U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations
| REPORT |
| This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information |
 |
| Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-12-048 Date: November 2013 |
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-12-048 Date: November 2013 |
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®
This report provides information on four topics related to advanced pavement marking systems: (1) an evaluation of the durability and cost effectiveness of alternative marking materials, (2) a two-part study on the safety impacts of wider edge lines, the first part using operational effects as surrogate safety metrics and the second part based on a post-hoc analysis of safety data, (3) an evaluation of the potential environmental impacts of cost effective pavement marking systems, and (4) a review of the effect of State procurement processes on the quality of installed markings. This report amplifies information that may be found in Pavement Marking Demonstration Projects: State of Alaska and State of Tennessee: Report to Congress (FHWA-HRT-09-039). The intent of this report is to provide decisionmakers with information on materials and methods that will reduce the overall national expenditure on pavement markings, while providing improved guidance and enhanced safety for the driving public.
Monique R. Evans
Director, Office of Safety
Research and Development
Notice
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
Quality Assurance Statement
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
Technical Report Documentation Page
| 1. Report No.
FHWA-HRT-12-048 |
2. Government Accession No. | 3 Recipient's Catalog No. | ||
| 4. Title and Subtitle
Pavement Marking Demonstration Projects: State of Alaska and State of Tennessee |
5. Report Date November 2013 |
|||
| 6. Performing Organization Code | ||||
| 7. Author(s)
Paul Carlson, Eun-Sug Park, Adam Pike, R.J. Porter, Jeffrey Miles, |
8. Performing Organization Report No.
|
|||
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Texas Transportation Institute SAIC |
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) |
|||
11. Contract or Grant No. DTFH61-05-D-00025 |
||||
| 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Office of Safety Research and Development |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Final Report |
|||
14. Sponsoring Agency Code
|
||||
15. Supplementary Notes Projects were performed with the cooperation and participation of the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities. The Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR) was Carl K. Andersen, Office of Safety Research and Development. |
||||
16. Abstract This project evaluates the safety impacts, environmental impacts, and cost effectiveness of different pavement marking systems as well as the effect of State bidding and procurement processes on the quality of pavement marking material employed in highway projects. The findings indicate that States are pursuing alternative procurement strategies to provide high-quality durable markings in a cost effective manner, often as part of a strategic safety plan, while industry has responded to requirements for more environmentally benign materials. A multi-State retrospective crash analysis suggests that the use of 6-inch edge lines reduces several crash types on rural two-lane two-way roads as compared to 4-inch edge lines. The monitored performance of pavement markings installed as part of the demonstration project was used to evaluate pavement marking cost effectiveness. The same results were also used to populate a framework for a pavement marking selection tool.
|
||||
| 17. Key Words
Acrylic waterborne paint, Durability, Environmental impacts, Pavement markings, Retroreflectivity, State bidding procedures, Wider edge lines |
18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service Alexandria, VA 22312 |
|||
19. Security Classification Unclassified |
20. Security Classification Unclassified |
21. No. of Pages 298 |
22. Price | |
| Form DOT F 1700.7 | Reproduction of completed page authorized |
SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors
| AADT | Average annual daily traffic |
| AASHTO | American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials |
| AC | Asphalt concrete |
| ACGIH | American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists |
| ADOT | Arizona Department of Transportation |
| ADT | Average daily traffic |
| AGBMA | American Glass Bead Manufacturers Association |
| AKDOT | Alaska Department of Transportation |
| ALDOT | Alabama Department of Transportation |
| ANOVA | Analysis of variance |
| ANSI | American National Standards Institute |
| AWPM | All-weather pavement marking |
| BMP | Best management practices |
| CAA | Clean Air Act |
| CAS | Chemical Abstracts Service |
| CDOT | Colorado Department of Transportation |
| CERCLA | Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act |
| CFR | Code of Federal Regulations |
| CMRG | Chemical Manufacturer Recommended Guideline |
| EB | Empirical Bayes |
| EEC | European Economic Community |
| EHS | Environment, Health, and Safety |
| EPA | Environmental Protection Agency |
| F+I | Fatal plus injury |
| FDOT | Florida Department of Transportation |
| FHWA | Federal Highway Administration |
| FP-XRF | Field-portable x ray fluorescence |
| GDOT | Georgia Department of Transportation |
| GEE | Generalized estimating equation |
| GEV | Generalized extreme value |
| HMAC | Hot mix asphalt concrete |
| HMIS | Hazardous Materials Identification System |
| HSIS | Highway Safety Information System |
| HSL | Hue, saturation, and lightness |
| IARC | International Agency for Research on Cancer |
| IIA | Independence of irrelevant alternatives |
| Iowa DOT | Iowa Department of Transportation |
| ISO | Organization for Standardization |
| KDOT | Kansas Department of Transportation |
| LC50 | Median lethal concentration |
| LCA | Life-cycle assessment |
| LCI | Life-cycle inventory |
| LCIA | Life-cycle inventory assessment |
| LD50 | Median lethal dose |
| LRS | Longitudinal reference system |
| MC | Midpoint of curve |
| mcd/lux/m2 | millicandela per lux per square meter |
| MDOT | Michigan Department of Transportation |
| mil | One thousandth of an inch |
| MMA | Methyl methacrylate |
| MnDOT | Minnesota Department of Transportation |
| MSDS | Material safety data sheet |
| MUTCD | Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices |
| NAAQS | National Ambient Air Quality Standards |
| NCDOT | North Carolina Department of Transportation |
| nd | Non-detectable |
| NEPA | National Environmental Policy Act |
| NESHAP | National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants |
| NFPA | National Fire Protection Association |
| NJDOT | New Jersey Department of Transportation |
| NJIT/RU | New Jersey Institute of Technology/Rowan University |
| NOAEL | No observed adverse effect level |
| NTP | National Toxicology Program |
| NTPEP | National Transportation Product Evaluation Program |
| OSHA | Occupational Safety and Health Administration |
| PC | Point of curve |
| PDO | Property damage only |
| PEL | Permissible exposure limit |
| PM | Particulate matter |
| PMST | Pavement marking selection tool |
| PCC | Portland cement concrete |
| PPE | Personal protective equipment |
| ppm | Parts per million |
| RCRA | Resource Conservation and Recovery Act |
| REML | Restricted maximum likelihood |
| R.I. | Refractive index |
| R.P. | Reference post |
| RPM | Raised pavement marker |
| RTLTW | Rural two-lane two-way |
| SAFETEA-LU | Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users |
| SAIC | Scientific Applications International Corporation |
| SARA | Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act |
| SAS® | Statistical Analysis Software® |
| SCBA | Self-contained breathing apparatus |
| SIP | State Implementation Plan |
| SPF | Safety performance function |
| SPLP | Synthetic precipitation leaching procedure |
| SR | State route |
| TCLP | Toxicity characteristic leaching procedure |
| TDOT | Tennessee Department of Transportation |
| TSCA | Toxic Substances Control Act |
| TTI | Texas Transportation Institute |
| TxDOT | Texas Department of Transportation |
| U | Upstream location |
| UV | Ultraviolet |
| VDOT | Virginia Department of Transportation |
| VOC | Volatile organic compound |
| W | Advance curve warning sign location |
| WSDOT | Washington State Department of Transportation |
| α | Alpha, level of statistical significance |
| β | Beta, regression coefficient (of a negative binomial model) |
| χ | Chi, covariate (of a negative binomial model) |
| c | Combinations, number of factor-level combinations in an interaction |
| Δ | Delta (upper case), mean difference, in a given factor |
| δ | Delta (lowercase), minimum detectable difference |
| μ | Mu (lowercase), represents one millionth, or 10-6 |
| n | Sample size |
| Σ | Sigma (upper case), sum of parts that follow |
| σ | Sigma (lowercase), one standard deviation |
