© The Institution of Engineering and Technology
Incidents can significantly impact freeway operations and deteriorate mobility and safety. This study quantified their safety impacts through inspecting queue properties. Specifically, the end-of-queue (EOQ), where severe rear-end collisions commonly occur, is employed for safety assessment based on vehicles’ trajectories. Since detector data is typically available, this study applied such data for EOQ identification, as opposed to vehicle trajectories that are difficult to collect and process. Three measures related to queue duration, impact area and vehicle number exposed to the EOQ are presented as surrogates. To understand the applicability of these measures, a systematic set of incident scenarios is replicated with VISSIM. Quantitative results are used to estimate regression models, and significant variables are identified. The proposed methods can be used to evaluate safety impact of traffic incident management programs such as freeway service patrol, as well as to determine optimal plans for prearranged incidents such as pothole repair.
References
-
-
1)
-
2. Dowling, R.: ‘Volume VI: definition, interpretation, and calculation of traffic analysis tools measures of effectiveness’. , Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C., 2007.
-
2)
-
13. Pedersen, N.J., Samdahl, D.R.: ‘Highway traffic data for urbanized area project planning and design’. , Transportation Research Board, Washington DC, 1982.
-
3)
-
8. Tarko, A., Davis, G., Saunier, N., Sayed, T., Washington, S.: ‘Surrogate measures of safety’. , McLean, VA, 2009.
-
4)
-
5)
-
10. Chou, C.S., Nichols, P.A.: ‘Exploring traffic end-of-queue in a temporal-spatial diagram and applications for work zone safety analysis’. Conf. Proc. 91st TRB Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., 2012.
-
6)
-
9. Chen, C., Skabardonis, A., Varaiya, P.: ‘Systematic identification of freeway bottlenecks’, Transp. Res. Rec., 2004, 1867, pp. 46–52 (doi: 10.3141/1867-06).
-
7)
-
11. PTV, VISSIM 5.4: ‘Program files – PTV vision – examples – training – special modeling – incident’ (Planung Transport Verkehr AG, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2012).
-
8)
-
14. Miller-Hooks, E., Chen, X., Chou, C.S., Tarnoff, P.: ‘Concurrent flow lanes – phase II’. , Maryland State Highway Administration, 2008.
-
9)
-
15. Venables, W.N., Smith, D.M., the R core team: ‘An Introduction to R’. . 2012.
-
10)
-
12. Chou, C.S., Miller-Hooks, E.: ‘Exploiting capacity of managed lanes in diverting traffic around an incident’, Transp. Res. Rec., 2010, 2229, pp. 75–84 (doi: 10.3141/2229-09).
-
11)
-
3. ATSSA: ‘Treating potential back-of-queue safety hazards’ (American Traffic Safety Services Association, Fredericksburg, VA, 2009).
-
12)
-
4. Benekohal, R.F., Ramezani, H., Avrenli, K.A.: ‘Queue and user's costs in highway work zones’. , Illinois Center for Transportation, 2010.
-
13)
-
7. Gettman, D., Head, L.: ‘Surrogate safety measures from traffic simulation models’. , 2003.
-
14)
-
5. Wiles, P.B., Cooner, S.A., Walters, C.H., Pultorak, E.J.: ‘Advance warning of stopped traffic on freeways: current practices and filed studies of queue propagation speeds’ (Texas Transportation institute, 2003).
-
15)
-
6. Sayed, T., Zein, S.: ‘Traffic conflict standards for intersections’, Transp. Plan. Technol., 1999, 22, pp. 309–323 (doi: 10.1080/03081069908717634).
http://iet.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1049/iet-its.2013.0199
Related content
content/journals/10.1049/iet-its.2013.0199
pub_keyword,iet_inspecKeyword,pub_concept
6
6