Evaluation of Wet-Weather and Contrast Pavement Marking Materials and Applications URL
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-07/0-5008-2 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date EVALUATION OF WET-WEATHER AND CONTRAST March 2007 PAVEMENT MARKING APPLICATIONS: FINAL REPORT Published: August 2007 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Paul J. Carlson, Jeffrey D. Miles, Adam M. Pike, and Eun Sug Park Report 0-5008-2 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 0-5008 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 2004-February 2007 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: Evaluation of Wet-Weather and Contrast Pavement Marking Materials and Applications URL: http://tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5008-2.pdf 16. Abstract This report details the completion of a 30-month project investigating wet-night and contrast pavement markings. The first year report contains the literature review on wet-night markings and the Phase I effort on wet-night pavement markings. This report contains the Phase II effort on wet-night pavement markings, a benefit-cost analysis, and a study of contrast markings. Phase II effort consisted of expanding the study design from Phase I to include additional wet-night pavement marking products, the effects of glare and dry pavement on detection distances, and a benefit-cost analysis with respect to the use of different pavement marking systems to accommodate drivers under wet-night conditions. In the contrast study, a literature review of contrast markings, a state-of-the-practice with respect to contrast markings, and a study of driver understanding and preference with respect to contrast markings were all conducted. After studying multiple wet-night pavement marking products and standard pavement marking products used in the state of Texas, it was found that reflectorized raised pavement markings provided the most preview time under wet-night conditions. The rumble stripe and the use of bigger beads such as Type III do provide improved wet-night detection distance, and in reference to cost, the use of bigger beads on a flat line, or a rumble stripe in conjunction with RRPMs provides an effective wet-night performance. Contrast markings were found to be used in 64 percent of the districts in Texas and in 64 percent of the responding states. The most frequently used contrast marking design is the bordered design where a white marking is highlighted with black markings along the longitudinal sides. While driver preference suggests that the shadow design is less preferred to the bordered design, the shadow design is normally a more cost-effective design, considering maintenance of the marking. The findings show that the bordered design is preferred. While this design is currently provided with tape products, which have a high initial cost, a non-tape marking alternative is the shadow design, which has fewer maintenance concerns than other non-tape applications. The use of only these two designs is also recommended to limit the number of contrast marking designs in hopes of minimizing driver confusion (this study showed that some drivers do not understand the meaning of the contrast markings). 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Pavement Marking, RRPM, Visibility, Wet, Night, No restrictions. This document is available to the Contrast, Retroreflectivity, Rainfall Rates, Rumble public through NTIS: Stripe, Benefit-Cost, Durability 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 158 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized EVALUATION OF WET-WEATHER AND CONTRAST PAVEMENT MARKING APPLICATIONS: FINAL REPORT by Paul J. Carlson, P.E. Associate Research Engineer Texas Transportation Institute Jeffrey D. Miles, E.I.T. Associate Transportation Researcher Texas Transportation Institute Adam M. Pike, E.I.T. Assistant Transportation Researcher Texas Transportation Institute and Eun Sug Park Associate Research Scientist Texas Transportation Institute Report 0-5008-2 Project 0-5008 Project Title: Evaluation of Wet-Weather and Contrast Pavement Marking Materials and Applications Performed in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration March 2007 Published: August 2007 TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE The Texas A&M University System College Station, Texas 77843-3135 DISCLAIMER 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 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) or the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT). This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The engineer in charge of the project was Paul J. Carlson, P.E., (Texas, # 85402). The United States Government and the State of Texas do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This project was conducted in cooperation with TxDOT and FHWA. The authors would like to thank the project director, Brian Stanford of the Traffic Operations Division, for providing guidance and expertise on this project. The authors would also like to thank other members of the TxDOT Advisory Panel for their assistance: • Tom Beeman, TxDOT Design Division • Carlos Ibarra, TxDOT Atlanta District • Carla Baze, TxDOT Maintenance Division • Johnnie Miller, TxDOT Construction Division • Sally Wegmann, formerly with the TxDOT Houston District • Greg Brinkmeyer, formerly with the TxDOT Traffic Operations Division • Wade Odell, TxDOT Research and Technology Implementation Office Special thanks also go to Ivan Lorenz and Dick Zimmer of TTI for helping to design and build the rain tunnel and equipping the test vehicle with various electronics for this project. In addition the authors would like to thank the industry professionals who provided all of the samples that were tested in this project. The authors would also like to thank all of the TxDOT districts and the states who responded to the online contrast marking survey. Ivan Lorenz should also be acknowledged for his creation and editing of the simulated contrast marking scenes used in the laptop survey portion of this research. Special thanks also go to Brooke Ullman, Nada Trout, and Sandra Schoeneman for conducting the laptop survey. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Figures............................................................................................................................... ix List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. x Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 2: Performance of Pavement Markings – Retroreflectivity and Visibility............. 3 Introduction................................................................................................................................. 3 Background................................................................................................................................. 3 Study Design............................................................................................................................... 6 Selection of Study Variables................................................................................................... 6 Test Equipment ....................................................................................................................... 9 Study Procedure.................................................................................................................... 13 Data Collection ..................................................................................................................... 15 Analysis of Retroreflectivity Measurements ............................................................................ 17 Cross Slope Impacts on Retroreflectivity Measurement ...................................................... 17 Retroreflectivity Values as a Function of Wetness and Material Type ................................ 17 Impact of E2176 Continuous Wetting Range on Retroreflectivity Measurements .............. 23 Statistical Analysis of Retroreflectivity-Wetting Relationship............................................. 24 Analysis of Pavement Marking Visibility................................................................................. 25 Demographics ....................................................................................................................... 25 Statistical Testing Using Analysis of Variance .................................................................... 26 Chapter 3: Benefit-Cost Analysis ...........................................................................................