and appropriate techniques should be employed to assess:
the probability of each collision scenario,
the severity of each collision scenario and
the reduction in risk achievable from each active and passive element of the proposed collision protection
systems.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
20
A.2 Determining the design collision scenarios for collision risks which differ from
the normal European operations
A.2.1 Design collision scenarios
This subclause gives guidance on how design collision scenarios may be established where the design
collision scenario parameters in Clause 5 are not applicable and in the absence of other regulations.
Clause 5 requires the reference collision scenarios to be considered.
To determine the limiting case for each design collision scenario it is necessary to analyse the risks based on
the characteristics of the train unit and the characteristics of the collision obstacle, at the point of impact, and
the probability of a collision occurring, in the context of the particular railway system.
The probability of a particular collision scenario occurring will be derived from consideration of the type of
railway, its operating characteristics and the contribution of active collision protection systems.
The characteristics of each scenario will be defined by the following parameters:
train unit configuration;
masses of the train unit;
mechanical characteristics of the vehicles making up the train unit, including stiffness, coupling system,
energy absorption capabilities etc.;
speed at impact;
characteristics of a collision obstacle.
A.2.2 Risk analysis
Analysis of the risks arising from each of the potential collision scenarios should be undertaken in accordance
with the requirements of any applicable regulations.
The risk assessment should consider the collision risks presented by the complete railway system within
which the railway vehicle to be designed is intended for operation, including the contribution of control and
signalling systems (active safety).
The principal requirement for the risk analysis is to ensure that the risks arising from collisions involving new
train unit types are fully understood and that the risks are no higher than with existing train units. All
reasonable actions should be taken to minimise the risks from collisions.
In the absence of regulations the train operator should be responsible for ensuring appropriate risk analysis is
conducted to define the design collision scenarios, and provide input regarding the characteristics of the
railway and obstacles. The train operator may engage the train supplier or an alternative specialist
organisation to undertake the analysis.
The train supplier should provide input to the risk analysis regarding the characteristics of the new train units.
It is recommended that both causitive and consequential risk analyses are used, based on the methods as
defined in EN 50126-1 and taking into account a statistical analysis of relevant collision history data (see
A.2.5).
Available analysis techniques include:
Hazard and Operability (HAZOP) studies;
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
21
Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (FMEA);
Fault Tree Analysis (FTA).
Where existing analyses are available for similar vehicles operating in a similar context, it is sufficient to
review the applicability of the previous analyses.
A.2.3 Factors to be considered in the risk assessment
Factors which may affect the impact speed of the train unit include:
the maximum operational speed of the train unit;
the type of operation and the signal sighting and train braking distances;
the safety signalling system, including the provision and characteristics of active safety systems.
Where Automatic Train Protection (ATP) systems are in use, approach to another train unit or other obstacle
may be strictly controlled and speed limited to a very low level. Speed restrictions following failure of the
control system should also be considered.
Other factors to be considered are:
sections of railway where bi-directional running occurs;
characteristics of the operational control systems;
signal and hazard sighting distances;
maximum emergency braking rates.
Factors which may affect the types of collision obstacle to be considered include:
Is it a closed railway - such as a rapid transit system, with only one train type?
Is it an open railway with mixed traffic?
Are there any level crossings? - If not there is no need to consider the road crossing collision scenarios.
Is the railway a tramway with street operation?
Is the railway protected from trespassers?
Is there fencing? Is it secure? Will it keep out large animals?
Is there a relevant history of people placing obstacles on the line (either by accident or maliciously)? What
type and size of obstacle?
Is there a relevant history of obstacles on the track resulting from natural features in the vicinity of the
railway?
A.2.4 Collisions following derailment
Collisions following derailment are relatively uncommon events and it is not possible to predict accurately the
behaviour of a derailed train or establish associated limiting case collision scenarios. The protection provided
under the requirements of this European Standard will mitigate the effects of such incidents, but further
consideration of the effects is outside the scope of this European Standard.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
22
A.2.5 Bibliography of relevant accident information
The following are documents containing relevant collision history data and were available at the date of
publication of this European Standard:
Vehicle category C-I; see [1], [2] and [3];
Vehicle category C-III and C-IV; see [4], [5], [6] and [7].
These examples may be used as a basis for definition of the design collision scenarios for new train units, but
the risk analysis has to ensure the scenarios and consequential risks are appropriate to the actual operating
conditions and characteristics of the new train units.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
23
Annex B
(normative)

Requirements of a validation programme
B.1 Test specifications
B.1.1 Test programme
The purpose of the test programme is to validate that the numerical model used in the final demonstration
correctly reproduces the behaviour of the energy absorbing mechanisms. The tests shall reflect the energy
absorption requirements of Scenario 1 or Scenario 2 where these apply to the design, but this requirement
does NOT require the actual scenario to be reproduced exactly in the tests.
Calibration tests shall be carried out on each different type of vehicle end assembly involved in energy
absorption. Where end assemblies use the same energy absorbing principles it is not necessary to perform
separate calibrations.
It is permissible to perform separate tests on energy absorbing elements that perform independently.
All interactive energy absorption mechanisms shall be included in the same test.
Tests shall normally absorb at least 80 % of the maximum energy required to be absorbed by the mechanism
under test. If a lower value is used in the test it shall be justified and shall not be less than 50 % of the
required energy.
Full size tests shall have sufficient energy to ensure:
all the mechanisms included in the test are initiated;
in dynamic tests the impact speed is at least 50 % of the initiation speed in the scenario;
all mechanisms that have not otherwise been validated over the full range are proven in the test.
NOTE Tests on components whose behaviour is very sensitive to speed (e.g. viscous damper elements) should be
conducted at the effective scenario impact speed.
B.1.2 Acceptance criteria for calibration/validation tests
To enable the vehicle numerical model to be validated, tests shall be performed with an appropriate level of
accuracy, comparable parameters shall be measured and the results shall be fully documented. Acceptable
tests will include:
the measurement of forces, collision speed, decelerations and deformations, for performance
comparisons (energies, deformations etc.) of the various energy absorption devices and mechanisms
during structure and component tests;
dimensional measurements before and after tests in areas defined and agreed prior to the test;
records of the test configuration, general views and detailed drawings using, where necessary, high-
speed video allowing comparison of the kinematics of the test with the corresponding simulation;
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
24
the speed of impact (measured to at least 0,5 km/h) and the mass of the test vehicle (measured to at
least 5 %);
the uncertainties on the actual measurements during the tests as they relate to the corresponding
parameters of the numerical model shall be quantified and presented in the report;
NOTE It is recommended that key reference values of essential speed, force and displacement parameters are
able to be confirmed by at least two independent recording systems. It is also recommended that some other
essential recordings are duplicated (e.g. impact time, accelerations, speeds).
the test signals should be filtered by a minimum 1 000 Hz low pass filter.
B.2 Numerical simulations
B.2.1 Numerical model validation
Models used in the simulations to demonstrate compliance with the scenarios shall be based on the same
modelling techniques as those used for comparison with the tests. The modelling is considered to be
acceptable if, when compared to the tests, the following criteria are achieved:
the same sequence of events occurs during the collision (i.e. where several phases of energy absorption
occur they correspond);
the same observed deformation patterns occur;
the level of energy dissipated by the model is within 10 % of the test value;
the simulation produces a global force curve, (with peaks and troughs and levels etc.) which exhibits the
same general characteristics as measured in the test. (The presence of high frequency transients shall be
removed by filtering the response with a 180 Hz low pass filter when making this comparison.)
When the collision energy is absorbed by a number of distinct mechanisms or progressive stages the
following criteria for comparison shall apply to each as well as the whole:
the overall displacement (stroke) of the simulation is within 10 % of the test value;
the mean force, determined from the force-displacement graph shall be within 10 % of the test value.
Any uncertainties in the measurements made during testing and also in the numerical modelling shall be
quantified and presented in the validation report. Any gaps observed in the calibration parameters that were
previously identified shall be quantified, justified and explained (along with the differences between any initial
simulations and the tests results).
NOTE Good agreement between the test and simulation results depends mainly from the quality of the numerical
model and the precision of the test kinematics. The material properties of the crumple zones should reflect the actual
behaviour of the materials used. Nominal material values can be used in other parts of the model. In the ideal case, only
the mass and the speed should be adjusted in the simulation in order to match the results of the calibration test.
B.2.2 Simulation modelling
The simulations of the reference scenarios have to be performed with numerical models that faithfully replicate
the geometry of the structures and energy absorbing devices. The effects of couplers and buffers on the
collision behaviour shall be represented. To be considered valid, the modelling of the areas of energy
absorption (vehicle crumple zones) of the principal vehicles in the reference scenarios shall be based on the
same modelling techniques, degree of detail and accuracy of representation as that used in the simulations of
the tests.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
25
For all scenario simulations, a calculation report shall be produced that contains a description of the scenarios
and detailed descriptions of both the obstacle and the rolling stock modelling. The model validation procedure
shall be included (either directly or by reference to other documentation).
Conformation of compliance to each scenario by simulation shall be documented in the form of demonstrable
measurable objectives, as well as the overall behaviour of the rolling stock according to the specifications.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
26
Annex C
(normative)

Reference obstacle definitions
C.1 80 t wagon
For the collisions between a train unit and a buffered wagon, the wagon shall be represented by a mass of
80 t which has only one degree of freedom in the translational x direction and the interface geometry as
shown in Figure C.1. The end wall shall be assumed as rigid. It shall be equipped with side buffers with the
initial dimensions shown, a stroke of 105 mm and the force-displacement characteristic indicated in
Figure C.2.

Dimensions in millimetres

Key
1 wagon end
2 top of rail
Figure C.1 Buffered wagon interface
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
27

Key
Y force 2 buffers, in kN
X displacement, in mm
Figure C.2 Wagon buffer characteristic
C.2 C-III Reference obstacle
The regional train is to be represented by a rigid mass of 129 t which has only one degree of freedom in the
translational x direction, a rigid vertical face and a central coupler with the dimensions as shown in Figure C.3.
The height of the train coupler is centred at 1 000 mm above the rail. The train coupler has the characteristic
given in Figure C.4 and an energy absorption capacity of 530 kJ.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
28

Key
1 top of rail
2 coupler representation
Figure C.3 Peri-urban tram obstacle

Key
Y force, in kN
X displacement, in mm
Figure C.4 Coupler characteristic
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
29
C.3 Large deformable obstacle
For the collisions between a train unit and a large heavy obstacle at a level crossing, the equivalent
deformable obstacle shall take the form of a complete numerical model represented in the specific crash
simulation software.
The obstacle to be used is unrestrained and is illustrated in Figure C.5. It is defined in terms of the following
characteristics:
a) geometry, as indicated in Figure C.5;
b) mass = 15 000 kg;
c) centre of mass at 1 750 mm above rail level;
d) parts A and B may be modelled with or without cover sheets;
e) continuous axial uniformity of density and stiffness;
f) zero friction to the ground;
g) if friction at the obstacle surface is modelled, it should be taken as 0,2;
h) the train centre coupler at the cab end shall be omitted in the simulation with this obstacle.
NOTE 1 The obstacle density may be varied in the z direction and the stiffness in the x direction to achieve the required
properties.

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
30

Key
1 top of rail
A, B parts of obstacle
Figure C.5 Deformable obstacle geometry

Key
Y longitudinal force, in kN
X displacement of the sphere (x direction), in mm
Figure C.6 Deformable obstacle stiffness

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
31
The stiffness of this obstacle shall match at least to the characteristics of the longitudinal force-displacement
curve given in Figure C.6 when impacted at its centre by the solid, uniform sphere defined below:
a) impactor shape solid, uniform sphere of 3 m diameter (i.e. centre of mass at 1,5 m above rail level);
b) impactor mass 50 000 kg;
c) impact speed 30 m/s;
d) impactor to have only longitudinal translation freedom (x direction);
e) longitudinal force-displacement characteristic shall be above the minimum curve given in Figure C.6.
NOTE 2 The force-displacement characteristic may be filtered by a 60 Hz low pass filter in meeting this condition. (There
is no specified requirement for the vertical component of the contact force.)
C.4 C-IV Corner collision obstacle
The corner obstacle for tram collisions is as shown in Figure C.7 below.

Figure C.7 Tram corner collision obstacle
The obstacle shall be rigid and cover the complete vehicle cross section (in projection).
The obstacle has only two degrees of freedom with translation in the x direction and y direction (i.e. no
rotational freedom). The mass of the obstacle is 3 000 kg.
The aim of this assessment is to investigate the behaviour of the vehicle front end. Therefore the requirements
apply only to the vehicle structure ahead of the leading bogie centre.
For this simplified simulation, the tram body shall be restrained to have no freedom in the y direction at the
main body-bogie attachment points and the forces/stresses/deformations generated at these constraints shall
not form part of the evaluation.

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
32
Annex D
(normative)

Reference train definitions Defined formations
D.1 Reference trains for locomotive, power head, driving trailer and coach design
A reference train shall be used for the design of locomotives, power heads, driving trailers and coaches that
do not form part of a fixed rake of vehicles. The sections below define the reference train requirements for
different types of vehicles.
The modelling rules given in Annex B shall be adopted in the simulations incorporating reference trains.
D.2 Locomotive design
For locomotive design the reference train shall be a single rigid wagon (see Figure D.1). This applies to
locomotives used for freight operations and also for those used for passenger operations.
NOTE Since the locomotive operates in both directions the end energy absorption characteristic required to meet
Scenario 2 will exist at both ends and will provide sufficient energy absorption to meet the requirements of a crashworthy
passenger train.

Key

energy absorbing vehicle ends
m
1
actual collision mass of locomotive to be assessed
m
2
80 t
The wagon is assumed rigid and has the interface characteristics as given in C.1.
Figure D.1 Locomotive reference train
D.3 Power head and driving trailer design
For power head and driving trailer design the reference train shall be a rake of four vehicles behind the design
vehicle (see Figure D.2). The interface ahead of each vehicle shall be capable of absorbing energy. This gives
the reference train the characteristics defined below.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
33

Key

m
1
actual collision mass of leading vehicle to be assessed
m
2

average collision mass of the heaviest class of coaches to be operated. If no information is available
for m
2
it may be assumed to be the same as m
1
. If m
1
is a power head of mass greater than 50 t, m
2

can be taken as 50 t for most European main line operations
The assumed reference vehicle force-displacement characteristic shall be consistent with the coupling
arrangement and the class of vehicles being considered. The characteristic of the intermediate end of the
power head/driving trailer may be used for the reference vehicles in the absence of other information.
Figure D.2 Power head/driving trailer reference train

A power head or driving trailer designed in combination with this reference train may be considered to meet
the requirements of this European Standard without further assessment when operating with any passenger
rolling stock that also meets this European Standard.
NOTE The characteristics of the vehicles of the reference train are not intended to specify any requirements for the
crashworthiness design of coaches. They are intended only to be used as a standardised simulation condition for the
power head or driving trailer crashworthiness design.
D.4 Individual coach design
For individual coach design the reference train shall be a rake of vehicles. An individual coach design shall be
able to run in any position in a train formation. The position behind the leading vehicle can be assumed as the
worst case. The reference train arrangement shown in Figure D.3 provides a suitable approximation to this
condition.
Therefore, the reference train for the design all individual intermediate coaches shall consist of:
a stationary half vehicle against solid wall;
four impacting coaches (including the coach being assessed) that start at half the speed of Scenario 1;
the coach to be assessed is the leading moving vehicle.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
34

Key

1 stationary half vehicle
m
1
actual collision mass of the coach to be assessed
m
2

average collision mass of the heaviest class of coaches with which it is to be operated. If no
information is available for m
2
it may be assumed to be the same as m
1
or 50 t, whichever is the
greater, for most European main line operations
The assumed reference vehicle force-displacement characteristic shall be consistent with the coupling
arrangement and the class of vehicles being considered. The characteristic of the vehicle being assessed may
also be used for the reference vehicles in the absence of other information.
Figure D.3 Coach simplified assessment

Any coaches at least complying with this scenario can be considered to meet this European Standard if
operated together with each other and any compatible leading vehicle that also meets the requirements of this
European Standard.
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
35
Annex E
(informative)

Migration rule for this European Standard
The obligation to apply a standard can be stated by law, a regulation or a private contract, but cannot be
stated in the standard itself. However, the stakeholders who are represented in the CEN Technical Committee
responsible for the standard are of the opinion that the standard should be applied as follows.
Unless specifically called for by a European regulation or TSI, the standard, for which the CEN received a
mandate by the EC under the interoperability directives, should NOT be used for homologation and
certification or authorisation for putting into service purposes of rolling stock, when such rolling stock falls
under one of the following exemption categories:
rolling stock that is purchased under a contract already signed or was at the final phase of the
tendering procedure at the date of publication (dop) of this European Standard;
renewed or upgraded rolling stock where the work that would be necessary to achieve compliance
requires structural alterations that would necessitate re-validation of the vehicle structural integrity.
Also exempt during a transitional period are:
rolling stock that are purchased under options of contracts already signed, or at the final phase of a
tendering procedure, at the date of publication (dop) of this European Standard;
rolling stock built in accordance with an existing design approval, having received a homologation,
certification or an authorisation for putting into service within the European Union before the date of
publication (dop) of this European Standard, which is purchased under contracts signed during this
transitional period.
The proposed transitional period of 4 years should start from dop.
These exemptions should continue to apply during the whole operational life of the rolling stock concerned,
and would also include parts for maintenance and repair, as long as this rolling stock is neither renewed nor
upgraded.

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
36
Annex ZA
(informative)

! !! !Relationship between this European Standard and the Essential
Requirements of EU Directive 2008/57/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the interoperability of the rail
system within the Community (Recast)
This European Standard has been prepared under a mandate given to CEN/CENELEC/ETSI by the European
Commission and the European Free Trade Association to provide a means of conforming to Essential
Requirements of the Directive 2008/57/EC
1)
.
Once this standard is cited in the Official Journal of the European Union under that Directive and has been
implemented as a national standard in at least one Member State, compliance with the clauses of this
standard given in Table ZA.1 for High Speed Rolling Stock and Table ZA.2 for Locomotives and Passenger
Rolling Stock confers, within the limits of the scope of this standard, a presumption of conformity with the
corresponding Essential Requirements of that Directive and associated EFTA regulations.

1) This Directive 2008/57/EC adopted on 17 June 2008 is a recast of the previous Directives 96/48/EC Interoperability of
the trans-European high-speed rail system and 2001/16/EC Interoperability of the trans-European conventional rail
system and revisions thereof by 2004/50/EC Corrigendum to Directive 2004/50/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council of 29 April 2004 amending Council Directive 96/48/EC on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail
system and Directive 2001/16/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the interoperability of the trans-
European conventional rail system
EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
37
Table ZA.1 Correspondence between this European Standard, the HS TSI RST published in the
OJEU dated 26 March 2008 and Directive 2008/57/EC
Clause/ sub-clauses of this
European Standard
Chapter//annexes of the
TSI
Corresponding text,
articles//annexes of the
Directive 2008/57/EC
Comments
The following clauses of this
standard are applicable, but
only to crashworthiness design
category C-I vehicles
according to Table 1 which
belong to Class 1 or Class 2
vehicles according to HS TSI
RST:
1 to 6.1
6.5
7
Annex B: B.1; B.2.2
Annex C
Annex D
NOTE Vehicles in the
crashworthiness design
categories C-I with a top speed
of < 190 km/h, C-II, C-III and
C-IV are out of the field of
application of this TSI.
4 Characteristics of the
subsystem
4.2 Functional and technical
specification of the
subsystem
4.2.2 Structure and
mechanical parts
4.2.2.3 Strength of vehicle
structure
Annex A Passive safety
crashworthiness
Annex III, Essential
requirements
1 General requirements
1.1 Safety
Clauses 1.1.1, 1.1.3
2 Requirements specific to
each subsystem
2.4 Rolling stock
2.4.1 Safety 1

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
38
Table ZA.2 Correspondence between this European Standard, the CR LOC and PASS RST TSI (final
draft Rev 4.0 dated 24 November 2009) and Directive 2008/57/EC
Clause/ sub-clauses
of this European
Standard
Chapter//annexes of
the TSI
Corresponding text,
articles//annexes of
the Directive
2008/57/EC
Comments
All the clauses related
to crashworthiness
design category CI are
applicable unless
specified otherwise in
the TSI.

4 Characteristics of the
Rolling stock subsystem
4.2 Functional and
technical specifications of
the subsystem
4.2.2 Structure and
mechanical parts
4.2.2.5 Passive safety

Annex III, Essential
requirements
1 General requirements
1.1 Safety
Clauses 1.1.1, 1.1.3
2 Requirements specific
to each subsystem
2.4 Rolling stock
2.4.1 Safety 1

Parts of EN 15227:2008
are quoted in the TSI and
are therefore mandatory.
Application of scenarios 1
and 2 to heavy haul
locomotives used only for
freight wagon and fitted
with centre couplers con-
forming to the Willison or
Janney principle is an
open point.
The assessment of con-
formity of locomotives
with central cabs with the
requirements related to
scenario 3 is an open
point.

WARNING Other requirements and other EU Directives may be applicable to the product(s) falling within
the scope of this standard."

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010 (E)
39
Bibliography
[1] ERRI B205.1/DT 357 Report: Analysis of Collision Accidents Statistical Analysis of Collision
Accidents in Europe during 1991 1995. Sponsoring body: UIC Passenger Commission.
November 1997
[2] SAFETRAIN Train Crashworthiness for Europe, Sub-task 1.1 Collision Risk Analysis, Final report
[3] RAILWAY SAFETY, HSEs Annual Report on the safety record of the railways in Great Britain during
2000, The Stationery Office
[4] SAFETRAM Technical Report of the WP 1: LRV Statistics, December 2000
[5] SAFETRAM Technical Report of the WP 1: Identification of Reference Accident Scenarios for City and
Periurban Trams, July 2002
[6] SAFETRAM Technical Report of the WP 1: Statistical and Risk Analysis of Accidents for Periurban
Trams, January 2002 (DB) and February 2002 (SNCF)
[7] Dissertation, University of Hannover Theoretical Observations of Collisions on Level Crossings,
Fser, S; Shaker Verlag Aachen, 2002
[8] EN 50126-1, Railway applications The specification and demonstration of reliability, availability,
maintainability and safety (RAMS) Part 1: Basic requirements and generic process

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

EN15227 - Crashworthiness of Railway Vehicle Body

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN15227 - Crashworthiness of Railway Vehicle Body

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN 15227:2008+A1:2010: Railway

You might also like