Analyzing motorists’ responses to temporary signage in highway work zones

For decades, the importance of highway work zone safety has increased considerably with the continual increase in the number of highway work zones present on highways for repairs and expansion. Rural work zones on two-lane highways are particularly hazardous and cause a significant safety concern due to the disruption of regular traffic flow. In this study, researchers determined motorists’ responses to warning signs in rural, two-lane highway work zones. The researchers divided vehicles into three classes (passenger car, truck, and semitrailer) and compared the mean change in speed of these classes based on three different sign setups: portable changeable message sign (PCMS) OFF, PCMS ON with the message of Slow Down, Drive Safely, and a temporary traffic sign (W20-1, “Road Work Ahead”). Field experiments were conducted on two two-lane work zones with flagger control. Statistical analyses were performed to determine whether there was a significant interaction between motorists’ responses and the sign setups. Data analysis results show that a visible PCMS, either turned on or off, was most effective in reducing truck speeds in rural, two-lane work zones. The temporary traffic sign (W20-1) was more effective in reducing the vehicle speeds of passenger car and semitrailer. Results of this research project will help traffic engineers to better design the two-lane work zone setup and take necessary safety countermeasures to prevent vehicle crashes.

[1]  Rahim F Benekohal,et al.  Multivariate analysis of truck drivers' assessment of work zone safety , 1999 .

[2]  Stephen H Richards,et al.  IMPLEMENTATION OF WORK-ZONE SPEED CONTROL MEASURES , 1986 .

[3]  Dean Testa,et al.  METHODS AND PROCEDURES TO REDUCE MOTORIST DELAYS IN EUROPEAN WORK ZONES , 2000 .

[4]  S. Emerson,et al.  AASHTO (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials). 2001. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets. Fourth Edition. Washington, D.C. , 2007 .

[5]  Jun Wang,et al.  Investigation of Highway Work Zone Crashes: What We Know and What We Don't Know , 1996 .

[6]  Marcus A Brewer,et al.  Improving Compliance with Work Zone Speed Limits Effectiveness of Selected Devices , 2006 .

[7]  Nicholas J Garber,et al.  EFFECTIVENESS OF CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS IN CONTROLLING VEHICLE SPEEDS IN WORK ZONES. FINAL REPORT , 1994 .

[8]  法律 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices , 2010 .

[9]  Yong Bai,et al.  Development of crash-severity-index models for the measurement of work zone risk levels. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[10]  Zoltan Anthony Nemeth,et al.  ACCIDENT CHARACTERISTICS BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER SAFETY UPGRADING PROJECTS ON OHIO'S RURAL INTERSTATE SYSTEM , 1978 .

[11]  Motoki Asano,et al.  Improving the Nighttime Visibility of Signs and Workers in Road Work Zones in Japan , 2008 .

[12]  N J Garber,et al.  Crash characteristics at work zones. , 2001 .

[13]  Steven D Schrock,et al.  AN ANALYSIS OF FATAL WORK ZONE CRASHES IN TEXAS , 2004 .

[14]  K. Dixon,et al.  Analysis of Fatal Crashes in Georgia Work Zones , 2000 .

[15]  Yingfeng Li,et al.  Comparison of characteristics between fatal and injury accidents in the highway construction zones , 2008 .