Tag Archives: traffic safety

Using SMART-Signal Data to Predict Red Light Running at Intersections

This project developed a methodology using traffic data collected by the SMART-Signal system to identify intersections prone to red light running and, therefore, serious crashes. This methodology could help MnDOT prioritize intersections for safety improvements.

“The essence of this project was to develop a toolbox that traffic engineers can use to determine an intersection’s safety performance,” said Henry Liu, Research Professor, University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute.

Liu served as the study’s principal investigator.

“This research provides a way to classify intersections that have a higher potential for red light running,” Mick Rakauskas, Former Research Fellow, HumanFIRST Program, University of Minnesota

What Was the Need?

Engineers traditionally measure an intersection’s safety using the number of crashes that actually occur there. However, collisions are rare and somewhat random events, and it can take a long time to collect enough data to accurately assess a single location’s safety.

Traffic conflicts—“close calls” in which one or both drivers must brake, swerve or take some other evasive action to avoid a crash—happen much more often than collisions do. As a result, many research projects use traffic conflicts as an alternative measure of safety.

Red light running (RLR) is one of the most common and dangerous causes of traffic conflicts at signalized intersections. While not every RLR event leads to a collision, it is often the first step in a process that ends in one.

Additionally, crashes caused when drivers run red lights are typically right-angle crashes, which are frequently severe. About 45 percent of right-angle collisions result in injury compared to about 25 percent of other crash types. Reducing right-angle-crash frequency can therefore significantly improve overall road safety and reduce costs related to traffic collisions.

MnDOT’s Safety Group wanted to determine whether it was possible to objectively and automatically identify intersections where RLR events are most likely to occur. Developing a methodology to identify the most dangerous intersections would help MnDOT prioritize locations for safety improvements.

What Was Our Goal?

Several previous MnDOT research projects had developed the SMART-Signal system, an automatic system that collects data from traffic signal controllers at signalized intersections. MnDOT has installed the system at more than 100 intersections in the Twin Cities. This project sought to develop tools that use SMART-Signal data to evaluate safety performance at intersections.

What Did We Do?

flowchart
This flowchart shows the methodology for determining whether an RLR event will result in a crossing conflict.

Researchers analyzed SMART-Signal data collected at the intersection of Boone Avenue and Trunk Highway 55 (TH 55) in Golden Valley between December 2008 and September 2009. This intersection is equipped with both stop-bar detectors and advance detectors located about 400 feet upstream of the intersection. Researchers used stop-bar-actuation data and details about traffic signal phases to identify RLR events at the intersection.

However, since most intersections are equipped only with advance detectors, this method cannot be used to measure RLR events at all intersections. As an alternative, re-searchers used vehicle-speed and traffic-volume data from the advance detectors, along with recorded traffic-signal-phase information from SMART-Signal, to identify potential RLR events. They compared these potential events to actual RLR events identified using stop-bar data and developed a formula to predict whether an RLR event would occur. This formula can be applied at intersections of major and minor roads that are not equipped with stop-bar detectors.

Researchers then used data from a minor road to develop a method that identified whether an RLR event would lead to a traffic conflict. In this method, an intersection is first divided into four conflict zones (two in each direction). When a vehicle from the main road enters the intersection, the method enables researchers to calculate when the vehicle enters and leaves each of the conflict zones it passes through. Then they determine whether a vehicle from the minor road is in the same conflict zone. Using this methodology, researchers estimated the number of daily traffic conflicts at other inter-sections on TH 55. These estimates were based on data collected in 2009 and between 2012 and 2015.

Finally, researchers developed a regression model to evaluate whether adding the number of predicted traffic conflicts to a more standard model that used average annual daily traffic (AADT) would correlate with the number of actual collisions at that site. They evaluated the model using data from seven four-legged intersections and two T-intersections on TH 13 and TH 55.

What Did We Learn?

The formula for predicting RLR events matched observations 83.12% of the time, based on more than 2,000 data points.

The number of daily crossing conflicts at TH 55 intersections ranged from 7.9 (at Glenwood Avenue in 2009) to 51.2 (at Winnetka Avenue in 2013).

While limited data were available for the regression model (as no site had more than four years of SMART-Signal data available, and there were only 11 crashes in total), the model suggests that estimated average traffic conflicts and minor-road AADT both contribute to accurate prediction of right-angle-crash frequency, while major-road AADT does not. Due to the limited data available, however, these conclusions should be considered preliminary.

What’s Next?

While there are currently no plans for follow-up studies, additional research efforts could include continuing to evaluate and improve the prediction model as more data are collected, and installing video cameras at intersections to validate the proposed methodologies.


This Technical Summary pertains to Report 2017-08, “Estimation of Crossing Conflict at Signalized Intersection Using High-Resolution Traffic Data,” published March 2017. 

Reducing speeds to improve safety for work-zone flaggers

When drivers approach a roadway work zone at high speeds, they put the lives of work-zone flaggers at risk. To keep flaggers safe on the job, U of M researchers are looking for better ways to capture drivers’ attention—and compel them to slow down—as they approach flagger-controlled work zones.

Kathleen Harder, director of the Center for Design in Health, and John Hourdos, director of the Minnesota Traffic Observatory, identified and tested new work-zone warning elements to more effectively capture and sustain driver attention. The project was funded by MnDOT and the Minnesota Local Road Research Board.

The project began with a simulator study in which participants completed three drives, each featuring a work zone with different warning treatments. One condition was a traditional four-sign configuration currently used to warn drivers approaching work zones. The other two conditions featured a variety of new elements, including signage with new messaging such as  a “one-lane road ahead” sign with flashing LED lights, a dynamic speed warning sign equipped with a loud warning horn that sounded if drivers exceeded the speed limit, and portable rumble strips.

“Overall, we found that the new set of elements is more effective than the elements currently used to reduce driving speeds on the approach to a flagger-controlled work zone,” Harder says.

Although adding LED lights to the one-lane road sign had no significant effect on drivers’ speeds, findings indicated that the dynamic speed sign coupled with the horn was more effective than the dynamic sign alone.

To test these new elements under real-world conditions, the researchers conducted field tests evaluating two configurations in Minnesota work zones. The first configuration followed the minimum standards outlined in the Minnesota Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The second deployed signs employing new messaging and attention-getting devices, including a dynamic speed warning sign, horn, and rumble strips.

Findings showed that the combination of the dynamic speed warning sign and the horn successfully reduced the overall speed of vehicles approaching the work zone. The portable rumble strips did not cause any significant speed reduction, but this may have been related to their location downstream from the dynamic speed sign and horn.

“Our findings reveal that the new set of elements designed to capture driver attention—including new messaging, a dynamic speed trailer, and horn—had a significant influence on reducing driver speed,” Harder says. “The experimental layout practically eliminated high-speed outliers and successfully reduced the approach speed to the flag operator.”

Video Demonstration: Robotic Message Painter Prototype

In the above video, University of Minnesota-Duluth Associate Professor Ryan Rosandich tests a prototype of a robotic arm he developed to paint messages and markings on roadways. He calls the machine “The MnDOT Robot.”

During a test run in October 2015, the MnDOT robot painted a right-turn arrow and the word “ahead” on pavement at MnDOT’s Pike Lake station in Duluth.

Rosandich hopes commercial companies will show an interest in further developing his proof-of-concept technology into something that road authorities can use regularly to make work easier, faster and safer for their employees.

Companies interested in commercializing this technology can contact Andrew Morrow at amorrow@umn.edu.

Editor’s Note: The paint used in the above demonstration was diluted due to the cold weather at the time of the demonstration and does not reflect the condition of the paint expected in a typical application.

Rumble Strips vs. Mumble Strips: Noise Comparison (Video)

We recently blogged about a research project to evaluate a new type of rumble strip that produces significantly less external noise than traditional designs. The above video, shot near Thief River Falls, Minnesota, shows a comparison between traditional rumble strip designs and the newer, “sinusoidal” rumble strips (a.k.a. “mumble strips”).

The life-saving benefits of rumble strips are well-established, but traditional designs produce external noise that residents consider to be a nuisance. The issue has pit safety concerns against quality-of-life concerns in some parts of the state. Researchers are investigating whether sinusoidal rumble strip designs, which are much quieter, are effective enough to combat drowsy or inattentive driving.

The video is not exactly a scientific comparison, but it does give the viewer a good sense of the difference in noise levels produced by the two styles of rumble strips. The results of the actual research project are expected to be available later this year.

New technology aimed at making rural intersections safer

This video above showcases a new kind of intersection conflict warning system being developed for use primarily by local agencies at rural, two-way stop intersections. Called the ALERT System, it uses a simple but ingenious combination of radar, wireless communication and flashing LEDs to alert drivers to the presence of approaching vehicles, thereby helping them identify safe gaps in the cross traffic and avoid potentially deadly collisions.

These types of systems are nothing new; MnDOT and other state DOTs have been developing them for more than a decade under the ENTERPRISE pooled fund program. MnDOT also recently kicked off a three-year project to deploy 20–50 of its Rural Intersection Conflict Warning Systems at selected at-risk intersections across the state. The main difference with the ALERT System is that it’s designed to be cheaper and easier to deploy than existing ICWS technologies. While that might sound like an incremental improvement, the difference for cash-strapped local agencies could be huge.

Since the ALERT System uses solar power, it doesn’t have to be hooked up to the power grid — which means that, in theory, county public works crews could install it themselves. The system also uses a simplified controller that doesn’t require a traffic signal technician to install and maintain, and detects vehicles using radar rather than in-pavement sensors. These factors might encourage greater adoption of ICWS technologies, which studies have shown to reduce both the frequency and severity of crashes.

The project is now in its second phase. It still faces a number of hurdles before could be ready to deploy, but Vic Lund, the traffic engineer for St. Louis County and the project’s main champion, says the results so far have been encouraging. In the video below, Lund shares his thoughts on the project, its challenges and the future of Intelligent Transportation Systems in Minnesota.

Learn more:

White House honors MnDOT traffic boss for work on rural intersection safety

The White House named Minnesota Department of Transportation State Traffic Engineer Sue Groth one of its 12 transportation “Champions of Change” for her role in implementing life-saving technology to help prevent collisions at rural intersections. The rural intersection conflict warning systems, which use sensors and lights to give motorists real-time warnings about traffic conditions, were developed by MnDOT’s Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology.

It’s worth noting that MnDOT Research Services and the University of Minnesota are also currently working on a project to develop a low-cost version of these systems using LEDs and solar panels. The ongoing research, being conducted by University of Minnesota— Duluth Professor Taek Kwon, is a continuation of the Advanced Light-Emitting Diode Warning System project completed in 2010.

Here’s the press release from MnDOT:

ST. PAUL, Minn. – On Wednesday, May 8, 2013, the White House honored Sue Groth, Minnesota Department of Transportation’s state traffic engineer, as one of 12 people who are Transportation “Champions of Change.” The Champions event, “Transportation Technology Solutions for the 21st Century,” focused on individuals or organizations that have provided exemplary leadership in developing or implementing transportation technology solutions to enhance performance, reduce congestion, improve safety and facilitate communication across the transportation industry at the local, state or national level.

“These Champions represent the very best in American leadership, innovation and progress,” said Secretary Ray LaHood. “I’m proud to recognize these transportation leaders who work every day to grow our economy and help us reach our destinations more quickly, efficiently and safely.”

The MnDOT Office of Traffic, Safety and Technology has been selected as a Champion of Change for their work to reduce fatal and life-changing crashes on Minnesota roadways, while enhancing mobility for all users. OTST is being honored for designing, testing and helping to deploy dozens of life-saving rural intersection conflict warning systems throughout Minnesota, while leading a national effort to do more of the same throughout rural America. These systems save lives at rural intersections that might otherwise not warrant or afford more traditional traffic control devices or geometric improvements.

See also: