Use of Graphics and Symbols on Dynamic Message Signs: Technical Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. FHWA/TX-08/0-5256-1 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date USE OF GRAPHICS AND SYMBOLS ON DYNAMIC MESSAGE March 2008 SIGNS: TECHNICAL REPORT Published: May 2009 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Brooke R. Ullman, Nada D. Trout, and Conrad L. Dudek Report 0-5256-1 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Texas Transportation Institute The Texas A&M University System 11. Contract or Grant No. College Station, Texas 77843-3135 Project 0-5256 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Texas Department of Transportation Technical Report: Research and Technology Implementation Office September 2005 – February 2008 P.O. Box 5080 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Austin, Texas 78763-5080 15. Supplementary Notes Project performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration. Project Title: Use of Symbols and Graphics on Dynamic Message Signs URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5256-1.pdf 16. Abstract This project has taken a step toward defining how graphic and symbol displays can improve or assist communication with drivers. Through three human factors evaluations of alternative designs, researchers identified specific design elements that should or should not be used in graphic displays. Additionally, some of the key benefits identified for the use of graphic displays as compared to equivalent text messages are: • A graphic display appears to improve the ability of drivers to identify available lanes in a problem area. • The delivery of incident descriptor information (e.g. accidents or work zones) through the use of graphic symbols improves comprehension levels of non-native-language drivers (e.g., a driver whose primary language is Spanish). • The viewing time required for comprehension by a non-native speaker may be shortened as a result of the use of graphics and symbols. • The use of graphics makes it possible to effectively illustrate unusual operational scenarios, such as high-occupancy vehicle lanes or adjacent toll lanes, through graphic representation of roadway geometry, logos, shields, etc. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Dynamic Message Sign, Changeable Message Sign, No restrictions. This document is available to the Graphics, Symbols public through NTIS: National Technical Information Service Springfield, Virginia 22161 http://www.ntis.gov 19. Security Classif.(of this report) 20. Security Classif.(of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 192 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized USE OF GRAPHICS AND SYMBOLS ON DYNAMIC MESSAGE SIGNS: TECHNICAL REPORT by Brooke R. Ullman, P.E. Assistant Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Nada D. Trout Assistant Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute and Conrad L. Dudek, P.E., Ph.D. Professor Emeritus Texas A&M University Report 0-5256-1 Project 0-5256 Project Title: Use of Symbols and Graphics on Dynamic Message Signs Performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration March 2008 Published: May 2009 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER This research was performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official view or policies of the FHWA or TxDOT. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. This report is not intended for construction, bidding, or permit purposes. The engineer in charge of the project was Brooke R. Ullman, P.E. #95927. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. The authors would like to thank several people for their insights and guidance in this research: Brian Fariello (San Antonio District), Project Director; David Casteel (San Antonio District), Program Coordinator; Steve Connell (Fort Worth District), Rick Cortez (Dallas District), John Gaynor (Houston District), Charles Koonce (Traffic Operations Division), Danny Magee (Laredo District), Mark Olson (FHWA), David Rodrigues (San Antonio District), and Robert Wheeler (Traffic Operations Division), Project Advisors; and Wade Odell, Research and Technology Implementation (RTI) office liaison. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Gerald Ullman and Susan Chrysler of the Texas Transportation Institute for their participation on the expert panel that guided the design of the graphics used for this project, as well as that of Sandra Schoeneman, Sarah Young, Maria Medrano, Llubia Corella, and Maria Ramos of the Texas Transportation Institute for their assistance during various phases of the project. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ ix List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. xi Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................................. 1 Background and Significance of Work ....................................................................................... 1 Chapter 2: Previous Research ........................................................................................................ 5 Word Messages ........................................................................................................................... 5 Legibility of DMSs ................................................................................................................. 6 Symbols on Static Signs.............................................................................................................. 8 Pictograms on Dynamic Message Signs ..................................................................................... 9 Graphical Route Information Panel .......................................................................................... 11 Animation and Color................................................................................................................. 12 Chapter 3: Focus Groups ............................................................................................................. 13 Study Design ............................................................................................................................. 13 Focus Group Protocol ........................................................................................................... 14 Locations ............................................................................................................................... 15 Participants ............................................................................................................................ 15 Results ....................................................................................................................................... 16 Section 1 – Incident/Roadwork Downstream of Freeway-to-Freeway Interchanges ........... 16 Section 2 – Incident/Roadwork Downstream of Freeway-to-Tollway Interchanges ............ 26 Section 3 – Incident/Roadwork Scenario with Adjacent Toll and Free Lanes ..................... 31 Section 4 – Use of HOV Lane during Evacuation ................................................................ 33 Section 5 – Routing Heavy Trucks Around CBDs ............................................................... 36 Summary ................................................................................................................................... 37 Section 1. Incidents/Roadwork Downstream of Freeway-to-Freeway Interchanges ........... 38 Section 2. Incidents/Roadwork Downstream of Freeway-to-Tollway Interchanges ........... 39 Section 3. Incident/Roadwork Scenarios With Adjacent Toll and Free Lanes .................... 39 Section 4. Use of HOV Lane During Evacuation ................................................................ 40 Section 5. Routing Heavy Vehicles ..................................................................................... 40 Chapter 4: Level 1 Human Factors Laboratory Study ................................................................. 43 Study Design ............................................................................................................................. 43 Study Issues .......................................................................................................................... 43 Laboratory Instruments ......................................................................................................... 57 Study Locations .................................................................................................................... 57 Participant Recruitment ........................................................................................................ 58 Demographics ....................................................................................................................... 58 Study Protocol ......................................................................................................................