## 4 Local Railway Level Crossing Case Study  
### System Definition  
The methodology described was applied for the implementation of a management tool for 96 crossings at the level of a 110 km narrow gauge Italian local line.  
The isolated local lines, unlike the national railway network, are characterized by limited economic and organizational resources, a strong heterogeneity of the environments crossed, and unique geometric and operational characteristics. Furthermore, this mode of transport serves short- and medium-range travel in environments where standard railways are unable to operate, crossing from highly built urban environments to highly tortuous mountain stretches.  
The line lacks Active Train Protection/Active Train Control (ATP/ATC) systems, and the position of the train is controlled by an axle counter block system between stations, requiring greater attention to the evaluation of faults and errors of the driver.  
All these factors contribute to generating vulnerable conditions in correspondence with the LCs, increasing the risk both for passengers and vehicle occupants.  
The strong heterogeneity is also found in the characteristics of the LCs along the line. In addition to the context in which they are found, the LCs are characterized by a variety linked to the protection systems they are equipped with, from fully automatic LCs and protected by barriers to the LCs without any type of active protection. In particular, it is possible to identify seven LC classes, as shown in Table 2.  
In Class 1 LCs, the passage of a train activates a detection pedal located before the crossing, which triggers the closure of the barriers and switches on the warning lights and acoustic signals. A second pedal, positioned after the LC, detects when the train has passed, opening the barriers and turning off the warning lights and acoustic signals.  
In Class 2 LCs, the barriers, warning lights, and acoustic signals are manually activated and deactivated by an operator. This is also the case for Class 3 LCs, though these crossings lack warning lights and acoustic signals.  
Class 4 and Class 7 LCs are located on private roads and are only used a few times a day by the road owners. Lastly, Class 5 and Class 6 LCs are open crossings, with Class 5 having acoustic or light warnings, while Class 6 has no such warnings.  
As illustrated in Figure 2, the average density of LCs along the line is quite high at 0.87 LCs/km, compared to the Italian average of 0.35 LCs/km. This density is particularly concentrated in urban areas, where higher traffic levels and limited visibility due to nearby buildings and obstacles increase the risk.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline
**Type** & **Description** & \(\mathbf{N}^{\circ}\) \\ \hline CLASS 1 & Automatic LC & 59 \\ \hline CLASS 2 & LC with manually activated barriers, acoustic signals, and & 2 \\  & warning lights & 3 \\ \hline CLASS 3 & LC with manually activated barriers without acoustic signals & 2 \\  & and warning lights & 2 \\ \hline CLASS 4 & Private LC protected by chains or gates & 2 \\ \hline CLASS 5 & LC with no barriers, with acoustic signals and warning lights & 2 \\ \hline CLASS 6 & LC with no barriers and no acoustic signals or warning lights & 2 \\ \hline CLASS 7 & Private LC with no barriers and no acoustic signals or & 2 \\  & warning lights & 2 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Level crossing classes.  
Figure 2: LC distribution and classes along the studied line.  
All these factors contribute to increased hazard exposure all over the line. In this context, the methodology described in this work consents to provide the basis for a tool capable of analyzing and optimally managing the safety level of each individual LC.