Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

1

Alternative Database System• HSIS (Highway Safety Information System) combined

with GIS– Incorporates many databases such as crash inventory, roadway

inventory, traffic signal inventory, and ADT – User interface allows data to be edited, analyzed, and exported– Supports graphical displays, point-and-click selections, pull-

down and pop-up menus

• Crash analysis– Supports five searching methods– All methods allow user to designate variables to be reported

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

2

Crash Analysis• Spot/Intersection Analysis

– Evaluate accidents at a user designated spot or intersection

• Strip Analysis– Examine crashes along a designated length

of roadway– User enters a route and length of segment– Program automatically searches consecutive

strips

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

3

Crash Analysis (cont.)• Cluster Analysis

– Study accidents around a given roadway feature

• Sliding-Scale Analysis– Identify high accident roadway segments– Program memorizes all strips that exceed

accident threshold

• Corridor Analysis– Locates high crash areas within a corridor

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

4

New Kent Case Study

• Initial Data Collection– Routes 609-622

• Corridor Analysis– Corridors for which guardrail inventory is

available – Routes 33, 106, 249, 273

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

5

Corridor Analysis• Compare routes for frequency and severity of

accidents• Select routes that have greatest accidents/miles• Compare results with current guardrail

inventory• Advantages

– Reduce random chance associated with accidents

– Use summary statistics available in HTRIS

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

6

Corridor Analysis (cont.)

• Disadvantages– Overlooks role of hazardous locations– Many locations of mediocre severity vs. one

location of very high severity

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

7

Initial Analysis

33 1.09 0 0 2 2 0 4 $21,000 4 4 0 0 0106 5.08 9194 1 16 16 1 24 $151,990 33 14 192 140 5.845249 4.78 18805 0 41 51 0 72 $3,825,090 92 19 262 205 0273 4.48 17050 1 19 12 1 29 $121,540 32 22 100 91 3.152

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

8

Initial Analysis (cont.)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Accidents

33 106 249 273

Route

Total vs. Fixed Object Accidents

All Accidents

Fixed Object Accidents

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

9

Initial Analysis (cont.)

0

5

10

15

20

Accidents/Miles

33 106 249 273

Route

Total vs. Fixed Object Accidents / Miles

All Acidents

Fixed Object Accidents

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

10

Initial Analysis (cont.)

0

0.001

0.002

0.003

0.004

0.005

Accidents/DVMT

33 106 249 273

Route

Total vs. Fixed Object Accidents / DVMT

All Acidents

Fixed Object Accidents

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

11

Initial Analysis (cont.)

1 953351315 11/12/95 478318 NE 2 1 1 290 973302233 11/20/97 478044 E 1 1 1 291 990391178 1/27/99 478044 E 1 1 1 2 492 961992605 6/28/96 478044 0.1 E 2 1 1 2 1

•Route 249 (Using Total Accidents as measure)

•Route 106 (Using FO accidents/miles and FO accidents/DVMT as measure)

1 980371428 1/29/98 50784 0.009 N 8 1 4 1 131 971710576 6/7/97 478312 NE 9 2 1 1 132 991741994 6/15/99 478312 NE 9 5 2 133 993330086 11/11/99 478312 0.01 NE 9 2 1 2 2

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

12

Initial Analysis (cont.)• Route 273 (Using Total FO accidents as measure)

Accide

nt N

umbe

r

Docum

ent N

umberDate

Node

Offset

Directi

onCollis

ion

type

Weat

herSur

face

Con

dition

Number o

f veh

icles

Fatali

ties

Pedes

trian

fatla

ties

Injur

iesPed

estri

an In

jurie

s

1 950270920 1/19/95 478298 N 9 4 2 130 951460666 5/16/95 478109 N 1 1 1 2 331 953051387 10/23/95 478109 N 1 1 1 2 132 961590441 5/26/96 478109 N 1 2 2 2

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

13

Future Work

• Conclude screening – Comprehensive corridor analysis

• Examine evaluation methods– Risk assessment and safety evaluation– Examine the safety state model

• Suggest Safety alternatives

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

14

Motivation

• Ability to compare multiple projects with a graphical user interface (GUI)– Assist resource allocation– Decision support– More evidence to the table, sooner– Demonstrate with New Kent County’s

guardrails

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

15

Mission Statement

Develop a GUI for a guardrail and hazard inventory system for resource allocation

and decision making

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

16

Visualization of New Kent

• Graphically represent what resident engineers know using an electronic map indicating the locations of:– Guardrails– Obstacles– Accidents– Complaints, etc.

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

17

Electronic Map (Map 1)

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

18

Electronic Map

• Map of New Kent/route 249 area

• Similar to the zoomed in view on standard maps– Only concerned with guardrail sites,

candidate sites, and accident data

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

19

Legend

• R, L, R*, L*– Side of road on which guardrail is located, *

indicates substandard guardrail

• C1, C2, C3, Cn– C = citizen complaint– n = number of complaints

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

20

Legend (cont.)

• O– Obstacle

• A1, A2, A3, An– A = Accident– n = number of accidents

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

21

Legend

• Same functionality as the New Kent County map’s legend with different symbols– Guardrails– Obstructions– Complaints– Accidents

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

22

Integration of Map and Catalog

• The data visualized on the map comes from the catalog

• Users able to retrieve the data they want via the map

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

23

Example Functionality

• When a user selects a guardrail site, the information in the catalog about that site is displayed– Location, type, direction, length, etc.

• When a user selects a route, that information is displayed– Guardrail prevalence, ADT, accidents, etc.

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

24

Zoomed In (Map 2)

Center for Risk Management of Engineering Systems University of Virginia, Charlottesville

25

Zoomed In (Map 3)