henry999 wrote:
但如果在減速後速度不快翻車出軌的狀況下有沒有用?
我直覺的認為如果鐵路列車在不至於出軌的減速下應該不至於造成乘客飛出座位, 頂多就是撞上前座的椅背, 如果是站的就會跌倒, 個人是覺得傷害不會太大, 頂多瘀青而已, 當然, 我沒有科學數據證實, 頂多只是猜測而已
個人積分：3067分
文章編號：70589111
個人積分：12128分
文章編號：70589336
個人積分：467分
文章編號：70590129
個人積分：12128分
文章編號：70590623
個人積分：9035分
文章編號：70591300
個人積分：12128分
文章編號：70592730
各國火車沒加裝安全帶原因~不是安全帶沒用,而是成本考量
搜尋安全帶成本:
千長途九巴擬上層裝安全帶 成本2億 新巴城巴：少人戴浪費資源
https://news.mingpao.com/pns/dailynews/web_tc/article/20180913/s00002/1536776610462
美國校車事件-要裝安全帶,最後還是成本考量沒強制
https://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20161123002405-260408
台灣這次出軌22亡,以賠600萬計,金額1.3億,全面加裝安全帶成本比這多很多
數十年來發生案例少,所以以後也不太可能加裝
個人積分：20386分
文章編號：70593216
個人積分：3549分
文章編號：70593656
個人積分：3933分
文章編號：70594247
個人積分：12128分
文章編號：70594542
cross R wrote:
你怎麼一直講不聽？...(恕刪)
這份報告並沒有說多少時速翻車,綁及無綁安全帶,乘客的存活率
時速200以上的高速鐵路與台灣最高營運速度130的普悠瑪能否相提並論!
Assessment of three-point passenger restraints (seatbelts) fitted to seats on rail vehicles. (T201 Report)
01/01/2007 00:00 PDF 1.3MB
This report details the work carried out under project T201, Three Point Seatbelt Assessment. It is part of a wider scope of work concerned with improving passenger safety including the prevention of ejections. This report follows on from the assessment of Two Point Seatbelts and the possible fitment of such devices to passenger carrying rail vehicles.
In conducting the research into the possible fitment of “Lap and Diagonal” (colloquially known as 3 point seatbelts) passenger restraint devices to seats in rail vehicles, an existing rail seat was used as a donor seat. This was extensively modified to accept the anchorages and fixtures required. It was found that the seat structure required additional stiffening to accommodate the increased load case of restraining an occupant, whilst also resisting impact from an unrestrained passenger from the rear.
It was found that injury outcomes for passengers choosing to wear restraints were substantially improved. However, there was a slight general worsening of injury outcomes for passengers choosing not to wear restraints as they impacted the modified (stiffened) seat.
There was a significant problem when considering unrestrained 5th percentile female passengers (those of small female and adolescent stature) choosing not to wear restraints when impacting the modified seat. Neck injury (Nij) in this group significantly increased to a level outside acceptable limits. It may be possible to reduce this feature if a new seat were designed which took account of this problem, however the difficulties and implications that this represents should not be underestimated.
In an earlier phase of this work, 6 recent significant accidents had been analysed in which it was established that there is a possible negative consequence to the fitment of any passenger restraint device. That is, in those accidents there had been areas of significant vehicle structural intrusion into the passenger compartment, to an extent where passengers' survivability would have been compromised, if they had been restrained in their seat by seatbelts. In the accidents investigated, the unrestrained passengers in these areas were thrown clear of this structural intrusion. Although this phenomenon is not fully understood, its importance and significance should be recognised. This report takes this phenomenon into account in establishing if there is a net benefit to passenger safety to be gained by fitting lap and diagonal restraints to seats on rail vehicles. At this time no net safety benefit can be identified.
校車寬度高度與火車廂相同,往前撞擊及翻車時人被拋飛動作是相同的,用校車影片舉例有何差別
youtube 也找不到train crash with seatbelts test影片
T201這報告是說乘客在被拋飛,彈射時的傷害,綁安全帶比無綁有明顯改善
負面是當車廂結構被破壞,硬物侵入車廂,乘客的座椅安全帶被限制在座位上，乘客的生存能力就會受到影響
那麼當火車翻車,時速在100KM內,翻車,車廂沒被硬物侵入,有安全帶會不會比較好
