5 CounterMeasures

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 32

CENG 6309*:

Road safety
Engineering
Ambo University Hachalu Hundessa
Institute of Technology
SCEE, Civil Engineering
Prof. Emer T. Quezon
C.Eng., M.ASCE, MSc., PhD
Dr.-Ing(hc)
Email: quezonet09@gmail.com
emer.tucay@aastu.edu.et
Webpage:
https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=I
6QHv7UAAAAJ&hl=en
Chapter 5
Countermeasures
on the Occurrence of Crash
Severity
Introduction
A countermeasure is a roadway strategy
intended to decrease crash frequency or severity,
or both at a site.
 Prior to selecting countermeasures, crash data
and site supporting documentation are analyzed,
and a field review is conducted to diagnose the
characteristics of each site, and identify crash
patterns.
 The sites are further evaluated to identify factors
that may be contributing to observed crash
patterns or concerns, and countermeasures are
selected to address the respective contributing
factors.
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING
FACTORS
1. For each identified crash pattern, there may be
multiple contributing factors.
2. The following sections provide information to assist
with development of a comprehensive list of possible
crash contributing factors.
3. The intent is to assist in identification of a broad
range of possible contributing factors in order to
minimize the probability that a major contributing
factor will be overlooked.
4. Once a broad range of contributing factors have
been considered, engineering judgment is applied
to identify those factors that are expected to be the
greatest contributors to each particular crash type or
concern.
5. The information obtained as part of the diagnosis
process will be the primary basis for such decisions.
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
6. Perspectives to Consider when Evaluating
Contributing Factors
1. A useful framework for identifying crash
contributing factors is the Haddon Matrix.
2. In the Haddon Matrix, the crash contributing
factors are divided into three categories: human,
vehicle, and roadway.
3. The possible crash conditions before, during, and
after a crash are related to each crash
contributing factor category to identify possible
reasons for the crash.
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING
FACTORS
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING
FACTORS
 The engineering perspective considers items like crash data,
supporting documentation, and field conditions in the
context of identifying potential engineering solutions to
reduce crash frequency or severity.
 Evaluation of contributing factors from an engineering
perspective may include comparing field conditions to
various national and local jurisdictional design guidelines
related to signing, striping, geometric design, traffic control
devices, roadway classifications, work zones, etc.
 In reviewing these guidelines, if a design anomaly is
identified it may provide a clue to the crash contributing
factors.
 However, it is important to emphasize that consistency with
design guidelines does not correlate directly to a safe
roadway system;
 vehicles are driven by humans who are dynamic beings with
varied capacity to perform the driving task.
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING
FACTORS
 When considering human factors in the context of
contributing factors, the goal is to understand the
human contributions to the cause of the crash in
order to propose solutions that might break the
chain of events that led to the crash.
 Several fundamental principles essential to
understanding the human factors aspects of the
roadway safety management process include:
 Attention and information processing:
 Vision:
 Perception-reaction time:
 Speed choice:
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
 Contributing Factors for Consideration
 Crashes on Road way Segments
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Crash Type Possible Contributing Factor(s)
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Crash Type Possible Contributing Factor(s)
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
 Crashes at Signalized Intersections
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Crash Type Possible Contributing Factor(s)
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
 Crashes at Un-Signalized Intersections
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
Crash Type Possible Contributing Factor(s)
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS

 Crashes at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings


IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
 Crashes Involving Bicyclists and Pedestrians
IDENTIFYING CONTRIBUTING FACTORS
SELECT POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES
There are three main steps to selecting a
countermeasure(s) for a site:
1. Identify factors contributing to the cause of crashes at
the subject site;
2. Identify countermeasures which may address the
contributing factors; and,
3. Conduct cost-benefit analysis, if possible, to select
preferred treatment(s).
• Countermeasures (also known as treatments) to
address the contributing factors are developed by
reviewing the field information, crash data, supporting
documentation, and potential contributing factors to
develop theories about the potential engineering,
education, or enforcement treatments that may
address the contributing factor under consideration.
SELECT POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES
• Comparing contributing factors to potential
countermeasures requires engineering judgment and
local knowledge.
• Consideration is given to issues like why the
contributing factor(s) might be occurring?, what could
address the factor(s)?, and what is physically,
financially, and politically feasible in the jurisdiction?
• For example, if at a signalized intersection it is
expected that limited sight-distance is the
contributing factor to the rear-end crashes, then the
possible reasons for the limited sight distance
conditions are identified.
• Examples of possible causes of limited sight distance
might include: constrained horizontal or vertical
curvature, landscaping hanging low on the street, or
illumination conditions.
SELECT POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES
A variety of countermeasures could be
considered to resolve each of these potential
reasons for limited sight distance.
 The roadway could be re-graded or re-aligned to
eliminate the sight distance constraint or
landscaping could be modified.
 These various actions are identified as the
potential treatments.
 The AMFs represent the estimated change in
crash frequency with implementation of the
treatment under consideration.
 An AMF value of less than 1.0 indicates that the
predicted average crash frequency will be lower
with implementation of the countermeasure.
SELECT POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES
 For example, changing the traffic control of an
urban intersection from a two-way, stop-
controlled intersection to a modern roundabout
has an AMF of 0.61 for all collision types and
crash severities.
 This indicates that the expected average crash
frequency will decrease by 39 percent after
converting the intersection control.
 Application of an AMF will provide an estimate of
the change in crashes due to a treatment.
 There will be variance in results at any particular
location.
 Some countermeasures may have different
effects on different crash types or severities.
SELECT POTENTIAL COUNTERMEASURES

 For example, installing a traffic signal in a rural


environment at a previously un-signalized two-
way stop-controlled intersection has an AMF of
1.58 for rear-end crashes and an AMF of 0.40 for
left-turn crashes.
 The AMFs suggest that an increase in rear-end
crashes may occur while a reduction in left-turn
crashes may occur.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
The Situation
 Upon conducting network screening and diagnostic
procedures, a roadway agency has completed a
detailed investigation at Intersection 2 and Segment 1.
 A solid understanding of site characteristics, history, and
layout has been acquired so that possible contributing
factors can be identified.
 A summary of the basic findings of the diagnosis is
shown in Exhibit 6-9.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
The Question:
1. What factors are likely contributing to the
target crash types identified for each site?
2. What are appropriate countermeasures that
have potential to reduce the target crash
types?
The Facts:
 Intersections
1. Three years of intersection crash data.
2. All study intersections have four approaches
and are located in urban environments.
 Roadway Segments
1. Three years of roadway segment crash data.
2. The roadway cross-section and length.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
Solution
 The countermeasure selection for Intersection 2 is
presented, followed by the countermeasure selection for
Segment 1.
Intersection 2
1. Exhibit 6-5 identifies possible crash contributing factors
at un-signalized intersections by accident type.
2. As shown in the exhibit, possible contributing factors for
angle collisions include: restricted sight distance, high
traffic volume, high approach speed, unexpected
crossing traffic, drivers ignoring traffic control on stop
controlled approaches, and wet pavement surface.
3. Possible contributing factors for head-on collisions
include: inadequate pavement markings and narrow
lanes.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
4. A review of documented site characteristics
indicates that over the past several years the
traffic volumes on both the minor and major
roadways have increased.
5. An existing conditions traffic operations analysis
during the weekday p.m. peak hour indicates an
average delay of 115 seconds for vehicles on the
minor street and 92 seconds for left-turning
vehicles turning from the major street onto the
minor street.
6. In addition to the long delay experienced on the
minor street, the operations analysis calculated
queue lengths as long as 11 vehicles on the minor
street.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
7. A field assessment of Intersection 2 confirmed the
operations analysis results.
8. It also revealed that because of the traffic flow
condition on the major street, very few gaps are
available for vehicles traveling to or from the
minor street.
9. Sight distances on all four approaches were
measured and met local and national guidelines.
10. During the off-peak field assessment, the
vehicle speed on the major street was observed
to be substantially higher than the posted speed
limit and inappropriate for the desired character
of the roadway.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
11. The primary contributing factors for the angle
collisions were identified as increasing traffic
volumes during the peak periods, providing few
adequate gaps for vehicles traveling to and from
the minor street.
12. As a result, motorists have become increasingly
willing to accept smaller gaps, resulting in
conflicts and contributing to collisions.
13. Vehicles travel at high speeds on the major
street during off-peak periods when traffic
volumes are lower; the higher speeds result in a
larger speed differential between vehicles turning
onto the major street from the minor street.
14. The larger speed differential creates conflicts
and contributes to collisions.
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
15. The following countermeasures were
identified as having potential for reducing the
angle crashes at Intersection 2:
1. Convert stop-controlled intersection to modern
roundabout
2. Convert two-way stop-controlled intersection to
all-way stop control
3. Provide exclusive left-turn lane on one or more
approaches
16. The following countermeasures were
identified as having potential for reducing the
head-on crashes at Intersection 2:
1. Increasing intersection median width
2. Convert stop-controlled intersection to modern
roundabout
3. Increase lane width for through travel lanes
SAMPLE PROBLEMS
4. The potential countermeasures were evaluated based
on the supporting information known about the sites
and the AMFs provided.
5. Of the three potential countermeasures identified as
the most likely to reduce target crashes, the only one
that was determined to be able to serve the forecast
traffic demand was the modern roundabout option.
6. Additionally, the AMFs provide support that the
roundabout option can be expected to reduce the
average crash frequency.
7. Constructing exclusive left-turn lanes on the major
approaches would likely reduce the number of
conflicts between through traffic, and turning traffic,
but was not expected to mitigate the need for
adequate gaps in major street traffic.
8. Therefore, the roadway agency selected a
roundabout as the most appropriate countermeasure
to implement at Intersection 2.
ANY QUESTIONS
PLEASE ??

You might also like