Highway Safety Manual - Florida Department of Transportation

Report
Highway Safety Manual
Implementation
DISTRICT PILOT PROJECT PRESENTATION
MAY 2, 2011
1
Highway Safety Manual
Implementation
Presentation Outline

Overview of the Highway Safety Manual Implementation
Plan

Update of the Development of SPF Calibration Factors

Available SPFs and CMFs

Sample Pilot Project Description and Analysis

Request for Pilot Project Descriptions
2
3
4
5
6
CO & DISTRICT CHAMPIONS

Assign Top-Level District Champions





Participate in Top-down management presentations with
the Central Office champions (Bob Romig, Brian Blanchard
and Marianne Trussell)
Actively promote, support and advocate the benefits of
implementing the Highway Safety Manual
Monitor pilot projects and implementation progress
Conduct recognition ceremonies for pilot project
participants
Submit District Champion counterparts from
Transportation Development and Operations to Marianne
Trussell, Chief Safety Officer by April 29, 2011.
7
CALIBRATION OF THE HIGHWAY SAFETY
MANUAL TO FLORIDA CONDITIONS
OVERVIEW

Calibration factors for fatal and injury models
only

KAB and KABC
9
IDENTIFY FACILITY TYPES

FDOT Prioritized Segments
Rural two-lane roads
 Rural multilane divided roads
 Urban multilane divided arterials


Additional segments
Urban two-lane undivided arterials
 Urban two-lane with TWLTL
 Urban four-lane undivided arterials
 Urban four-lane with TWLTL

10
FDOT PRIORITY FACILITY TYPES
11
COMPUTE CALIBRATION FACTOR
C
 observedcrashes
 predictedcrashes
all sites
all sites
12
RURAL TWO-LANE ROADS
N = AADT × L × 365 × 10-6 × e(-0.312)
 CMFs with available data



Lane width, shoulder width, shoulder type, TWLTL,
lighting
CMFs values assumed
Grade, driveway density, roadside hazard rating
 HSM default values used

13
RURAL TWO-LANE ROADS
Rural 2 Lane Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
1.352
1.375
1.244
1.220
KAB
1.363
1.063
1.235
1.071
1.027
0.982
KABC
1.067
1.007
14
RURAL MULTILANE DIVIDED ROADS

N = exp[ a + b × ln(AADT) + ln(L) ]
Crash Severity Level

b
4-lane fatal and injury (KAB)
-8.837
0.958
4-lane fatal and injury (KABC)
-8.505
0.874
CMFs with available data


a
Lane width, right shoulder width, median width, lighting
CMFs with values assumed

None
15
RURAL MULTILANE DIVIDED ROADS
Rural 4 Lane Divided Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
0.777
0.760
0.746
0.695
KAB
0.768
0.724
0.721
0.703
0.708
0.671
KABC
0.713
0.689
16
URBAN ARTERIALS

CMFs with available data


Median width, on-street parking, lighting
CMFs with values assumed

Roadside fixed objects
 CMF

assumed to be 1.0
Driveway density
 CMF
assumed to be 1.0
17
URBAN 2 LANE UNDIVIDED
Urban 2 Lane Undivided Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
1.103
1.009
1.139
0.947
KABC
1.057
1.044
18
URBAN 2 LANE WITH TWLTL
Urban 2 Lane with TWLTL Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
0.916
1.184
1.105
1.073
KABC
1.051
1.089
19
URBAN 4 LANE DIVIDED ARTERIALS
Urban 4 Lane Divided Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
1.758
1.637
1.681
1.609
KABC
1.697
1.646
20
URBAN 4 LANE UNDIVIDED
Urban 4 Lane Undivided Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
0.627
0.743
0.777
0.697
KABC
0.685
0.738
21
URBAN 4 LANE WITH TWLTL
Urban 4 Lane with TWLTL Calibration Factor
2005
2006
2007
2008
0.749
0.765
0.735
0.708
KABC
0.744
0.698
22
BIKE LANES – URBAN 4 LANE DIVIDED

Without bike lane separation

With bike lanes

Without bike lanes
23
2007-2008 CALIBRATION SUMMARY
INTERSECTION DATA

Data Needs

Rural and Urban
 AADT,
Crashes, skew, left-turn lanes, right-turn lanes,
lighting,

Urban only
 pedestrian
activity, left-turn signal phasing, right-turn-onred, red-light cameras, bus stops, schools, alcohol sales
establishments
25
INTERSECTION DATA

Crash Analysis Reporting System
Geometric characteristics?
 Lat, long coordinates?


FDOT Intersection Study
Signalized: no geometry, no 2nd AADT
 Un-signalized: no AADT

26
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT
SR 44 from Hill Avenue to West of CR 4139 is a rural 2-lane
undivided roadway with curved roadway segments. Five
curves exist within the project limits and one curve would
require a design exception for super-elevation. Equation 10-6
(HSM-Part C) and the applicable CMFs (HSM-Part D) will be
used to predict crashes for the roadway segment that includes
Curve 1 and determine if a design exception is justified.
27
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT
28
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT
The following information is available:
1. Length of segment: 0.10 miles
2. AADT: 17,300 in 2010 (opening year); 26,600 in 2030 (design year)
3. Grade: 0.0%
4. Radius of curve: 573’
5. Driveways per mile: 2
6. Lane width: 12’
7. Shoulder width: 4’
8. Shoulder type: paved
9. Roadside hazard rating: 2 (based on 18’ CZ with 1:4 front slopes)
10. Curve length: 0.06 miles
11. Existing e: 3.5% (eastbound) and 0.0% (westbound)
12. Required e: 10.0%
13. Calibration factor: 1.01
29
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

Apply the appropriate SPF

N = AADT × L × 365 × 10–6 × e (–0.312)
 = 17,300 × 0.163 × 365 × 10–6 × e (–0.312) = 0.753
crashes/year
30
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

Adjust the estimated crash frequency to the site
specific geometric conditions

1. CMF1r = (CMFra – 1.0) x pra + 1.0 =

= (1.0 – 1.0) x 0.40 + 1.0 = 1.0

2. CMF2r = (CMFwra x CMFtra – 1.0) x pra + 1.0 =
 = (1.15 x 1.0 – 1.0) x 0.70 + 1.0 = 1.11

3. CMF3r =
=
(1.55 x Lc) + (80.2 / R) – (0.012 x S)
(1.55 x Lc)
(1.55 x 0.06) + (80.2 / 573) – (0.012 x 0)
(1.55 x 0.06)
=
= 2.51
Note: CMF1r => lane width; CMF2r => shoulder width and type;
CMF3r => horizontal curvature
31
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

4. CMF4r = 1.06 + 3(SV - 0.02) =
 = 1.06 + 3(0.10 - 0.02) = 1.30

5. CMF5r = 1.0 (grade < 3%)

6. CMF6r = 1.0 (less than 5 driveways / mile)

7. CMF7r = 1.0 (no rumble strips)
8. CMF8r = 1.0 (no passing lanes)
9. CMF9r = 1.0 (no TWLTL)


Note: CMF4r => super-elevation variance
32
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

10. CMF10r =
e(-0.6869 + 0.0668 x RHR)
=
(-0.4865)
e
e(-0.6869 + 0.0668 x 2)
e(-0.4865)
= 0.94

11. CMF11r = 1.00 (no roadway lighting)
12. CMF12r = 1.00 (no automated speed enforcement)

CMFcomb = 1.11 x 2.51 x 1.30 x 0.94 = 3.41

Note: CMF10r => roadside hazard rating = 2 (based on 18’CZ
with 1:4 front slopes).
33
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

Npredicted-rs = 0.753 x 3.41 x 1.01 = 2.59 crashes/year

Annual KABC Cost of Crashes (existing conditions)


Fatal = 0.013 x 2.59 x $6,380,000 = $214,815
Incap. = 0.054 x 2.59 x $521,768 = $72,974
Nonincap. = 0.109 x 2.59 x $104,052 = $29,375
Poss. Injury = 0.145 x 2.59 x $63,510 = $23,851

ANNUAL CRASH COST (existing conditions)= $341,015


Note: crash costs from STATE SAFETY OFFICE BULLETIN 0-01 or
ROADWAY DESIGN BULLETIN 10-09
34
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

Adjust the estimated crash frequency to the site
specific geometric conditions (build)

1. CMF1r = (CMFra – 1.0) x pra + 1.0 =

= (1.0 – 1.0) x 0.40 + 1.0 = 1.0

2. CMF2r = (CMFwra x CMFtra – 1.0) x pra + 1.0 =
 = (1.15 x 1.0 – 1.0) x 0.70 + 1.0 = 1.11

3. CMF3r =
=
(1.55 x Lc) + (80.2 / R) – (0.012 x S)
(1.55 x Lc)
(1.55 x 0.08) + (80.2 / 750) – (0.012 x 0)
(1.55 x 0.08)
=
= 1.86
Note: CMF1r => lane width; CMF2r => shoulder width and type;
CMF3r => horizontal curvature
35
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

4. CMF4r = 1.06 + 3(SV - 0.02) =
 = 1.06 + 3(0.10 - 0.10) = 1.06

5. CMF5r = 1.0 (grade < 3%)

6. CMF6r = 1.0 (less than 5 driveways / mile)

7. CMF7r = 1.0 (no rumble strips)
8. CMF8r = 1.0 (no passing lanes)
9. CMF9r = 1.0 (no TWLTL)


Note: CMF4r => super-elevation variance
36
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

10. CMF10r =
e(-0.6869 + 0.0668 x RHR)
=
(-0.4865)
e
e(-0.6869 + 0.0668 x 2)
e(-0.4865)
= 0.94

11. CMF11r = 1.00 (no roadway lighting)
12. CMF12r = 1.00 (no automated speed enforcement)

CMFcomb = 1.11 x 1.86 x 1.06 x 0.94 = 2.06

Note: CMF10r => roadside hazard rating = 2 (based on 18’CZ
with 1:4 front slopes).
37
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

Npredicted-rs = 0.753 x 2.06 x 1.01 = 1.57 crashes/year

Annual KABC Cost of Crashes (build conditions)


Fatal = 0.013 x 1.57 x $6,380,000 = $130,216
Incap. = 0.054 x 1.57 x $521,768 = $44,235
Nonincap. = 0.109 x 1.57 x $104,052 = $17,806
Poss. Injury = 0.145 x 1.57 x $63,510 = $14,458

ANNUAL CRASH COST (existing conditions)= $206,715


Note: crash costs from STATE SAFETY OFFICE BULLETIN 0-01 or
ROADWAY DESIGN BULLETIN 10-09
38
SAMPLE PILOT PROJECT

BENEFIT/COST RATIO

Annual Reduction in Crash Costs
=
B/C =
Annual Increase in Construction Costs
314,015 – 206,715
0.08994 x 821,748
107,300
73,908
=
= 1.45: 1
Note: Construction costs were annualized at 4% over 15 years.
39
DISTRICT ACTION





Submit a description of a pilot project that can be
analyzed using the current Highway Safety Manual.
Submit: narrative that describes the project
alternatives and the input values
Central Office will review the proposed analysis and
provide feedback that may include resource
information, discussion of appropriate methodology,
etc.
Submit by Wednesday, May 11th.
Information will be shared with District Champions.
40
THE NEW HIGHWAY SAFETY MANUAL OF 2010
Questions?
41

similar documents