4.6 Article

The impact of traffic barrier geometric features on crash frequency and injury severity of non-interstate highways

期刊

JOURNAL OF SAFETY RESEARCH
卷 75, 期 -, 页码 155-165

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jsr.2020.09.005

关键词

Traffic barrier; Crash severity; Crash frequency; Random-parameters negative binomial; Random-parameters ordered logit

资金

  1. Wyoming Department of Transportation (WYDOT) [RS03218]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Introduction: The main objective of this research is to investigate the effect of traffic barrier geometric characteristics on crashes that occurred on non-interstate roads. Method: For this purpose, height, side-slope rate, post-spacing, and lateral offset of about 137 miles of traffic barriers were collected on non-interstate (state, federal aid primary, federal aid secondary, and federal aid urban) highways in Wyoming. In addition, crash reports recorded between 2008 and 2017 were added to the traffic barrier dataset. The safety performance of traffic barriers with regards to their geometric features was analyzed in terms of crash frequency and crash severity using random-parameters negative binomial, and random-parameters ordered logit models, respectively. Results: From the results, box beam barriers with a height of 27-29 inches were less likely to be associated with injury and fatal injury crashes compared to other barrier types. On the other hand, the likelihood of a severe injury crash was found to be higher for box beam barriers with a height taller than 31 inches. Both W-beam and box beam barriers with a post-spacing between 6.1 and 6.3 inches reduced the probability of severe injury crashes. In terms of the crash frequency, flare traffic barriers had a lower crash frequency compared to parallel traffic barriers. Non-interstate roads without longitudinal rumble strips were associated with a higher rate of traffic barrier crashes. (C) 2020 National Safety Council and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据