Advertisement

Comparative Risk Analysis of Using the Markings for Ground and Raised Pedestrian Crossings

  • Victor StolyarovEmail author
  • Natalya Schegoleva
  • Andrey Kochetkov
  • Victor Talalay
  • Yuri Vasiliev
Conference paper
  • 48 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1116)

Abstract

The quality of road construction and ensuring road safety is one of the most important tasks today. One of the tools for solving this problem is risk-oriented approach. For the first time, the authors presented a comparative analysis of using the markings for ground and raised pedestrian crossings, taking into account the permissible risk of a breakdown of the car’s chassis and the value of the permissible risk of deterioration in the conditions of the driver and passengers when the car is moving along the indicated crossings with permissible speeds. From the results obtained above it follows that the use of the ground pedestrian crossing with an average marking line height of 6.0 mm, a weighted average marking line length from 4.0 m to 6.0 m, and a car speed at the crossing of 60 km/h (as regulated by road traffic code in the city limit) is considered permissible. The risk of breakdown of the car’s chassis at the speeds indicated in Russian State Standard GOST R 52605-2006 may remain acceptable (1 × 10−3) if the weighted average length of the raised pedestrian crossing also increases. Such pedestrian crossings are acceptable, for example, in large metropolitan areas.

Keywords

Pedestrian crossings Markings for ground Quality of road construction Road construction Road safety 

References

  1. 1.
    Stolyarov, V.V.: Speed limit on permissible risk to ensure traffic safety on complex sections of highways. In: Organization and Traffic Safety in Large Cities: Collection of Papers of Participants of the 11th International Scientific and Practical Conference, pp. 369–379. SPbGASU, St. Petersburg (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stolyarov, V.V., Shchegoleva, N.V., Kokodeeva, N.E., Kochetkov, A.V.: Examples of calculating the geometric, transport, operational and strength parameters of highways based on risk theory. Monograph: Part I. Design. Saratov State Technical Universit, Saratov (2017)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Stolyarov, V.V., Shchegoleva, N.V., Kochetkov, A.V.: Analysis of the approach adopted by the developers of the set of rules “requirements for the elements of the city road network of settlements”. Gruzovik 5, 43–48 (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stolyarov, V.V., Shchegoleva, N.V., Kochetkov, A.V.: The need for transport risk management to reduce the number of fatalities in road traffic accidents. Gruzovik 10, 41–43 (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schegoleva, N.V., Akulova, N.E.: Analysis of road safety on the federal highway M-5 “Ural” in the city of Penza. Inspection of the road section and assessment of the concentration of accidents. Technical regulation in transport construction 6(32), 2 (2018)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Shchegoleva, N.V., Pruss, V.V.: A probabilistic approach in determining damage in accidents on highways. Techn. Regul. Transp. Constr. 5(19), 4 (2016). http://trts.esrae.ru/38-203
  7. 7.
    Federal Law of December 27, 2002 No. 184-FZ (as amended on July 29, 2017) “On Technical Regulation” [Electronic resource]. https://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_40241/. Accessed 26 June 2019
  8. 8.
    Zhang, F., Han, Z., Ge, H., Zhu, Y.: Optimization design of traffic flow under security based on cellular automata model. Comput. Sci. Inf. Syst. 12, 8 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pavlyuk, D.: Feature selection and extraction in spatiotemporal traffic forecasting: a systematic literature review. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 11(1), 6 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kumaran, S.K., Mohapatra, S., Dogra, D.P., Roy, P.P., Kim, B.-G.: Computer vision-guided intelligent traffic signaling for isolated intersections. Expert Syst. Appl. 134, 267–278 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chang, Y., Cheng, R.: Effect of speed deviation and anticipation effect of flux difference in the lattice hydrodynamic model. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 531, 121751 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lv, W., Zhou, X., Fang, Z., Huo, F., Li, X.: Simulation study of vehicle travel time on route with signals considering comprehensive influencing factors. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 530, 121389 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hou, Q., Leng, J., Ma, G., Liu, W., Cheng, Y.: An adaptive hybrid model for short-term urban traffic flow prediction. Phys. A: Stat. Mech. Appl. 527, 121065 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fricker, J.D., Zhang, Y.: Modeling pedestrian and motorist interaction at semi-controlled crosswalks: the effects of a change from one-way to two-way street operation. Transp. Res. Rec. (2019)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vignali, V., Cuppi, F., Acerra, E., Simone, A., Costa, M.: Effects of median refuge island and flashing vertical sign on conspicuity and safety of unsignalized crosswalks. Transp. Res. Part F: Traffic Psychol. Behav. 60, 427–439 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Soilán, M., Riveiro, B., Sánchez-Rodríguez, A., González-De Santos, L.M.: Application of MLS data to the assessment of safety-related features in the surrounding area of automatically detected pedestrian crossings. Int. Arch. Photogram. Remote Sens. Spat. Inf. Sci.- ISPRS Arch. 42(2), 1067–1074 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Yuri Gagarin State Technical University of SaratovSaratovRussia
  2. 2.Perm National Research Polytechnic UniversityPermRussia
  3. 3.Moscow Automobile and Road Construction UniversityMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations