No abstract

No abstract

The identification of sites requiring investigation for possible safety treatment is one of the most important aspects of infrastructure safety management and has been the subject of considerable research aimed at improving the efficiency of the process. The more recent techniques use the empirical Bayes (EB) method for estimating the safety of specific sites. A refinement of the EB method that is conceptually sound and inherently simple to apply is the focus of this research. With this refinement, the EB estimate of the safety of a site is compared with its expected safety to determine the potential for safety improvement, which forms the basis for ranking sites for safety investigation. A comparative evaluation is provided of the proposed method against other EB methods and the more conventional ones, with data for signalized intersections and two-lane rural highway sections. The refined EB method is shown to be comparatively efficient.

A national-level safety analysis tool is needed to complement existing analytical tools for assessment of the safety impacts of roadway design alternatives. FHWA has sponsored the development of the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM), which is roadway design and redesign software that estimates the safety effects of alternative designs. Considering the importance of IHSDM in shaping the future of safety-related transportation investment decisions, FHWA justifiably sponsored research with the sole intent of independently validating some of the statistical models and algorithms in IHSDM. Statistical model validation aims to accomplish many important tasks, including (a) assessment of the logical defensibility of proposed models, (b) assessment of the transferability of models over future time periods and across different geographic locations, and (c) identification of areas in which future model improvements should be made. These three activities are reported for five proposed types of rural intersection crash prediction models. The internal validation of the model revealed that the crash models potentially suffer from omitted variables that affect safety, site selection and countermeasure selection bias, poorly measured and surrogate variables, and misspecification of model functional forms. The external validation indicated the inability of models to perform on par with model estimation performance. Recommendations for improving the state of the practice from this research include the systematic conduct of carefully designed before-and-after studies, improvements in data standardization and collection practices, and the development of analytical methods to combine the results of before-and-after studies with cross-sectional studies in a meaningful and useful way.

Rural two-lane roads generally lack physical measures such as wide medians or barriers to separate opposing traffic flows. As a result, a major crash problem on these roads involves vehicles crossing the centerline and either sideswiping or striking the front ends of opposing vehicles. These types of opposing-direction crashes account for about 20% all fatal crashes on rural two-lane roads and result in about 4,500 fatalities annually in the US. The present study evaluated a potential engineering countermeasure for such crashes-installation of rumble strips along the centerlines of undivided rural two-lane roads to alert distracted, fatigued, or speeding motorists whose vehicles are about to cross the centerlines and encroach into opposing traffic lanes. Data were analyzed for approximately 210 miles of treated roads in seven states before and after installation of centerline rumble strips. An empirical Bayes before-after procedure was employed to properly account for regression to the mean while normalizing for differences in traffic volume and other factors between the before and after periods. Overall results indicated significant reductions for all injury crashes combined (14%, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 5-23%) as well as for frontal and opposing-direction sideswipe injury crashes (25%, 95% CI = 6-44%)--the primary target of centerline rumble strips. In light of their effectiveness and relatively low installation costs, consideration should be given to installing centerline rumble strips more widely on rural two-lane roads to reduce the risk of frontal and opposing-direction sideswipe crashes.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract