Potential Safety Benefits of Motor Carrier Operational Efficiencies (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 7-29
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 7... ...
trips; • Minimizing loading, unloading, and related delays; • Optimizing routing and navigation – Providing navigational and routing aids – Assigning familiar routes to drivers; • Selecting road type: divided versus undivided roads; • Avoiding work zones; • Avoiding traffic; • Emphasizing efficient scheduling: optimal times for safe travel; • Avoiding adverse weather; • Using higher-productivity vehicles; • Using onboard computers and mobile communications; • Employing team driving; • Using EOBRs; • Optimizing fuel economy and safety – Speed limiters – Monitoring driver fuel economy; and • Monitoring vehicle condition. The last four topics in this list were not among the topics originally planned for the study, but were added based on survey responses and interview inputs.
|
From page 8... ...
ìActor "/Factor Time Frame "Actor"/Factor Government/ Industry/ Society Motor Carrier Driver: Enduring Traits Driver: Temporary States Vehicle Design and Equipment Vehicle Condition Roadway Design/ Traffic Road/ Environment Condition Pre-Trip/ Pre-Threat Loading Delays Optimize Times of Travel Team Drivers Speed Limiters Monitor Fuel Economy Vehicle Size Onboard Computers & Comms. EOBRs Preventive Maintenance Monitor Vehicle Condition Deadheads Optimize Routing Divided Roads Exposure to Traffic Optimize Times of Travel Work Zones Exposure to Adverse Weather Pre-Crash Crash Post-Crash/ Response Post-Crash/ Remediation ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ TABLE 2 CVO SAFETY MATRIX WITH CLASSIFICATION OF OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCIES AFFECTING SAFETY
|
From page 9... ...
study. About 76% of carriers agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, "Cost is no issue when it comes to keeping our vehicles defect-free." About 80% agreed that, "Deploying a defect-free fleet is the most important thing we can do to ensure highway safety." In CTBSSP Synthesis 1, Effective Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Management Techniques (Knipling et al.
|
From page 10... ...
Reducing empty trips is one of the operational practices being examined in the Motor Carrier Efficiency Study (MCES)
|
From page 11... ...
Respondents were asked to rate the safety benefits of reducing empty miles on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from −3 ("Reduces Fleet Safety") to +3 ("Improves Fleet Safety")
|
From page 12... ...
Instead, the problem revolves around detention times. CTBSSP Synthesis 1: Effective Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Management Techniques (Knipling et al.
|
From page 13... ...
On project surveys, respondents were asked to rate the safety benefits of "reducing loading and unloading delays" on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from −3 ("Reduces Fleet Safety") to +3 ("Improves Fleet Safety")
|
From page 14... ...
If systems are updated, they can route drivers around work zones or road closures. The relative risks associated with some of these road types and conditions will be documented in the following sections.
|
From page 15... ...
Any secondary task such as navigation can reduce performance on the primary task. LTCCS statistics showed a relation between truck drivers' roadway familiarity and crash involvement.
|
From page 16... ...
Greater opportunities exist in trip planning between loading and delivery points. The statistics suggest that, when given a choice, trucks are safer on divided highways even if that means significantly greater mileage.
|
From page 17... ...
No one knows how many trucks and other vehicles divert from these roads to avoid tolls, or the effects of diversion on overall crash rates. It is important that carriers and drivers carefully weigh their road choices by factoring relative crash risks into their decisions.
|
From page 18... ...
About half of all LTCCS truck-crash involvements occurred on urban roads, although only 28% were cited as having a "traffic factor." LTCCS trucks were at-fault in 45% of their multivehicle crashes in urban areas, versus only 33% in rural areas (Knipling and Bocanegra 2008)
|
From page 19... ...
Carrier J, located in upstate New York, monitors New York and surrounding state traffic alerts daily to warn drivers of congestion. In a research partnership with the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI)
|
From page 20... ...
20 Although its emphasis was not on traffic safety, a large urban pilot test on truck deliveries has demonstrated huge time and cost savings from shifting day deliveries to nighttime. The Research and Innovative Technology Administration–funded pilot test arranged for participating carriers to make off-hour deliveries, instead of their regular day deliveries, to retailers and other receivers in New York City.
|
From page 21... ...
In the LTCCS, 18% of CT crash involvements occurred on wet roads, versus 11% of ST involvements. A comparison of the LTCCS CT wet roads percentage (18%)
|
From page 22... ...
Most CTs are operated across state lines. This makes them, their drivers, and their carriers subject to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs)
|
From page 23... ...
. The focus here will be on those specific telematic applications mentioned by motor carriers in project surveys and interviews, which relate to both operational efficiency and safety.
|
From page 24... ...
An electronic device converts any text sent to drivers to voice when the vehicle is moving so that drivers' eyes are not diverted from the road. TEAM DRIVING This section and the next three address topics that were not included in the original project work plan or in the safety manager surveys but have been added to the discussion because they were mentioned by carrier safety managers in project surveys (chapter three)
|
From page 25... ...
Many carriers would utilize team driving more extensively if they could better meet these challenges. Questions and challenges relating to team driving involve trip planningandrouting,vehicle features (i.e., sleeper berths)
|
From page 26... ...
Those mentioning speed limiting also stated that they monitored driver fuel use, as discussed next. Monitoring Driver Fuel Economy A more direct method for improving fuel economy is to monitor fuel use for individual drivers and trips.
|
From page 27... ...
Training and other practices suggested included: • Use of speed limiters to eliminate the highest speeds; • Instrument panel–mounted fuel-use displays to give drivers feedback on fuel use; • Training drivers to resist the urge to speed up for yellow lights, but rather to anticipate light changes and coast slowly to stops; • Use of cruise control; • Monthly analysis of individual driver fuel use and driving patterns; • Rather than discipline, emphasis on rewards and recognition for best performers; and • For large fleets, extending the training and rewards up the line to fleet managers and supervisors. No item addressing fuel economy monitoring was on the safety-manager survey form, but one was added to the otherexpert form.
|
From page 28... ...
Preliminary results from one fleet and 4.6 million miles of travel found the use of TPMS to be associated with slower tire wear and 1.8% better fuel economy. Complete and final project results are pending at this writing.
|
From page 29... ...
Can one therefore demonstrate a link between overall motor carrier performance and safety? Corsi et al.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.