U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000


Skip to content
Facebook iconYouTube iconTwitter iconFlickr iconLinkedInInstagram

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
Back to Publication List        
Publication Number:  FHWA-HRT-17-069    Date:  December 2017
Publication Number: FHWA-HRT-17-069
Date: December 2017

 

Safety Evaluation of Edge-Line Rumble Stripes on Rural Two-Lane Horizontal Curves

Appendix: Additional Installation Details

The following appendix presents additional details provided by Kentucky and Ohio. The States were asked to provide responses to the following questions:

  1. What was the “before-period” condition for the treatment sites with respect to center-line and edge-line rumble strips? (No rumble strips? Center-line rumble strips only? Edge-line rumble strips only? Or some combination of these?)

  2. Do you know whether the treatment sites analyzed by this study were installed as a RETROFIT, through RESURFACING, or by a combination of these?

  3. The installation dates for the treatment sites on our list range from 2009 to 2011. What type of rumble strip was installed at these treatment sites? (If there is more than one, please indicate all that apply.)

    1. Milled.

    2. Rolled.

    3. Formed.

    4. Raised.

    5. Other.

  4. We would like to provide a summary of the rumble strip characteristics below. Would you have any standard drawings—dated 2009/2010—that applied to all of the treatment sites considered in this study? If not, would you be able to identify the following characteristics for the edge-line rumble strips at the study sites?

    1. Width.

    2. Length.

    3. Depth.

    4. Spacing.

    5. Pavement marking type.

    6. Pavement marking width.

  5. Were there any other requirements (e.g., minimum paved shoulder width, pavement structure, etc.) for the installation of rumble strips at the study sites?

  6. Were any other safety countermeasures (besides RESURFACING, if that was your answer to no. 2 above) installed in conjunction with the rumble stripes at the treatment sites evaluated by this study?

  7. Please describe any notable challenges related to the rumble stripe installation and how you overcame them.

  8. Please describe any notable challenges related to the rumble stripe maintenance and how you overcame them.

  9. What lessons learned or recommendations would you share with another States interested in the widespread application of edge-line rumble stripes?

Responses from Kentucky

Kentucky staff responded to all questions. Their responses are listed in numeric order.

  1. The “before condition” had no rumble strips.

  2. The treatment sites analyzed by this study were a combination of RETROFIT and RESURFACING.

  3. The installations were all milled rumble strips.

  4. The following dimensions were used for the ELRS based on the pavement cross section in the ELRS Standard Drawings provided by Kentucky:

    1. Width: 7 inches to 7.5 inches.

    2. Length: 6, 8, and 12 inches, based on pavement width.

    3. Depth: 0.5 to 0.625 inches.

    4. Spacing: 12 inches center-to-center.

  5. The pavement width was required to be at least 20 ft minimum (lanes and shoulders), and the speed limit was 50 mi/h and greater.

  6. No (that I am aware of). There may be sites that received updated signs but not in conjunction with this treatment.

  7. Communication with the field personnel through meetings to alleviate any misconceptions and trepidation.

  8. Minor issues with rumbles installed at the edge of the mat may cause accelerated pavement edge degradation.

  9. Communicate the intentions. Initially target overrepresented crash routes to convey safety improvements. Provide experience from other public agencies as testimony. Leave room for flexibility in design and implementation. Track crash statistics of comparative routes that do not have rumbles to indicate missed opportunities for crash reductions.

Responses from Ohio

Ohio staff responded to all questions. Their responses are listed in numeric order.

  1. The “before condition” had no rumble strips.

  2. They were installed on routes meeting the minimum requirements (i.e., shoulder width, acceptable PCR .and not just resurfacing). They may have been added to district pavement marking contracts as well as resurfacing in the year or two when they were installed through the systematic program.

  3. The installations were all milled rumble strips.

  4. The following dimensions were used for the ELRS based on the pavement cross section in the ELRS Standard Drawings provided by Kentucky:

    1. Width: 5 inches ± 0.5 inches.

    2. Length: 6, 10, and 16 inches, based on shoulder width.

    3. Depth: 0.375 inches.

    4. Spacing: 12 inches center-to-center.

  5. The treatment sites were installed as a combination of adequate shoulder (2 ft or greater), acceptable pavement condition (PCR rating of 80 or higher), minimum lane widths (11 ft), two-lane routes outside of urban areas and locations where the speed limit is 45 mi/h or greater.

  6. No. Sites were gathered if they met the criteria shown in question 5.

  7. After surveying a few of the ODOT Districts, no notable challenges were encountered upon installation.

  8. After surveying a few of the ODOT Districts, no notable challenges were mentioned in regard to the maintenance of the rumble stripes.

  9. The recommendation would be to have some sort of policy set that governs where they will/can be installed. We all know that they provide a safety benefit; however, we are still selective of where they can be placed depending on shoulder width and pavement condition. The goal is to uphold the condition of the roadway system as best we can while continuing to improve safety.

 

 

Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000
Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center | 6300 Georgetown Pike | McLean, VA | 22101