Integrated prioritization method for active and passive highway-rail crossings.

This two-year research project developed a prioritization system for highway-rail at-grade crossings that addressed the following major concerns: (1) warrants to identify low-volume, passive crossings with risk factors; (2) a broader priority index that considers more variables than the original index; (3) warranting thresholds that remain valid with changes in data; and (4) a prioritization methodology capable of properly prioritizing the warranted passive crossings over high-volumes active crossings. The prioritization system combines a revised priority index based on a newly developed crash prediction equation, warrants for active warning devices at passive crossings, and a passive crossing prioritization index based on Utility Theory principles. The warranting threshold are defined in terms of cumulative percentiles rather than fixed numbers to ensure reliability as data changes. The warrants and prioritization indices were integrated into a systematic prioritization methodology capable of a generating priority list that assigns top priorities to crossings with risk factors in spite of low volumes. The deliverables will facilitate highway-rail crossing management in Texas and ensure proper consideration of low-volume crossings when applying funding mechanisms such as Section 130 funds.

[1]  D W Schoppert,et al.  FACTORS INFLUENCING SAFETY AT HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS , 1967 .

[2]  D. Bouyssou,et al.  Utility Maximization, Choice and Preference , 2002 .

[3]  Frank F Saccomanno,et al.  A Model for Evaluating Countermeasures at Highway-Railway Grade Crossings , 2005 .

[4]  Kelley Klaver Pecheux.  Evaluation of sight distance as a criterion for prioritizing rail-highway intersections in Texas , 1993 .

[5]  Tom Scullion,et al.  PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEM CONCEPTS, EQUATIONS, AND ANALYSIS MODELS. FINAL REPORT , 1995 .

[6]  Richard A. Raub.  Examination of Highway–Rail Grade Crossing Collisions Nationally from 1998 to 2007 , 2009 .

[7]  M J Demetsky,et al.  EVALUATION OF METHODS FOR PREDICTING RAIL-HIGHWAY CROSSING HAZARDS. FINAL REPORT , 1986 .

[8]  Elena S. Prassas,et al.  Warranting Traffic Signals on the Basis of Proximity of Railroad Grade Crossings , 2007 .

[9]  Thanuja Gunatillake,et al.  REDUCING COLLISIONS AT PASSIVE RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSINGS IN AUSTRALIA , 2002 .

[10]  G S Spring,et al.  HIGHWAY RAIL CROSSING PROJECT SELECTION , 2003 .

[11]  Leslie E Olson,et al.  AN ANALYSIS OF LOW-COST ACTIVE WARNING DEVICES FOR HIGHWAY-RAIL GRADE CROSSINGS , 2005 .

[12]  Bohn Stafleu van Loghum,et al.  Online … , 2002, LOG IN.

[13]  Thomas L. Saaty,et al.  Decision Making for Leaders: The Analytical Hierarchy Process for Decisions in a Complex World , 1982 .

[14]  Jodi L Carson,et al.  An alternative accident prediction model for highway-rail interfaces. , 2002, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[15]  Brent D Ogden.  Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing handbook - Revised Second Edition 2007 , 2007 .

[16]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Book Reviews : Scientific Opportunities and Public Needs: Improv ing Priority Setting and Public Input at the National Institutes of Health. Institute of Medicine. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998, 136 pages, $26.00 , 1998 .