Network Rail steps back from geofencing over safety fears
- Reference: 1710229089
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2024/03/12/network_rail_pulls_geofencing_over/
- Source link:
Network Rail and Connected Places Catapult were given the [1]award at an industry event in London last June.
Three suppliers were part of the collaboration: OnWave, Track Tracker, and Tended.
[2]
However, less than a year later, Network Rail has issued a safety advisory
[3]PDF
to the effect that the technology was restricted from use as ALO (All Lines Open) warning devices.[4]
[5]
Network Rail has "limited to safeguarded areas of work" the Product Acceptance (PA) certificates for devices from all three suppliers: OnWave, Track Tracker and Tended.
The safety notice reads: "The Technology shall not be used as a virtual fence for worker notification (personal warning) on ALO (Any line Open)."
[6]
Oops.
Problems were identified during trials at Network Rail's Milton Keynes offices in January 2024.
A geofence is a virtual perimeter around a given area. In this instance, workers have a wearable device that keeps track of their position using data provided by a Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS), such as GPS. Stray into the wrong place, and the device will alert the user that they've wandered out of a designated safe zone.
[7]Lift us up where we belong: UK's Network Rail puts elevators online
[8]Network Rail blames Atos for downtime
[9]This 125mph train is fitted with LASERS. Sadly no sharks, though
[10]Corporate execs: Get back, get back, to the office where you once belonged
It's a neat system, although we can imagine some downsides – alerts, for example, can be configured individually. [11]According to one of the manufacturers, "In certain cases they could be sent to other members of the project staff, improving visibility and resilience."
We're sure nobody would dream of following the example set by certain online retailers of tracking workers' movements for purposes other than safety.
[12]
Keeping an eye on workers aside, the technology as implemented appears to have some serious flaws, starting with "Geo-fence area within the system not aligned with intended physical boundary," according to Network Rail's advisory. Other issues include problematic response times for alarms and the worrying "Inconsistency between system dashboards and physical locations."
Network Rail - the owner and infrastructure manager of the majority of Britain's railway network - described the issues as "general" and noted that each supplier had at least one of the problems.
We asked one of the vendors, OnWave, for its take on the situation but have not received a response.
Network Rail, told us: "We are keen to expand our use of geofencing technology on the railway and are undertaking testing to support that ambition. We've temporarily restricted our use of some aspects of the tech while that testing takes place but it still has a strong role to play in the safety of our people."
The Register understands that the restriction relates to work taking place alongside an open railway line, where site wardens remain the primary protection for workers. Geofencing wearables are handy but not the only source of protection. ®
Thanks to former vulture Gareth Corfield for the tip.
Get our [13]Tech Resources
[1] https://cp.catapult.org.uk/news/award-win-for-railway-safety-innovation/
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZfA1yrKKzWZPVXzUFf8HIAAAAEY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://safety.networkrail.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Safety-Advice-NRA24-05-Geofencing-Immediate-Advice.pdf
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZfA1yrKKzWZPVXzUFf8HIAAAAEY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZfA1yrKKzWZPVXzUFf8HIAAAAEY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZfA1yrKKzWZPVXzUFf8HIAAAAEY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2020/10/16/network_rail_put_lifts_online/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2011/04/08/rail_systems_problems/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2014/11/10/network_rail_new_measurement_train_ride/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2022/12/16/return_to_office/
[11] https://www.onwave.com/network-rails-new-safety-measure-to-protect-track-workers/
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/applications&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZfA1yrKKzWZPVXzUFf8HIAAAAEY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: because...
You would only reopen the line when all the workers have left. If for example 19 out of the 20 workers have left the area, and the other one has gone offline but is still in the area, that isn't good enough.
Re: because...
But the gist of the article is that they want a system for use while the lines (tracks) are still in use. That needs to be far more resilient.
Plus, I imagine any form of GPS based system won't work in tunnels and would have limited use inside buildings.
Re: because...
It also may not be that reliable in areas with lots of skyscrapers..
Re: because...
Interesting they tested it at Milton Keynes, perhaps taking a train down to Euston and walking it through Euston throat - no skyscrapers but deep cuttings and multiple levels of track, would be a good test.
Re: because...
> But the gist of the article is that they want a system for use while the lines (tracks) are still in use.
Which requires location accuracy of 1ft or better and warning/alarm notification within seconds, combined with real-time update as the worker moves towards (or more importantly away from) safety.
However lower level of accuracy can be useful, if used in conjunction with other railway safe working practises. From memory one of the big (and easy to make) safety mistakes workers make is to step the wrong way of a line with an approaching train, only to encounter a train travelling in the opposite direction…
Re: because...
I remember a conference presentation a few years back of a cunning smart card based system for ensuring that tower crane operators could only operate cranes within parameters defined by their level of training and certification. The idea was that the operator's card, once inserted into the crane's console, would limit the extent of its operation. At question time, I asked whether there was any mechanism for ensuring that someone could not use another (potentially better qualified) operator's card. Silence ensued, then the speaker suggested that this was down to site wardens to check when workers reported on site. Incomplete solutions like this abound in the race to automate.
Safety in dangerous areas
....is very difficult.
Safe systems of work deserve time and experience being spent on them. In my view, on-site supervision by experienced personnel is essential. I can't really see technology doing the supervising but I can see robots doing the actual work.
Whilst revisiting safety procedures is important, it is more important to keep the object in mind.
Incoming in 3...2...1...0
The latest AI solution for the job of the 'Banksman'.
Most of the time they are the gatekeeper of PW works. Their experience is paramount to keeping the workers safe. I'm sure that someone will invent an AI model that will do away with this otherwise unproductive member of the PW crew.
IMHO and experience of working on the PW on a preserved railway, that would be total madness.
PW - Permanent Way
because...
... working in dangerous areas is expensive. You need the worker (s) and then safety officers / supervisors who stay in contact with control / despatch and that adds an expense. Many have been searching for the holy grail of technology that will identify that someone is working on site, but that technology can't make judgements, only decisions based on inputs.
Tag all the workers, have them chirp regularly, and how many missed chirps before you declare them as left the area, not in danger any more and reopen the line?
It's a solution I and many others have been seeking for years.