- [Timothy] This webinar covers Case Studies
of Innovative Low-Cost Work Zone Strategies
So before we get started,
I've been asked to read this disclaimer.
This material is based upon work supported
by the United States Department of Transportation
under cooperative agreement.
The numbers shown here.
The material was prepared by Michigan State University
and also the panelists.
Any opinions, findings, conclusions
or recommendations expressed in this publication are those
of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views
of the United States Department of Transportation.
The material contained here in does not constitute
a national standard, specification, or regulation.
And the US Government does
not endorse products or manufacturers.
Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear
only because they are considered essential
to the objectives of this webinar.
So let me give you a little bit of a background
of how we got here today.
So this webinar's being produced
as a part of the 2016 Work Zone Safety Grant Program.
And for those of you that aren't familiar,
the FHWA established the Work Zone Safety Grant Program
in 2005, as a means to develop and deliver highway work zone
safety training and guidelines.
Our particular team is led by Iowa State University.
And you can see the partners here us
at Michigan State University,
the University of Kansas and University of Missouri.
And we have six topic areas that our team is focused on.
And you can see those here.
Each one of those topic areas will also have,
some of them have already had webinars,
but we have several upcoming webinars
on each of these topic areas.
And you can see today's here,
our task at Michigan State is to develop the content
and training materials
for the Low-Cost Work Zone Management Strategies.
And so the culminating feature of our materials,
actually this toolbox
of Low-Cost Work Zone Management Strategies,
and the toolbox is in preparation.
It's in final draft form.
So the project is actually still ongoing,
but this is in final draft form.
So we're starting, we're beginning to advertise
through a series of webinars,
the content that's in this toolbox.
And I'll have a slide here right after this,
that talks about how this material will be distributed.
But first of all, so what do we mean
by low-cost work zone strategies?
And low-cost work zone strategies are those
that cost $50,000 or less per application,
but generally minor small-scale improvements
or enhancements to existing work zones.
In this toolbox, we've basically scoured the globe
for available work zone strategies.
We've come up with 33 kind of strategy areas.
And within those 33 strategies,
we have prepared, we've gathered case studies,
effective practices, standards and specifications,
typical applications, a strategy selection process,
and then also key references and literature.
So we've gathered that all together
in this toolbox document, like I said,
is going to be released as a part of our training materials
fairly soon once it's approved.
But today we're gonna feature some case studies
of the innovative types of strategies that are included
in this document.
So there's four general strategies.
There's four general categories of strategies.
The first being just general overall strategies.
We also have a whole cluster
of traffic regulation strategies.
So those would be related like flagger control, if you will.
Another set on pavement markings and delineation,
which you'll hear a little bit about, like for example,
orange pavement markings that are experimental treatment,
those will be covered today.
And then strategies related to speed or exposure control,
which is really kind of the original category
of low-cost strategy.
So we expanded out a little bit in our toolbox.
So the way that we're gonna deliver this content,
and this actually goes for all of the various six areas
in our team within the the 2016 Work Zone Safety Grant team
from Iowa State is all of our stuff is
eventually going to be pushed
to the Work Zone Clearing House,
and then includes our webinars.
So our first webinar is already there.
The recording of it is on the Clearinghouse
that was on the toolbox
of Low-Cost Work Zone Management Strategies,
basically in general, just a general overview
with some basic discussion about, you know, a fads
and some of the more general flagger control strategies,
and myself and Chris Brookes gave that presentation
back in December.
Today's webinar, once we get it transcribed and captioned,
the recording will have that available,
posted to the Clearinghouse as well.
And of course, the centerpiece will be the toolbox document.
Once that once that is complete, that will be posted.
We're also in the process of developing a series
of self-paced, online training content materials.
And that information right now, we have our first module,
just about complete and perhaps we'll be able to be piloting
that very soon, so I may be reaching out to some of you
on this webinar right now,
and seeing if you want to help us pilot
some of these materials that we have available
for self-paced online training.
And then perhaps a series of workshops.
We don't know what those are going to look like right now
with the current pandemic restrictions,
but we do have plans to deliver some level of workshops
in the future.
So if you wanna search, if you wanna find,
and I tested this myself this morning,
if you go to the Clearinghouse landing page
and you type in the little search window right here,
low-cost toolbox, the first hit will actually be this,
my content here, or our content here on the toolbox
of low-cost management strategies,
or you can just go straight to Google,
and type in Work Zone Safety Low-Cost Toolbox,
and it will be the first hit that comes up.
Here are our panelists today.
I know you don't wanna just hear me talk,
but I'm kinda the one that's been the organizer,
and the one that's kinda managing this particular area.
And so we have our presenters who will talk a great deal
on the case studies and the particular areas.
So we'll start off with Chris Brookes will give a little bit
of detail on the experimentation process
for the Driveway Assistance Device.
I am following the kind of the Michigan Department
of Transportation's procedure for getting approval
for experimenting with the Driveway Assistance Device.
He'll also come back at the very end
and talk about preformed reflective tapes.
John Shaw from Iowa State University,
will talk about Orange Work Zone Pavement Marking
case study in Wisconsin.
Steve Kite, formerly of the North Carolina Department
of Transportation, but currently
with Total Work Zone Solutions Group,
will talk about work zone pattern, masking,
and performance marking.
So basically, painting the entire road surface black
before a traffic shift.
And then Neil Boudreau from the Massachusetts DOT,
will talk about a smart, portable traffic signal system.
So before we begin with the case studies,
we do need to speak a little bit
about the experimentation process.
So today's webinar does include devices
that are not included within the MUTCD,
and as such, they're considered experimental.
And the MUTCD says that any new designs, devices,
or applications that are not covered in the MUTCD are not
in compliance with the MUTCD can only be used
if FHWA experimentation approval is received.
And that process involves, and I'll just summarize it here.
Experimentation requests are submitted
to the FHWA headquarters.
Now you can submit them through your field office,
your local field office,
but they do need to ultimately be reviewed and approved
by the headquarters, FHWA headquarters.
And then that has to happen before the experiment, okay?
So the approval has to happen prior to the experimentation.
And once the approval is granted and experimentation begins,
that then involves installation
of this experimental traffic control device
or experimental application
of already approved traffic control device,
but just using a slightly different manner.
Perform the evaluation.
So what are the impacts on human factors on drivers,
and just general overall traffic operations?
If there's any adverse effects that has to be, you know,
noted and potentially remove the device immediately,
providing reports to the FHWA post-in-term reports,
and of course, the final report.
And that process takes over one year, okay?
The whole process takes over one year.
Here's a list of...
So if you're doing an experimentation request,
these are the requirements.
So all experimentation requests require
the following components.
And Chris Brookes will give an example.
Michigan DOT's example of their experimentation plan
and requests to the FHWA
in the context of the Driveway Assistance Devices.
So the nature of the problem, justification of need,
description of how the proposed TCD deviates from MUTCD,
illustrations of the device,
explanation of how you basically selected, you know,
decided to use this device, and then just
a detailed evaluation plan is of course, important.
And then just kind of the backend side of things,
how we're going to re-establish the site once we're done.
And of course, in agreement to provide
some annual progress reports.
Successful experimentation helps to inform the process
of incorporating new devices and new applications
of existing devices into new additions of the MUTCD,
which leads me to this.
As many of you are already aware
that there's currently the Notice of Proposed Amendments
for the 11th edition of the MUTCD is out,
and it was released earlier this year.
So we're currently on the 2009 MUTCD, the 10th edition.
Now we're going to be on the 11th edition.
And so right now we're in the public comment period, okay?
So all this information is on the MUTCD website.
FHWA has plans to conduct informational webinars in March,
and do notice that they recently extended the comment period
to May 14th, 2021, okay?
So what does this entail?
So basically over the last decade plus, this NPA,
and that the upcoming, the comprehensive update
to the MUTCD is incorporating the results
of over 150 official experiments
of novel traffic control devices and applications,
official interpretations, in-term approvals
and other research.
Now, the remainder of today's webinar is going to focus
on case studies of innovative low-cost work zone strategies,
some of which are experimental,
and have experimental plans associated with them,
and have been approved by the FHWA.
Some are still in progress, some have been completed,
but I do wanna point those out.
So we'll be talking about the Driveway Assistance Devices,
and Chris Brookes in particular, will be talking
about Michigan DOT's experimentation plan.
John Shaw will talk about orange pavement markings
for work zones, that was also experimental.
Steve Kite will be talking
about North Carolina's very innovative Work Zone
Pattern Masking and Performance Markings.
Like I said, it was basically where they came up
with this material to cover the entire pavement surface
black prior to a traffic shift.
Neil Boudreau will talk about smart,
portable traffic signal systems.
And then, like I said, at the very end, Chris will wrap up
with preformed reflective tapes.
Now it is important to know we did look through the NPA.
The NPA for the new MUTCD does not include details
about any of the experimental treatments
that we're presenting today.
Which means that these treatments will continue
to require experimental approval prior to future use, okay?
So they'll still continue to be experimental in nature.
And now, I'd like to turn it over to Chris Brookes
to talk about Michigan DOTs experimentation plan
for the Driveway Assistance Device.
Chris, you're gonna turn your camera and microphone on.
- [Chris] Thanks, Tim, I know with the weather warming up
here in Michigan and I hope everywhere else.
I just wanted to start out asking you a quick question.
Do you know where you tell your kids to go
if they complain about it being too cold?
- [Timothy] Where?
- [Chris] You tell them to go stand in the corner,
'cause it's 90 degrees?
Well, I do have to thank the sidewalks for that joke.
They've been keeping me off the street three years.
So with the DAD being the topic that I'm talking about,
obviously it fits natural to, you know,
throwing a dad joke or two there.
With these in this presentation I'm gonna cover,
I just wanted to talk about and highlight a little bit
that on March 19th, we will be going more into depth
on the DADs and the Driveway Assistance Devices
in some of the past research.
Today is gonna be really a focus on what we did
to kinda get the experiment approval
and get it off the ground.
So we wanna kind of set the stage for that.
And that's kinda be leading you towards
if you like what you're hearing so far.
And plus, if you wanna hear some more dad jokes,
March 19th will definitely be a few on the table there.
So go on to the next slide there.
So in section 1A of the manual, it talks,
1A.10 on the manual talks about how you kinda have to go
about getting your statement of interpretation
that's being sought, so basically you have to,
as Tim went through that list to 10,
I kinda pulled them down,
a little bit different, more bullets,
but here on the next slide,
it shows you kinda what we did and what was going on,
we were asking for.
So if you go to the next slide, Tim, there we go.
We wanted to use these Driveway Assistance Devices
that we saw at ATSSA at the Expo Floor,
and wanted to see if the public can understand these.
These are not covered, the signal system and the layout
of this or the traffic control device as we're calling it.
It's not technically a signal, it's not covered.
So we had to then say, "Okay, can people understand this?"
And so what we had to do was understand how it works.
So if you can go on to the next slide,
we did have some help with the manufacturer
and putting together some of their different stuff.
And since it was at the time,
you know, kind of this unique product,
we did work directly with them.
It really does help to have that good relationship
with the product you're testing.
So that way you can kind of do that.
So this is kind of a first example.
I'll talk about how the DAD's functioning
when I have a slide up that kinda shows that.
That would be a little bit easier to explain
when that going through, but in a short sense,
this goes at a dry local driveway that will flash red
and then with an arrow in the right or left direction,
either being red or yellow, and on the 19th,
we'll be getting into some of those signs
in the legends and kind of the different layouts
and things that have been used across the US.
And this is the Michigan version,
but there definitely is a lot of other ones
that have been looked at and tested.
So go ahead and go on to the next one there.
So we do have our experimental report posted
on workzonesafety.org also too.
So in here, this can be used for reference as well later on
to kinda go back and find where we described all these.
So what we do is want them renumbered on the report
where we put them.
So I'm not gonna go ahead and read this.
I'm gonna more explain it with the pictures and the layout.
So we did put our nature of our problem in there.
So Tim, if you wanna go to the next slide.
We then kinda talked about the condition
that provokes the need.
And I wanted to highlight the condition
that provoked the need with a few examples slides here
of poor traffic regulators, as we call them in Michigan.
We do not call them flaggers, a lot of people do.
Some people call them stop-go operations.
This is what we see all the time.
You know, not an approved 350 device.
I'm in the middle of putting in a cone
or they're sitting on the arrow board.
We've seen all sorts of this.
And if you'd go to the next slide here,
the intermediate side streets is always a problem
too for us, where that picture on the left,
you see the individual there.
There's someone there, which is better than
what we normally get sometimes,
but they really need to have a stop, slow paddle.
Or if it's actually at a four-way intersection,
they're supposed to have a stop-stop paddle,
which we don't have the best confines of.
And then once again, you know,
just the regulator sitting on the arrow board.
We did have a traffic regulator killed
already this year in 2021, up in the UP.
So anything we can do to kinda do this,
there is a great need to reduce the worker exposure
that is taking place with this type of setup.
So if you go to the next slide.
And then this one was one of maybe my all-time just kind of,
"Oh my gosh" moments is.
This individual was actually studying when they were there.
I'm sure Tim can appreciate, you know, students studying,
when they're in school, but when you're working
in a work active work zone, that's not the correct time
or place to be catching up on your homework.
If you go to the next slide there.
So basically what was in place is we had to lay out
the current practices.
So in around, we kinda had to say,
"Okay, why do we need to do this?"
So everyone was probably aware of traffic regulating.
You can maintain one lane in, with two-way traffic.
If you have a large grade change
or you have to open the roadway back up
to two lanes at night, this creates some
of those potential issues where you don't wanna
have traffic regulating 24/7 for extended period of time.
If you have a lot of intermediate side streets,
then you have to have multiple regulators out there.
So on this particular project, we had a large grade change.
So it didn't allow us to do that.
So we looked at the idea, "Okay,
do we shut the runway down completely?"
This can only be done if you've got a viable detour.
And in this one, we could not do that,
because we couldn't limit the access to personal homes.
And I'll show you a map here of the project in a second.
So our original plan was to provide a one-way detour.
This seemed like a great idea.
We got one direction, it was a little bit of an issue.
You know, business owners, we were taking people away
from their businesses, and some people had long ways
to get home, but we figured this was doable
for the scenario that we're in.
So this was the original setup that we had.
Go on, so we did put this in there.
So kind of going back to Tim's notes,
we described how it deviates from the MUTCD.
We illustrated, put the illustrations in there.
And then an explanation of the device
and the experiment in the section.
So we kinda put all that in there,
and this is all once again,
you're able to refer back to this.
So I just wanted to kinda highlight this
as if you're stepping through it kind of as a guide
to doing this in the future.
So go to the next one here.
This is what caused the problem.
Pretty clear that this is closed.
Everyone could assume, right?
Yeah, your do-not-enters, three of them.
Road closed, probably pretty serious, this is closed.
Well, when we went out to the site and looked at it,
we had (indistinct) go to the next slide here.
People going the wrong way.
So we had a one-way detour in place.
As you can see, we did have signs
for the westbound detour direction.
It was a pretty lengthy detour.
I think it was about, you know, four or five miles.
So it was a decent length, but not anything too
unheard of in a work zone to expect people to travel.
So this is what the detour was.
But once again, what we found is
if you go to the next slide here,
people were not doing that.
So there was 22 citations in about a month,
and the office called us and said,
"Hey, we have to do something.
People are disobeying, this closure points."
We said, "Okay, we'll go out there and give the project
a look and see what's going on and try to figure out
what's going on."
We were out there for an hour,
and we witnessed four people pulled over by the officer.
We talked to them, and he could be out there all day.
And once again, going into the next slide here,
just to reiterate what was happening,
they were literally driving in the wrong direction
past these barricades, cutting through to their homes,
in that when this was one-way traffic,
that was supposed to be coming through here.
So we had head-on traffic conditions.
So going to the next slide here,
we tried some different initial modifications.
We added some additional detour signs thinking, okay,
maybe some people missed the signs.
We threw some more up there and that did not work.
It helped a little bit, but that still didn't work.
So we went to the next step.
Is even to, within this, just to highlight
that you made me think, you know,
"You have a crisp when someone gets up there,
there's nowhere for them to turn around."
There was literally like a little cul-de-sac side road,
where we put signing
to where people could just make a nice U-turn.
So there was not that,
"Oh, you got stuck at this closure point.
There's nowhere to go."
You literally could take that turn around
that Tim's highlighting and kinda scrolling over
with his mouse and go the other way.
So it was really like a no-brainer vocation
to kinda set that up.
So we weren't really understanding why
we were getting compliance.
So in looking at that, we knew we had
to do something different.
So going to the next slide here.
Once again, we couldn't really do any more signing.
That was all pretty appropriate.
Couldn't really add anything else.
So what do we have to do?
Go over the next one here, we proposed using DADs.
Now here's kind of the layout of the project.
As you can see, we did close some of the roads
to limit the number of access points.
As you see on the screen,
the push pins are the actual DAD locations
that we were proposing with full-blown normal,
temporary signals on the outside.
When the signal on the left side would turn green,
the arrows would flash in the right direction.
It would go red, you'd have your clearance time.
If the signal on the far-right end would turn green,
then all the DADs or the Driveway Assistance Devices
would flash in the left direction.
So this is what we put for the diagram
for that first experiment
in there, just to kinda give you that.
And this is why also too, we couldn't close
the roadway down because of the homeowner's detour.
So if you go to the next slide here.
Once again, we put it in there, how it works.
We talked about adding that information,
having the brochure and kind of that write-up
from the company that provided this,
working with rising signals that really helped us
when we tested it with them.
And they also had to provide us with some information
about the product, and go to the next slide here,
and say that there was a certification
that there wasn't any patent or copyrights on it.
So this is why you really need to have
that good working relationship
with the company that you're testing.
So you go to the next one here.
So then, we had to have some supporting research.
So for this one, since it was pretty new,
that was a little bit difficult,
but we did have a project where these were utilized
in an emergency response.
So if you go to the next slide here.
And it was in New Jersey for hurricane relief,
there was 25 locations.
And then we did talk about too
that we would get a public survey
as part of the experimental requests
due to the limited information.
So we kind of put that in there, knowing
that we didn't really have a lot of that prior information.
So if you go to the next slide here.
And we put that in there.
This is actually our second letter that we got,
because we added on, but this is kind of just a screenshot
of what an experimental letter will look like.
So you have that, they'll approve it.
And then two, they may ask you to change some things.
So what they did is they actually asked us
to modify our message with the approval.
So it was kind of like an approval, but with this change.
And then going to the next slide here,
once again, just for reference purposes,
we put in here and kinda laid out all those 10 items
that Tim talked about at the start,
and kind of detailed where they were in our plan.
So if you're looking to put it together on a new product
or a different one, you can kind of use this to mirror ours.
So if you go to the next one here.
Also too, this is our full report
and all the attachments that went in there.
The one thing to keep in mind when you are requesting
an experimental project is that you have to know
the locations as Tim talked about prior to going out there.
So here's all the different locations that we used.
Our full final report is posted on workzonesafety.org.
And I do see that John posted that in the chat
as well for that link, so thank you for that, John.
And if you're interested to know how successful these were,
or do you wanna hear some more dad jokes?
Once again, our presentation is gonna be on the 13th.
We will go into a lot of the details,
and just as a precursor,
we've seen about 80 to 90% compliance
with these, successful compliance.
But we'll talk about the different signal heads,
getting into the different heads on the DADs, the layouts,
the displays, and really looking at that.
So this is just something that we wanted to kinda use
for the experimental writeup,
knowing that we had the next presentation coming in
and kinda laying it out for...
The rest of the group went through something similar
to that, and just to help provide that layout in that shell
for anyone looking to do experiments in the future,
or you can reach out to myself if you have any.
I don't see any questions in the chatbox,
but I think that's my end of that section.
- [Timothy] Thanks, Chris, and you're welcome to continue
to add questions.
Those of you in the audience,
please feel free to add questions as we go
along and Chris will answer them
or any of the panelists will answer them as they're able.
The next case study that we wanna talk
about is orange pavement markings for work zones.
This'll be largely based on some work that was done
in the State of Wisconsin a few years ago.
John Shaw is here, but he has limited internet.
So we actually did a prerecording of his.
So what you'll see here is a prerecorded talk
about orange pavement markings.
So here it comes John.
- Good morning, good afternoon, or good evening,
depending on where you are in the world.
My name is John Shaw.
I'm a research scientist at Iowa State University.
I used to work for Wisconsin DOT,
and I'd like to talk to you today a little bit
about orange pavement marking experiments and practice
in different places throughout the world.
So our objectives today, really to explain the use
of special color work zone pavement markings internationally
as well as some experiments that have happened
here in the US,
to discuss some of the motivations for those experiments,
and also to catch up on some recent research results
as well as some things that are about to happen.
A quick reminder here that orange marking is
not an approved traffic control device in the MUTCD,
the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
It is still considered an experimental treatment
in the United States.
Consequently, agencies that want to try this will need
to get permission from the Federal Highway Administration,
if they're gonna deploy it on any federal aid facility.
The other point to mention is
that the request to experiment process is documented
in the MUTCD and your local FHWA offices can be a wealth
of information about how to make that process work,
if you're interested in doing an experiment.
So with that, we'll just jump right into it.
The ghost markings, I think for many people,
on this call are a familiar problem.
The issue of trying to remove existing pavement markings
and either you can't get it all off
or you leave a lot of marks and scars on the pavement,
which sometimes are just about as visible
as the pavement markings that you're trying
to get people to follow.
There's been some research on that topic
of pavement marking removal,
trying to find the best way to do this.
NCHRP 759, a few years ago, looked at this quite in-depth.
There's also a forthcoming NCHRP synthesis
that looks at current practices for different agencies.
So there's a bunch of methods that people use,
primarily grinding, water blasting, and flailing.
They all have trade-offs between the speed of removal
and the extent to which scarring occurs.
They all have some issues
with getting all of the old markings off,
especially if the old markings are epoxy,
thermoplastic or acrylic.
Those can be really, really hard to remove.
And even if you are successful at getting them all off,
the color and texture underneath the markings is
often different from the adjacent pavement,
which will typically be aged and faded if it's asphalt
or tire-marked, if it's concrete.
So you can, in many cases, get these bizarre changes
in contrast and inversions of contrast,
depending on the angle that you're viewing it from,
which might change, for example,
as you're going over a vertical curve.
Well, some people have tried to fix the issue of scarring.
Other people have tried to skirt the issue of scarring.
And I think that the first experimentation
with special color pavement markings
probably is more the latter,
trying to skirt the issue specifically in Germany
in the mid-1980s.
So as a lot of you probably aware,
there's two major pavement marking and signage systems
in the world.
There's the MUTCD and the many other national manuals
that it has inspired, like in Canada and New Zealand
and South American countries.
And then there's the Vienna Convention, the VC.
And the Vienna Convention is used in Europe
as well as more than 100 countries around the world.
The main difference for the purposes
of today's conversation is that the MUTCD is
an white-and-yellow pavement marking system,
whereas the Vienna Convention is usually
just white markings.
All the markings are white.
Well, that was quite an advantageous for the Germans,
because they knew they could get yellow paint,
and they decided that they would use the yellow paint
as an override color.
So that whenever you see a yellow marking in Germany,
that means follow that marking and ignore those white ones.
So for example, in the upper photo,
you see someone as exed out the turn arrows
and turned what used to be a left-turn lane
into a lane for the opposite direction of traffic.
And you also see there a bike lane has been
temporarily marked in.
Or in the lower photo, you see
the old white markings are there.
Nothing's been done to try to remove them.
And all the traffic is following the yellow markings
through this crossover.
Similarly, here on the upper left,
you've got a temporary pedestrian crossing in Paris.
In the upper right, you've got a big yellow circle telling
the traffic in Spain that they're supposed to be driving
through the work zone at 30 kilometers per hour,
or about 20 miles per hour.
And it's not just limited to arterials.
This is used on freeways and tollways all throughout Europe.
So for example, in the upper left,
you've got those big wide white marking still in place
on a freeway in Belgium.
And all the traffic is following the new yellow markings
that have been designated for the work zone.
In fact, the upper right photo in Italy is one
of the few I was able to find,
where the old markings have been ground out.
That was a tollway project,
a very high-speed tollway in Italy.
Typically, the Europeans are using a tape for this purpose;
orange or yellow tape.
And I should also mention that the central Europeans decided
to go their neighbors maybe one better
by making their works own pavement markings orange.
So Switzerland, Austria, Slovakia,
they're all using a temporary orange markings in spite
of the fact that their normal pavement marking systems are
indeed all white systems.
Well, around 2006, this idea seems to have come
to North America, to Canada, specifically to Ontario,
first in the Toronto area.
And it seems that in 2006, 2007, the Ontario Ministry
of Transportation engineers started experimenting
with some different orange marking materials.
And they go out quite enamored of orange PMMA or acrylic.
And that has been kind of the typical pavement marking
for big projects in the Toronto area since that time.
Application guidance was issued in 2014
and the Ontario Traffic Manual Book 7.
And it basically says you can use orange markings
on provincial highways with speed limits over 90 kilometers
per hour or 55 miles per hour.
It does allow, in some instances use on arterials,
though, they seem to be kinda discouraging municipalities
from doing that.
Quebec is following suit on a very limited way.
I'd say it's more experimental in Quebec,
and more functional, or you know,
normal practice in Ontario.
Well, almost a decade later,
this idea finds its way to the US in Milwaukee.
And so the first project, as far as we know
in the United States, I should say,
to use this was the Zoo Interchange,
the major freeway-to-freeway interchange
in the heart of the Milwaukee area.
This was the second major interchange rebuild in Milwaukee.
And in the first one is the Marquette Interchange Project.
There had been a lot of problems with ghost markings,
especially markings that were left over
from lanes that have been moved again and again,
different stages of the construction,
and sometimes the ghost markings ran diagonally,
and it was actually quite confusing for drivers.
So they thought they'd try something different
with the Zoo Interchange, the second major freeway project,
freeway-to-freeway interchange project,
which lasted several years.
So there was winter construction going on.
And they also wanted to try out some epoxies
for winter construction and waterborne paints
during the summer, so there's a lot of experimentation
with different materials, different shades of orange
and so forth.
Here, you see some examples.
So on the left are the epoxy paints.
On the right are some different waterborne paints
that were trialed in Milwaukee?
Well, although a lot was learned through the Zoo Project,
there had never really been any formal
sort of scientific study.
There were a few public opinion surveys,
but nothing very formal.
But the opportunity came up a little bit later to do a trial
in the suburbs of Milwaukee, on I-94 near Oconomowoc.
And that gave us a chance to look
at whether drivers were confused by the unusual color.
And if there were any problems that the fact
that the centerline wasn't painted in yellow,
and just also together, some new public opinion data.
So in Oconomowoc, we had the chance to do something
that rarely happens in traffic engineering,
which was really a head-to-head comparison.
In this case, we had the white markings
on one bridge crossover project at Dousman Road
and a very similar project just this downstream
about a mile or two at Golden Lake Road
that was taped in orange.
And we looked at a couple of surrogate safety measures,
especially out-of-position vehicles and any other unexpected
or erratic driver behavior.
So we looked at the westbound direction primarily.
Here's the configuration.
The westbound direction was crossing over.
The eastbound direction was shifted little bit,
but they were pretty close to their normal driving position.
And then we had some,
this laser distance measurement device,
as well as some cameras and some portable radar units
to collect data out at that site.
Well, as it turns out, the Oconomowoc
sort of matched pair comparison.
We didn't get much ghosting.
So we didn't really get to see the performance side-by-side
with a ghost marking situation,
but we did have definitely the difference in color.
So on the left side of the slide,
you see the Dousman Roadside in white, our control site,
and then on the right is Golden Lake Road
with the orange markings.
At this point when the photo was taken,
those markings were starting to fade a bit.
Pretty high traffic volumes, about 47,000 vehicles a day.
Here's the three tapes that were out on the site.
Some unused tape on the top.
And then the tape that had been in the field
for about three and a half months on the bottom.
You can see all of these tapes, you know,
got tire-marked and they're all faded,
but the color retention was reasonably good.
Here's our distance measuring equipment, our cameras,
and we also did a portable radar units
and a public opinion survey.
In the public opinion survey,
we found that about 47% of the road users we asked,
thought that the orange was somewhat better or much better
than white during daytime conditions or on dry pavement.
About 17% preferred white.
About 17% thought it was all about the same,
and 19%, even though they're just like three
or four miles upstream of this rest area
where we did the survey, had just driven
through the orange markings, they didn't notice them.
At night and in the rain, most drivers preferred white.
So main results from Oconomowoc.
Some of our WisDOT engineers were initially concerned
about the possibility of driver confusion
with the orange marking.
That did not prove to be the case.
During the three and a half months of the deployment,
there were no major operational problems.
Our laser distance measuring device found no
statistically significant difference between
the vehicle positioning in the white markings
versus the orange markings.
It was pretty much the same.
There were some lane straddlers.
We looked at those with the video,
as best we could tell if they were straddling lanes is
because they wanted to,
probably because under low-volume conditions,
if they straddled the lanes, they could go
through the crossovers faster than they could
if they stayed in their lane.
Speed was slightly higher in the orange marking.
We didn't collect a lot of speed data.
So we don't have a lot of confidence in that information.
We thought it might have been a sequencing effect
that they got to practice their chicane driving skills
in the first crossover, so that they were able to go
through the second one a little quicker.
As I said, in the public opinion survey,
they had a modest preference for orange.
It was not an overwhelming preference,
but it was a slight, you know, favoring orange.
Our project engineers came away from it with the conclusion
that they thought that the orange was a good thing to use,
parsimoniously sparingly in sites where you really needed
to draw attention to something special that was going on,
like the crossover, and maybe use it as a contrast color
rather than as the primary marking color.
So that was interesting.
Here's an example of somebody who did that
at a tall Plaza in New York State with purple and white.
Well, very interestingly, in 2019,
Kentucky Transportation Cabinet had a chance
to try out orange marking, and they did something similar,
and they found similar to what we did,
that there wasn't much impact on the traffic speeds.
They tried to look at crash data year on year.
So the first year of their project was white,
and the second year was orange.
Unfortunately, that was really confounded by changes
in the configuration of the work zone.
The lanes were narrower.
The second year, so crashes went up,
but that may not have been due to the orange markings.
That was probably due to the more intensive construction
and the narrower lanes.
In their driver's survey about half their drivers preferred
the orange, 43% said they still like white better.
And 8% said they didn't care.
North Texas Tollway Authority has been trying out
orange thermal plastic on one of their jobs.
They've got some positive feedback from the public.
About 60% said they think they're more aware
of the work zone when they have the orange markings.
And this project's up and coming.
Caltrans in the San Diego area is in the process
of rebuilding I-5.
And they normally have contrast markings out there,
black and white contrast markings
with a black stripe upstream, and a white downstream.
So they're planning in the upcoming construction season
to try the same sort of a concept with orange and white.
So this is a photo simulation.
This is not the actual site.
This is a photo simulation.
So you'll see there's gonna be an orange stripe,
followed by a white stripe.
And that's one alternative for one direction.
And then they'll do the other direction
with a white stripe with orange on both sides,
and try to see which of those works better.
I think they've chosen these a little bit based on
what they anticipate the sun angles will be and so forth.
And here's how they're gonna be treating it in the Gore.
So to summarize,
the public seems to think that orange makes them
a little more aware that they're in a work zone.
Really hard to find any measurable difference
in the way they drive,
at least through the equipment that we've got.
There didn't seem to be in any of these projects
any major adverse impacts on traffic flow,
maybe a slight increase in traffic speed.
Obviously, these different experiments are continuing,
and just to reiterate, they do require FHWA approval.
So I'll leave you with my thoughts,
If you're gonna be trying this, I would suggest
rather than rolling it on on your biggest
and baddest project, I would suggest maybe try it first
in some low-key, low-volume situations,
maybe even in the parking lot of a rest area at someplace
to just get the materials optimized
for your roadways in your climate.
And then, you know, kind of try it out
in a little bit more demanding environment.
So with that, I'll thank you for your attention.
Again, I'm John Shaw and I'm at Iowa State University,
and I'm happy to take some questions
through the Q&A as we wrap up here, thanks again.
- [Steve] Okay, my name is Steve Kite,
and I'm gonna talk about a concept
that North Carolina has been working on,
called work zone pattern masking
and performance pavement markings, next.
And the first slide you see on the left is a project
we started out with on I-40 where we had an onsite detour.
And the black material you see on the road is
indeed the pattern masking.
And you know, by contrast,
the picture in the center is projects
where they've attempted to do line removal,
which quite frankly, in North Carolina, that's pretty good,
but the scarring that it creates is pretty intense.
And as John mentioned in his presentation,
it does change the color
based on even when you do get good removal.
And the picture on the right is another project
where we were doing the pattern masking,
which you can clearly see the old line
when you're standing adjacent to it
and looking directly overhead.
But from the driver's perspective,
traveling at operational speed, you don't really see it.
Okay, next, the bigger deal
though is automated driving vehicles,
what are they going to be able to distinguish
when they're approaching and traveling through work zones?
So clearly, we've got to be able to create the contrast
so that this technology can maneuver
through our work zones, next.
So one of the things, you know, we have to ask ourselves
as DOT is how are we preparing for this technology?
And its interpretation of lane closures, crossovers,
road closures, as well as the intermixing
of automated driving vehicles with the human drivers, next.
And again, we've kinda already hit on it,
but the first thing we can do is create contrast.
What we're trying to do is create a contrast
between the pavement surface and the pavement markings,
and eliminate the confusion that's created
there in line removal processes and improve the quality
of the payment marking,
but just exactly how are we gonna do that, next.
Well, in this slide here, you can see that on the left,
that's a picture North Carolina, where we had
an open-graded friction course, which is a very thin overlay
with some very large aggregate.
And when they attempted to do the line removal,
it essentially removed the entire pavement structure.
And the one adjacent to that, that I just mentioned earlier,
changes the texture and the color of the pavement marking.
And then the one on the far right...
Excuse me, in number three rather,
someone got overly aggressive on trying to remove that line
and created a huge rut.
And number four, this is what we get oftentimes,
is sometimes it's either poor removal or no removal,
and it creates these ghost lines, next.
And the use of blackening out old lines is
clearly prohibited in MUTCD because it does create confusion
due through the contrast with older pavements.
And if you look at the picture in the top,
notice where the driver is centered.
They're not even following the pavement marking.
They're following the blackened lines.
And then the bottom picture, they did the same thing.
They blackened out the skip lines,
and I'm not sure the driver fully understands
where they should be in the lane itself, next.
So again, work zone pattern masking is a technique
like North Carolina has been using
to completely cover the pavement surface.
And the biggest challenge though, is that black material.
It can't be slick, and it can't create glare.
It's also gotta be able to dry quickly
and allow the pavement marking to be applied to directly
on top of, it's got to conceal the old lines.
It can't prematurely wear off, and excuse me,
it must not have to be removed in order to place
the pavement as well as allow a payment to bond to.
So clearly obviously, that's a simple fix, right?
Well, I can tell you from my experience,
it is not a simple fix.
It's been an issue that we've been trying to resolve
with this application for the last three or four years.
And each time we placed a material on a project,
we learned something else, and get a little bit closer
to the success we're looking for, next.
Again, if you look at this photograph,
this was one of our first little in the parking lot
kinda demos, and what you see running transverse
in the photograph are the old pavement marking lines
for parking stalls?
And we just went in there and painted over them transversely
just to see what it would look like.
And if you look clearly, in each one of these,
you can see the old lines,
but if you look from the driver's perspective,
looking down the road, they seem to disappear.
And it's because of the contrast that the black creates
for the white and the yellow material.
So for sure, it eliminates that land removal techniques
that damages our pavements and creates the most confusion.
But what we would like to think of this as a system.
You know, you would wanna mask to create your contrast,
but you also wanna put a high-end
or better-performance pavement marking on top of it
for the driver, next.
And I think we've already covered some of this,
but obviously, the benefits are you're eliminating
the grinding and the damage, then the cost of repairs
for asphalt pavements.
And when you do the masking, you're eliminating
your confusion patterns caused by grinding
or blackening of lines.
And obviously, we're looking for that black material
to give us the contrast and it can improve
your surface friction on your old worn out pavements,
because we are dropping frictional elements
in that material, similar to glass beads
to give it some friction.
Can improve production,
'cause your traffic shifts can be done much faster.
And the last bullet, you know, we obviously are trying
to figure out methods that supports connected
and autonomous driving vehicle initiatives
for both daytime and nighttime driving conditions, next.
And the application requirements.
Obviously, we're gonna replace it across the full width
of the roadway, not just covering the pavement marking.
It's gonna go down between 20 and 25 mils
when the added frictional elements for skid resistance.
It's gotta be glare-free when it's cured.
Has to cure in 30 minutes or less.
And it has to conceal the old markings
for a minimum of 12 months.
And in North Carolina, they're currently using this
on interstates and freeways and multilane, excuse me,
multi-phase intersections.
And estimated costs, somewhere in the neighborhood
between 50 and 72 cents square foot.
But before we move on,
we'll just take a look at this right here.
You can clearly see this is the old line,
but as we go further down the road,
it just disappears because the white material
on that black masking takes the eyeball away
from the old line, next.
Obviously, performance markings provide a clearer path
for motorists in the work zone.
Performance markings, or excuse me,
last longer, and are brighter for both daytime
and nighttime conditions, performance markings,
and excuse me, to support the connected
and autonomous vehicle initiatives
by having better lane delineation,
and certainly, will improve
the drivers' comfort and satisfaction,
and hopefully reduce work zone crashes, next.
But the industry and DOT concerns, this was a big deal,
because the striping community didn't have the equipment
that it would take to put this material down
because it has to be retrofitted
from the rear of the vehicle.
They were concerned about having to purchase new equipment.
They were also concerned about the reduction of the amount
of work for grinding machines currently in their fleets.
And then, unknown issues and unknown processes gave
them concern, which has also
clearly gave NCDOT concern as well.
And with the states back out and drop out...
Excuse me, drop this procedure for traffic pattern changes.
Will it last for the full duration?
What happens if the old lines reappear
due to premature wearing?
How much more does this cost in traditional grinding?
All of these are legitimate questions that industry had,
and we had to go about answering those.
Although when we started out, we certainly didn't know
many of these answers, next.
What you see here in a couple of shots of what they did
for retrofitting their paint trucks.
These are the paint guns mounted toward the rear,
and then they have,
I don't know if you can see it,
probably not clearly in that shot,
but there's a standard beam gun mounted right behind those,
where the frictional elements would be dropped
into the lines.
And in this photograph here is very similar.
Although, I think you can see a little bit better
about the beam gun and the paint gun there.
But what this does, this set up,
when you spray from the rear of the truck,
it allows for a wider application.
Keep in mind you're striping
or spraying rather the full width of the asphalt.
So this allows them to spray six-foot patterns
which increases their production.
The learning curve was really steep with these things,
because you could imagine trying to get uniformity
of not only each paint gun, but each beam gun
to distribute the frictional elements.
They didn't know exactly what rate to drop
the frictional elements at,
to get the skid resistance we were looking for.
And that it certainly didn't know
if their current setups would be able to apply the material
uniformly between 20 and 25 mils, next.
And then again, just to reiterate,
you know, when you look at this,
clearly, you can see the old line
when you're standing outside.
But as the driver approaches the work zone
and the masking has been applied,
the contrast at this performance marking
on the black surface creates,
takes all the driver's attention away
from the old line, next.
Here's a shot, and I've already mentioned this.
This is the I-40 Project, Burke County,
where we had an onsite detour.
It does look like
the payment's been resurfaced, but it's not.
It's just had a pattern masking applied
and performance pavement markings.
This right here, I think was a thermoplastic
that they put in the work zone.
And that pattern was in place for about eight months.
And this particular job had bought 40,000 vehicles
a day on it, next.
This is another project will be put it on.
This near had 180,000 ADT.
This was my durability test.
I had a pretty good feeling
that the previous job was gonna to do just fine,
but I was very concerned about this particular project.
But if you noticed the color difference between
this side of the work zone versus that side, it is unreal,
the contrast that is created with the masking application.
Again, it does look like it's been resurfaced.
That pattern was in place for over 10 months,
but we did have a failure.
And the failure was the old lines were located
kind of in the wheel path, along each line.
Some of those started to reappear.
So when that occurs, you have to reapply the material.
And what we learned was we needed to bump up our spec
to go to a minimum of 20 mils in all projects,
where you running 180,000-plus,
you probably gonna need to bump that up to 25 mils.
And also before I leave this slide, dry times.
Dry times are huge on material like this.
You're spraying large widths.
It's got to be able to set up on this particular job.
They were having a hard time getting it to set up.
So the manufacturer had to go back, reformulate,
to basically create a fast dry product,
so that we could get the pavement marking material installed
before the LD's kicked in at 5:00 a.m., next.
Work zone pavement markings.
Real quickly, North Carolina, what we're doing is
we're allowing the contract and the choice of epoxy,
polyurea, thermoplastic, polymer paint, or tape
for the work zone.
And the reason why we're allowing those choices depends
on the duration of the traffic patterns.
So obviously, the pattern is gonna be in place
for a year or more, epoxy, polyurea, thermoplastic would
probably be, or take, would be the material of choice,
whereas if it's shorter durations,
a polymer paint would it be more in line due to cost.
But these materials do have initial six-month
and one-year retro-reflectivity requirements,
unlike when the materials go down,
they've got to have a minimum of 375 million candelas.
At six months, we allow it to drop to 275,
and then at one year, the white's gotta be at 150.
In the yellow, when it goes down,
has to be 325 million candelas.
And at six months, we allow it to drop
no more than 225 million candelas.
And then at one year, 100 million candelas, next.
So what we've done is the picture
that you're looking at is I-85 Cabarrus County.
This is a polyurea on asphalt
with a mix of standard and highly-reflective beads.
This material is only applied once.
We collected data for over a year and a half,
and the project met the, excuse me,
retro-reflectivity requirements in all conditions.
However, I will add
that not all projects has been this successful.
As our striping community is getting used
to the performance specifications, sometimes their choosing
or either the contractor's choosing materials
that can't meet these requirements.
So we have to educate them, and to make sure
that they understand that these projects are going
to be evaluated and that data is gonna be collected.
And if it fails, then they're gonna have
to replace the material.
So eventually, the industry is starting to get the message
that in works zones, North Carolina DOT is
not messing around, okay, next.
And I can take questions in the chatbox, thank you.
- [Timothy] Thanks, Steve, up next is Neil Boudreau, Neil?
- [Neil] Yep, all right, good afternoon, everyone.
My name is Neil Boudreau, the Assistant Administrator
for Traffic and Safety at MassDOT.
I'm gonna cover a specific low-cost application today.
Affordable traffic signals that we use
to support a work zone, next slide.
Oops, sorry, so the following provides an example
of a solution-based work zone technology.
Project took place a few years back,
and it was focused on repairs to the Sagamore Bridge deck
and drainage structures on the Route 6 bridge,
over in Boston, Massachusetts.
This is the gateway to Cape Cod,
and whilst Route 6 is under MassDOT jurisdiction,
the actual bridge is under the responsibility
of the Army Corps of Engineers,
and they actually developed a TMP that was approved
via a permit process,
and they hired the contractor to do the work.
The existing cross-section is just a mere 40 feet in width,
between two 18-inch-high granite curves.
And we theoretically only had two 10-foot lanes
in each direction.
Construction required the closure of half of that bridge.
And the result was two-way traffic
on a little bit even less than half with those narrow lanes.
So as you would expect, we had significant congestion
on the approaches, which was further complicated
by the fact that we have a ramp junction,
just the short distance
before the actual bridge, next slide.
Here's a view of looking back upstream
from where the ramp comes into the mainline Route 6,
the source of the congestion, as I just mentioned.
So I'm sorry, my screen is going crazy.
Hold on one second, there we go.
The picture doesn't do the situation.
Is just a sample of the backup when the queue extends
much further upstream.
We were seeing queues in the air,
average range of two to five miles.
Back in 2018, when we had to cobble together
whatever we had for traffic volumes from older studies,
and they were likely low at the time,
but that was all we had to work with.
We knew that the mainline volumes were still less
than what we expect the capacity would be for a single lane.
You know, this may be the case in normal conditions,
but not when we had this constraint work zone
with a junction point that was located
just up on the incline to the bridge.
As the figure displays,
we have since captured and updated counts
in the fall of 2019, you can see we have significant volumes
out there, next slide.
As you could expect, we got a lot of negative feedback
from the first morning after this project went live
and every day thereafter.
We made some adjustments to the TMP,
but that was just not enough.
I made the call to try to use the police details
to mediate the traffic streams,
and essentially create a meter condition.
Unfortunately, the state police wanted
a guaranteed 12-hour detailed shifts,
which would have added significant costs
to the overtime expenses for the job.
Plus, we wanted to focus on just the peak hours,
and we had trouble filling these police details shifts.
So we were not gonna have the results we were looking for.
We had to find another solution, next slide.
I was asked to work with our district office
to find a solution that would address the significant delays
and chaos that was happening with the existing TMP.
We wanted something that could be flexible enough
to address the variable traffic demand.
And what we got was a little bit outside the box for us.
We just decided to use some unique technologies
to enhance traditional portable traffic signal systems
that I had happened to see earlier that year
at the ATSSA Traffic Expo.
It was sort of a traffic signal system
that was a smart system, it was better-managed traffic.
So I reached out to the manufacturer
that I knew had this ability
to deliver what we were looking for.
And I also knew that there was a local traffic contractor
that would be willing to work with us
in such an accelerated timeframe.
We needed to develop this plan in...
Sorry, a quick turnaround.
So with a phone call on Thursday morning
to the manufacturer, one that afternoon to both the contract
and the manufacturer, equipment delivery on Saturday,
and we were deploying the system on Sunday, next slide.
So as I mentioned, this project was being handled
on their permit for the Army Corps of Engineers.
What we had was the temporary traffic control plans
from their permit.
And we had to use that to modify the design
to introduce the affordable traffic signal into the system.
Of course, had to have an official record
of what was being implemented out in the field, next slide.
We did run a capacity analysis to develop the sequence
and timing trap for the temporary signal.
And it was based on those volumes that I had,
as I mentioned.
We decided to use long, maximum green times
to accommodate the demand,
with two-thirds of that cycle time was being dedicated
to the mainline Route 6 traffic.
The plan also included flashing operations
for the overnight hours, when we felt it was unnecessary,
or have stop-and-go operations, next slide.
This was an unconventional solution for us at MassDOT.
So we wanted to use
as much innovative technology as possible.
Obviously, we had portable traffic signal trailers
that we've used on other jobs, but we wanted to make sure
that we could also incorporate some new technology.
We use the traditional pavement markings to establish
the stop bar and regulatory warning signs.
We use video detection for the side street approach,
and we wanted to integrate the system
with the upstream portable message boards,
so that we could make people aware of the new signal.
And finally, when we had longer wait times,
we wanted to use something that was new,
which was called the wait time display, next slide.
The process to deploy the temporary signal
to the existing coverage drop control plan out in the field,
was a little bit of a challenge.
As I mentioned, we were seeing two, four, five-mile queues.
In the weekend conditions, when we were out there,
we were definitely well into the four or five-mile range.
So we had to work given the back of queue
and try to deploy this equipment,
in the contractor's personnel,
the manufacturer's representative,
the police details that we had out there.
I was out there myself, but we all worked collaboratively
and very effectively, next slide.
These signals are permanently designed
for much long-term use.
So the project was unconventional.
All the trailers were equipped
with enough onboard battery power
to operate for roughly 30 days.
Each signal communicates with a wireless network
with the other signals in the system,
including conflict monitoring.
And the equipment meets all MUTCD and NEMA requirements
for portable traffic signals, next slide.
Here's just a couple of pictures of where we're adding
the temporary stop-on markings for both the mainline
and side ramp approaches.
Again, having to stop traffic to do this, next slide.
Where the additional traffic signal
on an access-controlled highway was out of the norm,
we wanted to add the signal head warnings
for the temporary condition,
and make sure that we double-barrel them.
We added a changeable message sign
to broadcast that the warning about the signal ahead.
And then regulatory signs were added to the side street
or the Route 6 ramp approach as shown here,
along with the mainland approach,
which we showed earlier in the presentation.
We also included a no-turn-on-red sign
on the ramp from Route 6A to prevent traffic
from interfering with that mainline flow.
This wasn't your typical situation
and what we wanted people to be able to slip through
on the road, next slide.
The video detector allowed for custom detection zones
to be created,
just like normal permanent signalized intersection.
So during certain hours a day,
when we had less of a volume demand on the side street,
that Route 6A ramp, we operated a non-on-demand only basis.
And it rested in red on the mainline
until the video system detected a vehicle
on the side approach, next slide.
As we mentioned, we use the changeable message signs
that were retrofitted with wireless communication
to allow them to be integrated
with the horizon portable traffic signal system.
The display provided the signal status in real-time
over the network, and the borders replace of quarter mile
in advance of each of the signals.
So the drivers were informed when the signal was in red,
as shown in the messages, next slide.
Another unique piece of technology that we use
in this project was the wait time display.
This is a small variable message sign that is programmed
to operate in conjunction
with the signals in real-time operation.
It provides details to the motorists,
according to the phases of the signal, as follows.
Here we see that the signals are in green,
and we're using a work zone message, next,
which will transition to slow as we're moving closer,
further along into the green time phase.
Next slide, I mean, next...
And then it flips to wait when we've hit the yellow,
'cause we don't want people to try to run
through the yellow, as we're approaching the stop bar, next.
Then the wait time message appears on the red
with the duration of how long
this particular phase would last.
And then it will count down, next slide,
as we get approaching to the end of the red cycle, next.
And then we're back into the green.
Hopefully, that worked okay, next slide. (mumbles)
So what are the benefits of adding
this new wait time display technology
out into these portable signals?
Well, for one, we're trying to prevent drivers
from running the red.
In this particular application,
that's not as big of an issue
as it would be on a situation
where you're running a one-lane, two-way operation.
You clearly don't want people to run the red
and risk a head-on collision.
This also helps keep the driver more engaged
and aware of their surroundings.
And if we can avoid issues with the signal goes
to a fault mode by using these displays, it's helpful.
We don't have to run the flashing red.
And finally, you can just display the wait time
as either the real-time countdown,
or you could also use information
such as the maximum waste time,
based on the overall cycle length, next slide.
The key for us in this project was to provide
a press release for the bridge construction project
that explained MassDOT's approach
to address this unsafe congestion
with the installation of temporary traffic signals.
We also wanted to inform them that we would be using
the changeable message signboards in advance of the signal,
and the small wait time displayed to assist motorists
as necessary when they navigate the area, next slide.
So how did it operate?
As I mentioned, we only use the detection on the side,
a street ramp approach.
And then we rested in red
during those low traffic volume demand times,
which quite frankly was not that often.
We were able to service the mainline
and still not overburden the ramp approach
with the timings we had developed.
And we used the flash mode for overnight,
so that no one of those late-night hours had
to stop unnecessarily.
More importantly, we did not see any reported crashes
while the signal was out there in operational.
In general, we consider the signals, essentially,
we're operating as an alternating ramp meter, next slide.
Here's a video of the system in operation.
Next slide, to MassDOT, we felt that this was a success.
However, there were some portions of the motoring public
and the local news media outlets, we needed a reminder
that the traffic signals don't reduce the number of vehicles
on the road.
The truth is the signal is provided controlled access
at the merge point,
that was previously a much more chaotic situation.
We did get local public official and police support
for the operation as it was providing
a much safer alternative.
The positive results experience has encouraged MassDOT
to utilize this technology for more
outside the box low-cost type applications.
In fact, we are currently working on our return visit
to this bridge in early April
for another short six to seven-week project.
We'll be down to that single-lane operation again,
and utilizing this signal, next slide.
So where do we go from here?
First off, we need to look and see
how portable traffic signals,
that adaption is this data.
Is it mobility alone, or is it safety mobility?
We at MassDOT invested heavily into meeting
the work zone data exchange specifications,
and that we think that through the development
of web-based processes to capture this data
and the goal of sharing this with traffic service providers,
we are providing a better solution for all.
Ultimately, we wanna get this information out
to the end-users, our customers on the roadway.
Whether that's through Waze, Google Maps,
Apple, TomTom here.
The key is to get the information about what's going on
in the work zone out to the end-user
before they get there, next slide.
So taking this one step further, we're now looking
to push this data on signal operations
for connected vehicles.
So if we know we have a portable traffic signal system
out there, just because it's a signal in a work zone,
if it's technology-savvy and ITS-based,
we can push this information, so that gets
into that connected vehicles.
We do it for permanent signals.
Why not do it for a temporary one?
Ultimately again, we wanna get as much information
on active work zones to the public.
There are safety mobility benefits
with increased dissemination of information
regarding road events.
And if we do this correctly, there's negative side to this.
And the discussion has already begun.
Next slide, thank you.
- [Chris] All right, thanks, Neil, I'll take it from here.
I'm gonna talk to you a little bit
about temporary pavement markings.
And if you haven't been out there
and seeing the removal of temporary paint markings,
this is something that commonly occurs.
You're out there with a box cutter and you're ripping up
that getting bloodied knuckles as you go to the next slide,
or you have the shadow markings as a ghost lines,
like everyone, John and Steve both talked about earlier.
So using temporary tape can help eliminate these
on some of our newer pavements.
So we don't have to remove or some markings,
but there also be a problem with removing those.
If you go to the next slide,
the current removable tapes don't come up,
that are out there on the market and they cheer,
they spread, they create environmental issues.
It's not organized, it creates this
kind of haphazard environment on the freeway.
So what we did is we looked at testing some different tapes.
So if you go to the next slide here.
We also wanna make sure you don't wanna open it up.
You're not breaking the tape.
This is really a problem that,
you know, creates worker exposure,
does not promote good speed, and we'll show you some videos
here in a second of how the worker exposure can be improved
by improving this tape, so go to the next one here.
And also too, this is a common injury type that occurs
for pavement marking companies.
If you want one, I'm sure you're aware of having to pay,
you know, for back problems or things like that.
And this was with working with our contractor PK
in the State of Michigan, this was one
of the highest complaint areas
that they got from their workers of just causing problems,
back issues, things like that.
So we're trying to increase, you know, workers' safety,
motorists' safety in more ways than one, not just him that,
but also preventing injuries from occurring
from the back-breaking work that this is,
so go to the next one.
So what we did is we looked at a modified tape working
with three on bright line.
We tested a couple different products.
As you can see in the left here, that is the improved tape.
It has additional scrim or the webbing that makes the tape.
So it has a stronger internal strength.
As you can see here, the old tape broke
over that roadway defects.
So when you're ripping that up,
that would not be a continuous removal.
So if you go to the next slide here,
you got another picture of that,
just to kinda highlight that and what we were seeing,
as you can see kind of that scream coming
through on the left, right above the blue there.
You can kinda see that webbing still keeps it that intact,
where the top line, the old tape
that is actually been ripped and broken.
So go to the one.
Here, and we should be getting into some of the videos.
So why is the DOT, are we looking at this?
This was when we were out there
when we were testing the tape.
So there was, you know, a little bit more personnel
out there, maybe one or two extra people,
but this is commonplace
as to what is taking place out there.
Multiple people, workers on their hands and knees, removing.
When you're out there and you're doing that,
you don't have your head on a swivel.
You're not watching for traffic.
It's just not possible to do both.
You know, if you can imagine you've ever had a label
that you've been trying to pick off of a new copy cup
or something like that,
and then that label doesn't come off,
and you gotta sit there, and how annoying that is.
You imagine doing that with traffic
driving 70 miles per hour, five feet away from you,
throughout the whole course of the day.
It just is not something that you could really,
you know, mentally do.
So this was the problem.
And this is where the contractor came to us and said,
"Hey, you know, we really need to come up with a solution."
So we worked with industry on that.
And then too also, when you kinda saw on the right,
the propane tank there, in Michigan, we have, you know,
cold weather timeframes, November, March,
where you know, you're early season, late season,
where you have to remove traffic control
and take up the lines, when it starts getting cold,
and the tape gets more brittle.
It's been down for a full season and it starts ripping.
And once again, doing this next to traffic,
at times driving 60, 70 miles per hour, next to you,
75 in some areas,
it really creates that dangerous environment.
We really wanted to look at limiting the amount of time
that this would happen.
So here is one of the removals
from the pilot project that we were doing.
As you can see the method that's being used was
that little cart pulling up the tape.
This was the test tape, and you can just see
how much faster this is taking place,
and to these individuals are on their hands and knees
next to the live lane of traffic.
You can see the speed at which this is occurring.
So the amount of time that they're out there is
definitely drastically reduced.
So go to the next one here.
So what we did is we actually did a test section
or we did, on the temporary tape,
next to the standard tape.
And then we did a removal between the two,
just to see the difference and making sure, you know,
that we were giving it a fair shake.
So if you go to the next video here,
what we did is we actually did a side-by-side comparison,
and hopefully this will show,
but what I was doing was kinda showing that
this tape actually wasn't touching the ground there.
It was like bridging the gap and it was still connected.
It was kinda like bouncing off,
where the other tape had actually gone through unripped.
So I apologize that this is a little bit jumpy
and/or a little hard to follow up.
What we did is we had the standard tape,
kinda this test tape go, and then they started behind them.
And then what I kept trying to do is showing, you know,
through the video, how much faster the other tape was going.
And too, if you look and you see how slow traffic is going,
when you pay attention and you see we've got I-75,
which is a major freeway down to one lane.
So not only is there the worker exposure,
but there's also the motorist exposure for the rear end,
back a few crashes that are potentially likely to occur.
And so eight minutes into that,
you can't even see the standard tape line,
because what's happening is it keeps breaking
or keeps leaving pieces behind, which then requires
an additional person to follow behind
to make sure that those remanence markings
are being pulled up.
There's gotta be a person that's doing that.
So in theory, this operation is taking an additional person,
and creating and increasing their exposure.
All the time, we have joint lines, paddles,
all sorts of different roadway defects.
And as you can see, just kind of the remanence
that's left behind.
If this person wasn't walking there,
you know, you could potentially have
those markings left behind as ghost markings,
causing more risk, confusion later on,
but you know, joint cracks seal on a roadway is something
that we never have in Michigan, right?
You know, being a little facetious,
unfortunately, that is just commonplace in our roadways.
And I'm sure the same for everyone across.
I mean, we've got over 200 people
on this webinar right now listening.
So I'm sure they're from all corners of the the US
and the globe watching us.
So weather conditions and roadway defects are probably
a very common type thing.
But you know, this is old removable tape.
You know, the joke always when we worked
with the contractors was, is this actually removable?
Could you even use that term?
And you know, like to kinda make me question,
that always kinda brought the question of,
is it actually, you know, removable?
So in doing the improvements and making those changes,
we really did make sure that one through.
So we gonna go to the, how much it was long (indistinct).
Yeah, go to the next slide here.
So also too, when it comes up,
the improved tape really just gets in these nice bounds.
Your old tape had those old big piles.
So putting this in perspective of work hours
and actually looking at that,
if you go to the next slide here,
it really kind of puts this into perspective.
So these are some hypothetical numbers
and based upon what we did on some of our current projects,
but we had our current tape,
assuming 10,000 linear feet would take four workers
three hours, and if you did the same thing
with the improved tape with the rate that we would do,
it would take four workers 30 minutes.
And if you looked at that,
that'd be an about an exposure of 10 hours.
The reduction in 10 hours, the worker exposure.
Then if you took that and you assume 500 traffics,
which was in a season, and looked at the reduced hours,
you know, the 5,000 reduced hours,
be 1,250 hours for traffic switches by that time.
And then you'd be looking at the user delay cost savings,
if it was, let's say,
you assume $5,000 per hour for a user delay cost savings,
you'd be looking at 6.2 million in saved user delay costs.
That's not to mention the improved safety
from the worker aspect,
the reduction in timeframe that you're out there,
allowing roadways to be open a lot sooner.
So this is something that just, you know,
touching on it briefly,
but the tape and the way that it works on the pilot projects
that we did for our removal worked great.
We did this on across the board 2020 with NMDOT,
and there is a longer version presentation of this
that is available.
Should be posted pretty soon if you were part of ATSSA,
that'll be made available, or I can share that with you too.
It was a little bit more in-depth in some of that,
but just wanted to briefly touch on this,
and cover with everything else, just is one of those things
that Michigan has really,
MDOT has really kinda bought in on,
and really have found a massive improvement
in workers' safety by utilizing that new,
improved temporary tape.
- [Timothy] Okay, thank you, Chris.
And thank you to all our panelists, Chris Brookes,
Neil Boudreau, Steve Kite, and John Shaw.
We have a few minutes left.
If anybody would like to, you know, ask some more questions,
we now have the opportunity
if we wanna verbally answer questions
or continue to type them in, we have time to do that.
So a few minutes left here.
Thank you to all of our presenters and thank you to all
of our attendees here, had a huge audience,
just wanting to make one final wrap-up plug here
that this is a recorded webinar.
We will post it to www.workzonesafety.org.
Again, if you type in the search window on the landing site,
low-cost toolbox, it'll take you right to the specific page,
where this will be posted along with the other materials
and the prior webinar as well.
I did wanna mention that we do have certificates available.
If you'd like one, certificates of participation,
please email me at the email address shown here.
And then also put in a plug for our upcoming webinar
on a Friday, March 19th, at 1:00 p.m.,
hosted by the Iowa LTAP.
And Chris and I will talk in quite a bit more detail
about the Driveway Assistance Device.
We just didn't have time to do it justice here
in these particular webinar.
So we have a special webinar coming up in a few weeks.