Use of Smart Work Zone Technologies for Improving Work Zone Safety (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Traveler Information Systems 78% 10% 4.00 • Improved speed and lane deviation for smartphone messages compared to the portable changeable message sign (PCMS) (Craig et al. 2017) • Reduced vehicle speeds (1.25 mph to 3.64 mph for dynamic message signs (DMSs) (Edara et al. 2011) • Reduced vehicle speeds (13% to 17%) for graphic- aided PCMSs (Huang and Bai 2014) • Improved time-to-collision and deceleration for connected vehicle messages (Yang et al. 2020) • Oregon DOT Portable Changeable Message Sign Handbook (2nd Edition) (King and McCrea 2018) • Job Special Provision (15-32) (Missouri DOT 2018) • Guidelines on Improving Work Zone Safety Through Public Information and Traveler Information (Roadway Safety Consortium 2011)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Queue Warning 61% 18% 3.87 • Reductions in crashes (22%) and near crashes (54%) (Hourdos et al. 2017) • Crash reductions: 15% (total) and 63% (injury) (Schulze 2018) • Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) for nighttime lane closures with portable rumble strips: 0.717 (non-queuing conditions) and 0.468 (queueing conditions) (Ullman et al. 2018a) • Special Provision 12RC812- A705-02 (Michigan DOT 2021) • Concept of operations (Minnesota DOT 2015a) • System requirements (Minnesota DOT 2018) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) • Traffic Engineering Manual (Part 6, Section 640-29.1 and Plan Note 642-57) (Ohio DOT 2021) • Traffic Standards (WZ-ITS(1)- 19 and WZ-ITS(3)-19) (Texas DOT 2019) • Plan Sheet Library (TC161, TC162, TC165, and TC166) (Washington State DOT 2021) Work Zone Data Collection Technologies 33% 37% 3.12 • Waze identified incidents 10 minutes earlier than traditional approaches (Amin- Naseri et al. 2018) • DOTs at different levels of development (Cheng et al. 2017) • One crash for every 147 hard-braking events (Desai et al. 2020) • Work Zone Safety Data Collection and Analysis Guide (Chandler et al. 2013) • Work Zone Data Exchange (WZDx) Specification (GitHub 2021a) • A Framework for Work Zone Activity Data Collection and Management (Version 3) (Stephens et al. 2019)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Dynamic Lane Merge 27% 31% 3.79 • Beneficial when value of travel time greater than $4.85/hour (Datta et al. 2007) • Three fewer crashes per week (Kansas DOT 2016a) • Maximum queue length reduced from 8 to 2 miles (North Carolina DOT 2019) • Guidance for the Use of Dynamic Lane Merging Strategies (ATSSA 2012) • Boilerplate special provision (Minnesota DOT 2020b) Dynamic (Variable) Speed Limit 24% 27% 3.33 • Average speed reduction of 2.2 mph and speed compliance 8 times higher for uncongested work zone (Edara et al. 2013b) • Maximum reduction in mean speed of 4.7 mph (Mekker et al. 2016) • Average speeds 15 to 25 mph lower than original speed limit (Van Jura et al. 2018) • Guidelines for Work Zone Variable Speed Limits (North Carolina DOT 2011) • Standard Construction Drawing (MT-104.10) (Ohio DOT 2018) Work Zone Location Technologies 24% 51% 3.50 • Smart Work Zone Activity App (SWiZAPP) successfully tested for user-friendliness and functionality (Adu-Gyamfi et al. 2019) • Development of Statewide Work Zone Information System (SWIS) for Minnesota with need for further field testing (Parikh et al. 2019) • Electronic Reference Library (Sections 486.12, 2528, and 4188 for Smart Arrow Board) (Iowa DOT 2021a) • Concept of Operations and Requirements for Smart Arrow Board (Athey Creek Consultants 2018)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Notification of Construction Equipment Entering/ Exiting 18% 33% 2.71 - • Use of Smart Work Zone Technology to Improve Work Space Access Point Safety (American Road & Transportation Builders Association 2019) • Boilerplate special provision (Minnesota DOT 2020b) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) • Standard Construction Drawing (MT-103.10) (Ohio DOT 2018) • Traffic Engineering Manual (Part 6, Section 640-29.2 and Plan Note 642-59) (Ohio DOT 2021) Work Zone Intrusion Alarm 6% 33% 2.50 • Successful trials for two systems (Khan et al. 2019) • Successful field experimental trials for two systems and development of selection guide (Marks et al. 2017) • Mobile work zone alarms increased merge distances up to 122 feet (Brown et al. 2015) • System requirements (Minnesota DOT 2015b) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Automated Flagger Assistance Device (AFAD) - - - • Lower approach speeds (4.2 to 8.9 mph) and vehicles stopped farther back (11.4 to 48 feet) than for human flagger (Brown et al. 2018) • Good field performance and well-liked by maintenance staff (Terhaar 2014) • Special provision (Revision of Section 630) (Colorado DOT 2021b) • Supplemental specification (South Carolina DOT 2012) Electronic Workers Present Speed Limit - - - - • Boilerplate special provision (Minnesota DOT 2020b) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) Excessive Speed Warning - - - - • Boilerplate special provision (Minnesota DOT 2020b) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) Overheight Warning - - - • DOT survey found that one (Arizona DOT) of 21 DOTs installed overheight warning system in work zones (California DOT 2019) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Proximity Alert System - - - • Accurate worker location (within 6 feet) and VMSs posted speed limits and messages based on worker presence (Banaeiyan et al. 2016) • Bluetooth better performance than Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) or magnetic field (Cho et al. 2017) • Signals understood by participants (Park and Sakhakarmi 2019) - Radar Speed Feedback Signs - - - • 30% reduction in deceleration rates (Hourdos et al. 2019) • Lower vehicle speeds (0.7 to 5.6 mph) and speed variance (Jafarnejad et al. 2017) • 50% reduction in drivers exceeding speed limit by at least 15 mph (Roberts and Smaglik 2014) • Median speed reduced by 4 to 13 mph with presence lighting (Sakhare et al. 2021) • Special provision [12RC812 (A685)] (Michigan DOT 2021) • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) • Construction Manual (Chapter 15) (South Dakota DOT 2020) Sequential Warning Lights - - - • Reduced mean speed (2.2 mph) and benefit-cost ratio of 5 to 10 (Sun et al. 2011) • Standard Specifications (Section 616) (Missouri DOT 2021)

Smart Work Zone Technology % of DOTs that Already Implemented Technology % of DOTs that Plan to Implement Technology Average DOT Performance Rating (1 = Poor, 5 = Outstanding) Example Findings from Literature Example Resources Smart Barrel Speed Warning System - - - • Significant speed reductions during test deployment of prototype (Zhang et al. 2012) - Temporary Ramp Meter - - - - • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b) Turning Traffic Ahead - - - - • Long-term typical application (Minnesota DOT 2021b)

Abbreviations and acronyms used without denitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration GHSA Governors Highway Safety Association HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S. DOT United States Department of Transportation

Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-68694-5 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 8 6 9 4 5 9 0 0 0 0