traffic control device demonstration – june 15, 2005 summary report traffic control device...
TRANSCRIPT
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Traffic Control DeviceDemonstration
June 15, 2005
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Conducted at the 3M Transportation
Safety Center in Cottage Grove,
Minnesota
Sponsored by Mn/DOT and
Northland ATSSA
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Autoflaggernot part of the survey
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Daytime top half– Brightness 98%– Legibility 93%
• Nighttime top half– Brightness 94%– Legibility 90%
No PassingSign
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Font– Top is easiest to read– Bottom is easiest to read
• Sheeting– Right side is brighter– Right side is clearer
Glyph TrailSign
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Typical Comments– Looks uniform across – NO Difference – Different shades of green?– Left side is brighter?– Center is brighter?– Didn’t look like the sign was level
OXOXOXSign
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Daytime– Left 64% – Middle 36%
• Daytime– Middle 38%
– Right 62%
FidgetySign
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Nighttime– Left 15%– Middle 85%
• Nighttime– Middle 20%
– Right 80%
FidgetySign
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Daytime– Left 66%– Middle 4%– Right 30%
ConspicuitySigns
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Nighttime– Left 86%– Middle 5%
– Right 9%
ConspicuitySigns
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Daytime– Left 92% – Middle 5%– Right 3%
LegibilitySigns
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
• Nighttime– Left 59%– Middle 5%– Right 36%
LegibilitySigns
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
STOPSigns
• Daytime– Brightness
• Left 61%• Right 39%
– Legibility• Left 63%• Right 37%
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
STOPSigns
• Nighttime– Brightness
• Left 96%• Right 4%
– Legibility• Left 86%• Right 14%
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Wet ReflectivePavement Markings
• Typical Nighttime Comments– Awesome– Non-wet tape looks black– Obviously superior– Both white and yellow
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
TypicalLane Closure
• Typical Comments– Drums demand respect– Looks like a solid wall– Hard to tell lanes are merging
at barrels– Visible / Clean - not confusing– Very visible, good alignment– Type III with arrow was critical for direction
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Night Maint.Lane Closure
• Typical Comments– 2 arrow boards command respect– Cones look like a gap in the closure– Looks cluttered– Direction barricades easier to follow than
barrels– Much better at night than during the day
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
VariousDisplays
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Conclusions – Actions Taken
• DG3 Tech Memo For permanent and temporary WZ signs
• Clearview Fonts
Concluded to stay with current fonts
• Nighttime Maintenance LaneClosure TapersMN MUTCD is being reviewed to allow the practice
Traffic Control Device Demonstration – June 15, 2005Summary Report
Questions?