Worked Example: Highway Safety Modeling. Outline –Safety Modeling »Safety Modeling Process –Set-up for Worked Example –Develop / Build Safety Model »Project.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM)
Advertisements

1 Element 1: The Systemic Safety Project Selection Process Element 1: 4-Step Project Selection Process.
HSM: Celebrating 5 Years Together Brian Ray, PE Casey Bergh, PE.
A Comprehensive Study on Pavement Edge Line Implementation Presented by: Mark J. Morvant, P.E. Associate Director, Research Louisiana Transportation Research.
Lec 33, Ch.5, pp : Accident reduction capabilities and effectiveness of safety design features (Objectives) Learn what’s involved in safety engineering.
HSM Practitioner’s Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
HSM Practitioner’s Guider for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop Exercise IV – US 52 from Sageville to Holy Cross – Group Exercise - Session #8 8-1.
DISTRICT PILOT PROJECT PRESENTATION MAY 2, Highway Safety Manual Implementation.
Crash Modification Factor Development: Data Needs and Protocols Raghavan Srinivasan Daniel Carter UNC Highway Safety Research Center.
Spring  Crash modification factors (CMFs) are becoming increasing popular: ◦ Simple multiplication factor ◦ Used for estimating safety improvement.
Enhanced Safety Prediction Methodology and Analysis Tool for Freeways and Interchanges James A. Bonneson August 2012 NCHRP Project
Comparison of Proposed MMIRE Elements. Introduction Comparison of the current proposed MMIRE elements with: – 23 State databases HSIS States States databases.
Spring INTRODUCTION There exists a lot of methods used for identifying high risk locations or sites that experience more crashes than one would.
Incorporating Safety into the Highway Design Process.
Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Shared Roadways Lesson 14 (This picture shows bicyclists not.
Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville 26 Schedule.
Role of SPFs in the Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM) Mike Dimaiuta LENDIS Corporation.
Network Screening 1 Module 3 Safety Analysis in a Data-limited, Local Agency Environment: July 22, Boise, Idaho.
Selecting Countermeasures 1 Module 5 Safety Analysis in a Data-limited, Local Agency Environment July 22, Boise, Idaho.
2-1 LOW COST SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS The Tools – Identification of High Crash Locations – Session #2.
A Systemic Approach to Safety Management NLTAPA Annual Conference July 30, 2012 Hillary Isebrands, P.E., PhD.
1 CEE 763 Fall 2011 Topic 1 – Fundamentals CEE 763.
Timothy E. Barnett, P.E., PTOE State Safety Operations Engineer Alabama Department of Transportation.
Federal Highway Administration University Course on Bicycle and Pedestrian Transportation Lesson 13 (Some of these pictures show bicyclists not wearing.
Introduction: Overview of Roadway Safety Management Safety Analysis in a Data-limited, Local Agency Environment: July 22, Boise, Idaho 1 Module.
Data Palooza Workshop May 9, 2013 Rabinder Bains, FHWA – Office of Policy and Government Affairs.
HSM: Another Tool for Safety Management in Wyoming 1 Excellence in Transportation.
1 Element 1: The Systemic Safety Project Selection Process Element 1: 4-Step Project Selection Process.
NC Local Safety Partnership Selecting Interventions.
An Examination of “Fault,” “Unsafe Driving Acts” and “Total Harm” in Car-Truck Collisions Forrest Council (HSRC) David Harkey (HSRC) Daniel Nabors (BMI)
University of Minnesota Intersection Decision Support Research - Results of Crash Analysis University of Minnesota Intersection Decision Support Research.
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم AN-NAJAH NATIONAL UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF ENGINEERING CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT Evaluation, Design and Redesign Beit Wazan and.
Design Criteria CTC 440. Objectives Know what “design criteria” means Determine design criteria for various types of facilities.
Putting Together a Safety Program Kevin J. Haas, P.E.—Traffic Investigations Engineer Oregon Department of Transportation Traffic—Roadway Section (Salem,
July 29 and 30, 2009 SPF Development in Illinois Yanfeng Ouyang Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Interactive Highway Safety Design Model (IHSDM) By Josh Hinds.
Calibrating Highway Safety Manual Equations for Application in Florida Dr. Siva Srinivasan, Phillip Haas, Nagendra Dhakar, and Ryan Hormel (UF) Doug Harwood.
NCHRP Crash Reduction Factors for Traffic Engineering and ITS Improvements UNC HSRC VHB Ryerson University (Bhagwant and Craig)
Conference or Meeting Name 1 THE HIGHWAY SAFETY MANUAL Michael S. Griffith June 12, 2003.
Fall  Crashes are “independent” and “random” events (probabilistic events)  Estimate a relationship between crashes and covariates (or explanatory.
Chapter 9 Capacity and Level of Service for Highway Segments
Impact of Intersection Angle on Safety HSIS Annual Liaison Meeting David Harkey, Bo Lan, Daniel Carter, Raghavan Srinivasan, Anusha Patel Nujjetty May.
MAINE Highway Safety Information System Liaison Meeting Chapel Hill, North Carolina September , 2015 Darryl Belz, P.E. Maine Department of Transportation.
Cable Median Barrier with Inside Shoulder Rumble Strips on Divided Roads Raghavan Srinivasan, Bo Lan, & Daniel Carter, UNC Highway Safety Research Center.
Geometric Design: General Concept CE331 Transportation Engineering.
1 THE HIGHWAY SAFETY MANUAL Michael S. Griffith Federal Highway Administration July 26 th, 2004.
Role of Safety Performance Functions in the Highway Safety Manual July 29, 2009.
FHWA: Revision of Thirteen Controlling Criteria for Design; Notice for Request and Comment. Comments Due: December 7, 2015 Jeremy Fletcher, P.E., P.S.M.
I-10 Phoenix Corridor Safety Study I-10 Phoenix Corridor Safety Study 35 th Avenue to Sky Harbor Boulevard Safety Performance Evaluation Results Jim Schoen,
1 The Highway Safety Manual Predictive Methods. 2 New Highway Safety Manual of 2010 ►Methodology is like that for assessing and assuring the adequacy.
Highway Safety Manual (HSM) into Safety Processing
HIGHWAY SAFETY MANUAL APPLICATIONS
Lars H. Trandem and Kelly Pitera
HSM Practicitioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
HSM Applications to Multilane Rural Highways and Urban Suburban Streets Safety and Operational Effects of Geometric Design Features for Two-Lane Rural.
Using CMFs in Planning for Virginia’s Project Funding Prioritization
HSM Applications to Multilane Rural Highways and Urban Suburban Streets Prediction of Crash Frequency and CMF’s for Undivided Rural Multilane Highways.
HSM Applications to Multilane Urban Suburban Multilane Intersections
The Pennsylvania CMF Guide & PennDOT HSM Analysis Tool
HSM Practioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
HSM Practioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
Geometric Design: General Concept CE331 Transportation Engineering.
Design Criteria CTC 440.
HSM Practicitioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
Worked Example: Highway Safety Modeling
Design Speed, Operating Speed, and Posted Speed Limit Practices
HSM Practioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
HSM Practioner's Guide for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
HSM Practitioner’s Guider for Two-Lane Rural Highways Workshop
Contributing Factors for Focus Crash Types and Facility Types Raghavan Srinivasan University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center (UNC HSRC)
Presentation transcript:

Worked Example: Highway Safety Modeling

Outline –Safety Modeling »Safety Modeling Process –Set-up for Worked Example –Develop / Build Safety Model »Project Segmentation »Selecting and Applying CPMs »Selecting and Applying CMFs –Estimating Safety Performance –Collision Costs / Economic Analysis –Summary

Safety Modeling Involves two components Involves two components –Application of “base” CPMs »CPM is used to estimate the expected normal safety performance for the facility –Application of CMFs »CMF is combined with the with the CPM to estimate the safety associated with the specific design features of the facility Methodology follows FHWA - IHDSM and will be the recommended approach in the HSM Methodology follows FHWA - IHDSM and will be the recommended approach in the HSM Somewhat analogous to ‘traffic modeling’ Somewhat analogous to ‘traffic modeling’

Safety Modeling Process Systematic process for ‘Safety Modeling’ Systematic process for ‘Safety Modeling’ –Step 1: Understand Project/Limits and Segmentation –Step 2: Assemble requisite data (volume, design,…) –Step 3: Apply “Base” collision prediction model –Step 4: Select design features to include in Safety Model –Step 5: Calculate the CMFs for selected design features –Step 6: Estimate safety performance –Step 7: Calculate collision costs

Set-Up for Worked Example Consider 2 alignments: Consider 2 alignments: –1) Existing Alignment (Base Case) »Characterized by poor horizontal alignment and reduced cross-sectional dimensions –2) Proposed Improved Alignment (Option 1) »Characterized by improved horizontal alignment and increased cross-sectional design Objective: Objective: –To estimate the safety benefits associated with the proposed new alignment and the corresponding collision cost savings »Business Case, MAE, Project Justification…

Start End T1 C2 T3 Start End C2 T1 T3 C4 C6 C8 T5 T7 T9 Existing Road “Base Case” Existing Road “Base Case” Improved Road “Option 1”

Set-Up for Worked Example Existing Highway Existing Highway –RAU2 Highway –Existing traffic volume »7500 AADT –Poor geometry »5 Tangents / 4 Curves »Sub-standard curves »Steep grades –Cross-section »3.0 meter lanes »1.5 meter shoulders »Hazardous roadside Improvement Option 1 –RAU2 Highway –Existing traffic volume »7500 AADT –Favorable geometry »2 Tangents / 1 curve »Exceed design criteria »Reduced grades –Cross-section »3.6 meter lanes »2.5 meter shoulders »Improved roadside

Step 1: Project Segmentation Start and end points for the safety model must be the same for a fair comparison Start and end points for the safety model must be the same for a fair comparison Segmentation of corridor should be primarily based on horizontal alignment Segmentation of corridor should be primarily based on horizontal alignment –Tangent 1 / Curve 2 / Tangent 3 / …. Segmentation could also be based on significant changes in the design or operation Segmentation could also be based on significant changes in the design or operation –Change in traffic volume –Change in design elements (e.g., tunnel) –Others as required

Step 1: Project Segmentation

Step 2: Assemble Required Data

Step 3: Select and Apply “Base” CPM Select CPM for each option / each facility: Select CPM for each option / each facility: –“Existing” and “Proposed Improvement” –Use CPM to calculate the expected normal collision frequency –Corridors are: »Segment / Rural / Arterial / Undivided / 2-Lane »Use RAU2 models (PDO and Severe)

Step 3: Select and Apply “Base” CPM

Step 4: Select Features for Analysis Need to determine what design elements should be included in the safety model Need to determine what design elements should be included in the safety model Typically include (segments): Typically include (segments): –Lane widths ( ✔ ) –Shoulder widths ( ✔ ) –Horizontal curve ( ✔ ) –Grade ( ✔ ) –Access Frequency –Roadside Hazard Level ( ✔ ) –Median Treatment –Design Consistency ( ✔ )

Step 5: Determine CMFs Lane Width Lane Width –Base Case = 3.0 meters –Option 1 = 3.6 meters

Step 5: Determine CMFs Lane Width Lane Width –Base Case = 3.0 meters »CMF Target = 1.30 »Target = OR + HO »OR + HO = »CMF Total = 1.104

Step 5: Determine CMFs Lane Width Lane Width –Option 1 = 3.6 meters »CMF Target = 1.01 »Target = OR + HO »OR + HO = »CMF Total = 1.003

Step 5: Determine CMFs Shoulder Widths Shoulder Widths –Base Case = 1.5 meters –Option 1 = 2.5 meters

Step 5: Determine CMFs Shoulder Widths Shoulder Widths –Base Case = 1.5 meters »CMF = 1.07 »Target = ORR »ORR= »CMF Total = 1.012

Step 5: Determine CMFs Shoulder Widths Shoulder Widths –Option 1 = 2.5 meters »CMF = 0.86 »Target = ORR »ORR= »CMF Total = 0.975

Step 5: Determine CMFs Horizontal Alignment (for curves only) Horizontal Alignment (for curves only) –Base Case »C2 = 1.24Target = ALL »C4 = 1.88Target = ALL »C6 = 1.30Target = ALL »C8 = 1.08Target = ALL –Option 1 »C2 = 1.01Target = ALL

Step 5: Determine CMFs Roadway Grade Roadway Grade –Base Case »T1 to T5 = 6% Grade, CMF = 1.100, Target = ALL »T7 to T9 = 8% Grade, CMF = 1.137, Target = ALL –Option 1 »T1 and T3 = 2% Grade, CMF = 1.033, Target = ALL

Step 5: Determine CMFs Roadside Hazard Rating Roadside Hazard Rating –Base Case = RHR = 6 »CMF = 1.22 »Target = ALL

Step 5: Determine CMFs Roadside Hazard Rating Roadside Hazard Rating –Option 1 = RHR = 3 »CMF = 1.00 »Target = ALL

Step 5: Determine CMFs Design Consistency Design Consistency Base Case Base Case  C2 =  C4 =  C6 =  C8 =  Option 1  C2 = 0.990

Step 5: Calculate Composite CMF Calculate composite CMF

Step 6: Estimate Safety Performance Safety Performance = CPM x CMFs Safety Performance = CPM x CMFs

Step 6: Estimate Safety Performance Safety Performance = CPM x CMFs Safety Performance = CPM x CMFs

Step 7: Calculate Collision Costs With safety performance known, it is possible to calculate the collision costs associated with each design scenario. With safety performance known, it is possible to calculate the collision costs associated with each design scenario. Use BC MOT average collision cost values Use BC MOT average collision cost values –Fatal collision= $5,600,000 / incident –Injury collision = $100,000 / incident –P.D.O. collision= $7,350 / incident Use collision severity distribution to determine the average cost of a severe collision (F + I) Use collision severity distribution to determine the average cost of a severe collision (F + I) –(F + I) collision= $290,000 / incident

Step 7: Calculate Collision Costs Base Case:FrequencyCollision Cost Base Case:FrequencyCollision Cost –PDO Collisions / yr= 6.0 / yr= $44,000 / yr –F + I Collisions / yr= 4.4 / yr= $1,276,000 / yr –Total Collisions / yr= 10.4 / yr= $1,320,000 / yr Option 1: Option 1: –PDO Collisions / yr= 2.8 / yr= $21,000 / yr –F + I Collisions / yr= 2.1 / yr= $609,000 / yr –Total Collisions / yr= 4.9 / yr= $630,000 / yr Safety Benefit: Option 1= 5.5 / yr= $690,000 / yr Safety Benefit: Option 1= 5.5 / yr= $690,000 / yr

Step 7: Calculate Collision Costs Also possible to calculate the life-cycle collision costs (discounted) as inputs to a MAE, a business cases or other project justifications. Also possible to calculate the life-cycle collision costs (discounted) as inputs to a MAE, a business cases or other project justifications. Safety Model is run for Safety Model is run for –Opening Day; –Horizon Year; –Any interim years when road changes (that affect safety performance) are made Collision costs can be reduced to a NPV and combined with other project evaluation criteria Collision costs can be reduced to a NPV and combined with other project evaluation criteria –Mobility, environmental, economic development, etc.

Summary CPMs and CMFs can be used to develop a ‘Safety Model’ that allows for the explicit quantification of safety performance CPMs and CMFs can be used to develop a ‘Safety Model’ that allows for the explicit quantification of safety performance –CPM estimates the ‘normal’ safety performance –CMF estimates how each design feature affects safety Safety modeling considers the specific design features of a facility to estimate the collision frequency Safety modeling considers the specific design features of a facility to estimate the collision frequency Results can be converted into collision costs and combined with other evaluation criteria to assess and justify highway improvement expenditure. Results can be converted into collision costs and combined with other evaluation criteria to assess and justify highway improvement expenditure.