Examination of Fault, Unsafe Driving Acts, and Total Harm in Car-Truck Collisions

Abstract

Crashes involving large trucks and passenger cars are important topics for research and countermeasure development since they represent more than 60% of all fatal truck crashes and because the passenger car occupant is much more likely to be killed. This study ( a) examined “fault” in total car–truck crashes using North Carolina Highway Safety Information System (HSIS) data for comparison with fault analyzed in previous studies of fatal crashes, ( b) used general estimates system (GES) crash data to verify unsafe driving acts (UDAs) identified by expert panels in past studies, and ( c) used North Carolina HSIS data to identify critical combinations of roadway facility type, roadway location, and crash type based on “total harm”—a measure combining both the frequency and severity of the crash. Fault in total North Carolina car–truck crashes was found to differ significantly from past fatal crash studies, with the truck driver being at fault more often than the car driver both overall and in certain crash types. Car drivers continue to be at fault much more often in head-on and angle crashes. While it was not possible to analyze all UDAs identified in prior studies, when possible, the current analyses revealed differences between the GES crash data results and the expert-based results, pointing to the need for better UDA methods if they are to be used to target treatments. Finally, using the total-harm analysis with North Carolina car–truck crashes indicated that undivided rural arterials and collectors should be primary targets for further investigation and for treatment.

A descriptive analysis of light vehicle–heavy vehicle interactions using in situ driving data

“…Of these, 164 (78.1%) were judged to have been initiated by the LV driver and 46 (21.9%) were judged to have been initiated by the HV driver (ratio of 3.6:1). While these results were inconsistent with Council et al (2003), they are surprisingly similar to what Blower (1998) and Stuster (1999) found when assessing fatal LV-HV interactions (LV drivers were cited with a driver-related factor in over 80% and 67% of the fatal crashes, respectively). Also, this finding supports what the truck drivers in the Hanowski et al (1998) and Neale et al (1998) focus groups said about LV drivers being their most important safety concern.…”

“…Council et al (2003) analyzed 16,264 LV-HV interactions (both fatal and non-fatal crashes) from the North Carolina Highway Safety Information System and found the HV driver was assigned fault in 48% of the crashes, while the LV driver was assigned fault in 40.2% of the crashes (8.9% of the crashes were assigned fault to both drivers, while 2.9% were assigned fault to neither driver). Unlike the Blower (1998) and Stuster (1999) studies, the Council et al (2003) data suggests HV drivers were responsible for the majority of the LV-HV interactions (for all crash types). Thus, there appears to be some inconsistencies in the literature regarding which group of drivers is primarily responsible for LV-HV crashes.…”

Descriptive Analysis of Light Vehicle-Heavy Vehicle Interactions from the Light Vehicle Driver's Perspective

“…Further, Blower's (1998) analysis found that 13.9% of the fatal LV-HV interactions, where only the LV driver was cited with a driver-related factor, involved a rearend strike. When Council et al (2003) reviewed all types of LV-HV crashes in North Carolina, they found that 23.2% of the HV driver at-fault crashes involved a sideswipe and 28.5% of the LV driver at-fault crashes involved a rear-end approach. These discrepancies might highlight the differences between analyzing crashes and near crashes and/or the methodologies used analyze the data (i.e., a crash database approach versus a naturalistic or in situ data collection approach).…”

“…Rather than examining the police reports from fatal LV-HV interactions, they examined the police reports of both crashes and fatal crashes. While the prior studies assessed the most severe crashes, the Council et al (2003) study assessed the overall LV-HV crash picture.…”

Investigation of Truck-Involved Angle Crashes Based on GES and FARS Crash Databases

“…However, only about 5 percent of all car-truck crashes in the database included these four factors. Council et al [7] examined driver fault in car-truck crashes and analyzed the relative contribution of truck vs car drivers. Using the North Carolina database in the Highway Safety Information System (HSIS), they found that car drivers were more often to be at fault than truck drivers in head-on and angle crashes.…”