1. Traffic Control Devices Pooled Fund Study June 2010 Technical Liaisons: Amanda Emo (FHWA) Bryan Katz (SAIC) Co-Chairs: Scott Wainwright (FHWA) Bill Lambert (NH DOT)

2. 2 TCD PFS Members FHWA Office of Operations Office of Safety Eastern Federal Lands Local DOTs Los Angeles DOT Broward County DOT Organizations American Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA) State DOTs California DOT Florida DOT Georgia DOT Iowa DOT Illinois DOT Kansas DOT Mississippi DOT Missouri DOT Nebraska DOT New Hampshire DOT New Jersey DOT Nevada DOT New York DOT North Carolina DOT Oregon DOT Pennsylvania DOT South Carolina DOT Texas DOT Wisconsin DOT

3. 3 Completed Projects Pavement Markings for Speed Reduction Colors for Transponder-Controlled Tollbooth Lanes Navigation Signing for Roundabouts Pedestrian Countdown vs. Flashing Don’t Walk Evaluation of Selected Symbol Signs Diagrammatic Freeway Guide Sign Design Lane Restriction Marking and Signing for Double-Lane Roundabouts Alternative Flashing Patterns for Beacons at Unsignalized Pedestrian Crossings Analysis of Enlarged Pedestrian Signal Heads Completed Since Last June Meeting: Combined Lane Use and Destination Signs State-of-Practice for Freeway Guide Sign Design Evaluation of International Symbol Sign Designs

4. 4 Combined Lane Use and Destination Signs Purpose Provide recommendations for a consistent and uniform practice for combining lane use information on guide signs including construction/assembly type, type of information conveyed, and color of arrows and arrow panels.

5. 5 Combined Lane Use and Destination Signs Results Signs with single lane designations were understood significantly more than signs with shared-lane designations Regulatory lane-use panels and lane-use arrows proved to be equally effective for combined lane use and destination signs No difference in comprehension based on the presence or absence of vertical separator lines for signs tested

6. 6 State-of-Practice for Freeway Guide Sign Design Purpose Review current practices and provide an example uniform methodology to create a guide sign of any configuration by knowing the desired uppercase letter height of the principal legend.

7. 7 State-of-Practice for Freeway Guide Sign Design Report Contains Information About: Fractions Letter Style Legend Height Numeral Height Word Spacing Line Spacing Edge Spacing Route Shield Size Corner Radius Border Width

8. 8 State-of-Practice for Freeway Guide Sign Design Most Common Practice: Border Thickness Corner Radius Element Ratio to Capital Letter Height

9. 9 Evaluation of International (and Selected) Symbol Signs Purpose Evaluate potential symbol signs for legibility and comprehension. Signs include concepts from international practice as well as others that are used in the US but not included in the MUTCD. –Combination Horizontal Alignment / Advisory Speed –Congestion Ahead –Do Not Enter –Do Not Pass –Electric Vehicle Charging Station –Fallen Rocks –Flagger Ahead –Maximum Width –No Left Turn Ahead –Railroad Crossing on Leg of Roundabout –Cross Street Preferential Lane Warning Signs –Road Narrows –Low Shoulder Warning Signs –Survey Crew –Trolley Crossing –Uneven Lanes –Winery

10. 10 Evaluation of International (and Selected) Symbol Signs Results

11. 11 Evaluation of International (and Selected) Symbol Signs Results

12. 12 Evaluation of International (and Selected) Symbol Signs Results

13. 13 Evaluation of International (and Selected) Symbol Signs Results

14. 14 Current and Near-Term Project Topics Truncated Arrow-per-Lane Guide Signs Evaluation of Additional Symbol Signs Pedestrian Countdown Signals without Flashing Hand Business Logo Signing Sign Images as Pavement Markings Incident Management Signs

15. 15 Questions? For further information, contact: Scott Wainwright (202) 366-0857 scott.wainwright@dot.gov Bill Lambert (603) 271-2291 wlambert@dot.state.nh.us