Tag Archives: pavement markings

Prioritizing Pavement Markings on Low-Volume Roads

Researchers have developed a tool to help Minnesota local agencies make cost-effective pavement marking decisions in their counties. The spreadsheet-based tool was developed as part of a recently completed research study by the Minnesota Local Road Research Board.

What Was the Need?

Minnesota has many miles of low-volume roads, most marked with yellow centerline and white edge lines. Applying and maintaining these markings is a significant financial investment for local agencies, which typically work within very constrained budgets. These agencies needed more information about the value and the initial and ongoing costs of typical 4-inch and enhanced 6-inch pavement markings on low-volume roadways. They also needed clarification and guidance for prioritizing pavement marking installation and maintenance that could work within their limited budgets.

What Was Our Goal?

The goal of this research was to develop a prioritization approach and a decision-making tool for using pavement markings on low-volume roads based on the benefits and costs of these markings. Local agencies could then use these resources to make cost-effective decisions about installing and maintaining pavement markings.

Rural road with cyclist in bike lane
This segment of Minnesota Highway 38 has yellow centerlines and white edge lines that delineate a 4-foot bicycle lane

What Did We Do?

Researchers took a multistep approach to identifying critical pavement marking information and practices:

• Conducted a literature search of existing research on typical (4-inch) and enhanced (6-inch) pavement markings, focusing on the benefits (such as crash reduction and improved lane-keeping), costs and current maintenance practices.
• Surveyed Minnesota counties to learn about their current practices and management approaches for pavement markings.
• Reviewed existing County Road Safety Plan (CRSP) methodology to learn about research and data used to rank at-risk road segments and identify CRSP improvement strategies, specifically the range of pavement markings that CRSPs recommended.

Researchers were then able to develop a prioritization approach and a decision-making tool that incorporated both past research and local state of the practice. In addition to producing a final report describing task results, they developed a brochure explaining the approach, the tool and implementation steps.

“This innovative tool will help local agencies make pavement marking decisions under tight budget constraints, where the question is always how to best allot funds for competing needs. This tool clarifies the problems and helps prioritize the possible solutions,” said David Veneziano, LTAP Safety Circuit Rider, Iowa State University Institute for Transportation.

What Did We Learn?

The literature search revealed limited research addressing traditional pavement marking use and effectiveness on local roadways. Pavement markings produce safety benefits, including reduced crash rates, but showed no real effects on vehicle speed, indicating that pavement markings may not alter driver behavior. Only limited efforts were identified in the literature aimed at investigating the prioritization and management of pavement markings.

The survey of local Minnesota agencies revealed that most counties use centerline and/or edge lines, which may be the result of MnDOT State-Aid Operation Rules. Some counties mark all their roads; most use 4-inch latex paint or epoxy markings. Repainting schedules depend upon road age, marking condition and county budgets.

A review of Minnesota counties’ CRSPs showed they included pavement marking recommendations. The CRSPs recommended, on average, 109 miles of pavement markings in every county. Applying one linear foot of centerline costs about 5 cents; 100 miles of centerline cost $26,400. Because of the extent of these recommendations, researchers directly incorporated the methods and directives from the CRSPs into their prioritization approach and tool.

The spreadsheet tool produced through this project allows users to enter road site characteristics such as pavement condition, road width, the CRSP rating and traffic volume, as well as the age of extant markings, costs, durability and the potential for crash reduction. Pavement marking options include centerline and/or edge lines, high visibility markings and enhanced durability materials. The tool uses factor weights that assign a relative importance to each criterion for any potential marking approach compared to other alternatives. The result is a performance rating score for each marking alternative. Thus, the tool assists not only in identifying the physical aspects of a road segment, it also incorporates the agency’s preferences, priorities and budget through a priority-weighting feature that generates the cost or cost range for a marking project.

What’s Next?

Recommendations for further research include conducting a follow-up survey of users
of the new spreadsheet tool to facilitate future modifications, creating databases of roadway characteristics to simplify agencies’ use of the tool, and performing additional research on the safety and other effects of pavement markings. Researchers also encouraged agencies to keep in mind a proposed national retroreflectivity rule for the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that could affect pavement marking practices on low-volume roads. This rule has not yet been finalized or implemented.

This post pertains to LRRB-produced Report 2018-21, “Investigating the Necessity and Prioritizing Pavement Markings on Low-Volume Roads,” published June 2018. The Pavement Marking Prioritization Tool can also be found on the project webpage on the LRRB website.

Using a National Database to Develop Performance Metrics for Local Pavement Markings

Pavement marking performance metrics from a new study will help Minnesota local agencies save time and money by choosing longer-lasting pavement marking products.

Researchers developed pavement marking performance metrics for Minnesota local agencies to use as a guide to make better pavement marking product decisions. The metrics were developed based on an analysis of survey data collected from Minnesota local agencies and MnDOT pavement marking data mined from the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program (NTPEP). Findings showed differences in product performance with regard to retroreflectivity and service life, which were impacted by variables such as road surface type, year of application, traffic volume and type of pavement marking.

“There would be great potential savings in using pavement marking products with a longer service life. Mining NTPEP data to analyze product performance has not been done before and should contribute substantially to this goal,” said Omar Smadi, Director, Iowa State University Center for Transportation Research and Education.

What Was Our Goal?

The goal of this research was to develop pavement marking performance metrics for Minnesota local agencies to use as a guide when choosing the most durable and cost-effective products. Researchers developed the pavement marking performance metrics, specifically for retroreflectivity and service life, by analyzing existing MnDOT data mined from NTPEP. They also used the findings to make recommendations for future pavement marking research to support local agency needs.

What Did We Do?

Researchers designed and conducted a survey to assess pavement marking products used by local agencies in the state. Then they extracted 2010 and 2013 MnDOT pavement marking data from NTPEP to analyze the performance of products that survey respondents identified as commonly used.

NTPEP data included products tested at two different sites and applied on different road surfaces. Researchers analyzed performance with regard to retroreflectivity and deterioration or longevity of the materials under various conditions, such as road surface type, year of application, traffic volume and type of pavement marking. Based on results from the analysis, researchers developed performance metrics for Minnesota local agencies to use as a guide for choosing particular pavement marking product types.

What Did We Learn?

From the survey results, researchers learned that the majority of Minnesota local agencies use either latex or epoxy as their primary pavement marking material. However, epoxy and tape outperformed latex at all levels of conditions and provided a service life of three years or more.

A few survey respondents also reported grooving as a method that seemed to extend the service life of latex paint markings. Researchers were unable to investigate the impact of grooving, however, since MnDOT grooving data was not accessible.

2017-43-p2-image
Grooving may extend the service life of pavement marking materials.

From the NTPEP data analysis, researchers concluded the following:

  • White markings had significantly higher initial retroreflectivity and slower deterioration than yellow markings.
  • Road surface type does not significantly impact retroreflectivity throughout its service life.
  • Epoxy has higher retroreflectivity than latex materials.
  • As expected, markings on wheel zones deteriorated faster, reducing retroreflectivity over time.
  • Deterioration values of markings varied among different test sites, which may be attributed to differences in average annual daily traffic (AADT) values (10,000 in 2010 versus 37,000 in 2013) or installation practices.

“The findings from this research will be beneficial for Minnesota local agencies in determining which pavement marking materials are most effective,” said Kate Miner, then-Scott County Traffic Manager.

What’s Next?

Although the product performance metrics data will help Minnesota local agencies make better pavement marking product decisions in less time, researchers recommend developing a guidebook to make the information more usable. Adding grooving data to the guidebook would also be beneficial to investigate the potential impact grooving provides in extending the service life of pavement markings.

Researchers also recommend testing the same products evaluated in this research on low-volume local roads and on challenging surface types. MnDOT NTPEP data only included products that were tested on high-volume freeways.

This blog pertains to the Local Road Research Board-produced Report 2017-43, “Minnesota Local Agency Pavement Marking: Mining Existing Data,” published November 2017. A related project has developed a spreadsheet tool to help local agencies prioritize pavement markings on low-volume roads.

Robotic message painter could help keep road crews safe

Using rollers and stencils to draw turn arrows and crosswalk stripes on roads seems a bit archaic to MnDOT District 3 Maintenance Superintendent Randy Reznicek, who asked researchers if they could develop an automated road message painter.

University of Minnesota-Duluth Associate Professor Ryan Rosandich has taken that vision and created an robotic arm that can spray-paint pavement signs, with the goal of saving crews time and keeping them safer.

Designed to be mounted to the front of a maintenance vehicle, the robot is operated remotely by a laptop, programmed with numerous types of messages.

In an earlier prototype, researchers developed a trailer painter that could be pulled behind a truck.

Crews currently use heavy, eight-foot by four-foot stencils and rollers to paint designs, with an estimated 75 percent of such work involving the repainting of existing markings.

“It takes two people to lift the stencils,” explained MnDOT maintenance worker Joe Gilk, whom Reznicek presented with the idea about five years ago. “This would eliminate one position. One person could just run the truck and you could use that other person in another area of our job.”

Rosandich, who heads the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Department at the University of Minnesota-Duluth, led the initial development of a software system and trailer painter.

MnDOT has funded further research to develop the more technically difficult robotic arm, which it anticipates could be used in other aspects of maintenance work as well.

MnDOT District 3 maintenance worker Joe Gilk, left, and maintenance superintendent Randy Reznicek watch the demonstration of the robotic message painter, an idea that came from their office.
MnDOT District 3 maintenance worker Joe Gilk, left, and District 1 traffic engineer Rob Ege watch a demonstration of the robotic message painter, an idea that came from Gilk’s office.

Rosandich recently demonstrated the mechanical arm to a MnDOT road crew (no paint was used during the demonstration), but additional software and mechanical tweaks remain before researchers take the machine out for final testing on the pavement this spring.

A companion vision system is being developed to identify existing markings to guide the robot in the repainting of existing messages.

The robot’s three-segmented aluminum shell arm is capable of painting up to a 12-foot wide lane and has enough battery power for a whole day’s worth of work, Rosandich said.

Once the prototype is complete, researchers hope to find a manufacturer to develop and produce a machine that could be used by maintenance crews across the state. MnDOT has already had great success in deploying automated pavement patching systems in some districts.

Not only would a robotic message painter free up maintenance crews and speed up sign-painting, but Rosandich sees worker safety as its “biggest selling point.”

The start-up cost for manufacturing such a device is estimated to be $150,000.