A survey of the U.S. State DOT and the ODOT District traffic engineers was conducted and has provided some insight in the temporary pavement marking practices applied by the highway agencies across the United States. A computerized, animated driver comprehension study was conducted and the results have shown that the proposed Federal system and the fully restored center line system generally did a better job in conveying the correct passing/no-passing information than the current ODOT system. A subjective evaluation of selected temporary pavement marking systems in the field involving 12 evaluators has indicated that the use of the center line to convey passing information was more appreciated by the evaluators than the use traffic signs. Vehicle speed and lateral position measurements in the field were conducted and have indicated that drivers seem to lower their vehicle speeds under poor pavement marking visibility conditions. Driver eye fixation data was collected and it was found that some of the newly designed experimental traffic signs (especially symbolic signs) are requiring an excessive number of eye fixations in order to process the information displayed on these new signs. The eye scanning records were also analyzed with regard to driver road eye fixations under nighttime driving conditions. The Ohio University proprietary contrast based pavement marking visibility model CARVE was used to determine the maximum longitudinal distance of resurfaced roadway (maximum gap distance MGD under dry, non-glare, low-beam illumination conditions) for which no pavement markings are required. CARVE was also used to determine the maximum tolerable pavement marking obliteration for given pavement marking configurations.


    Access

    Access via TIB

    Check availability in my library


    Export, share and cite