##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

The counting of traffic conflict allows the estimation of accident potential at a particular location such as at-grade intersection. The objective of this paper is to examine the evasive action of driver occurs with some frequency at Shao intersection which may result in potential accident. This paper applied traffic conflict techniques to evaluate collision potential at unsignalized intersection located at Shao. The morning and evening peak traffic flow was captured using a video camera for seven days and then analyzed by playing back the video on daily basis. The 100 sample size of observed conflict was based on 95% confidence level, 5% permitted error and the proportion of the vehicles that were involved in a specific conflict for the observed traffic flow. The conflicts identified were compared with volume counts at minor approach. The daily peak hour approach traffic volumes were found to have a close relationship with the percentage values of conflict on the two minor approaches. It also showed that rear end collision accounted for more than 70 percent of traffic conflicts and it correlated well with the traffic volumes on WB and EB approaches.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. C. J Baguley, C.J.” The British Traffic Conflict Technique”. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, NATO ASI Series, Vol F5, International Calibration Study of Traffic Conflict Techniques, 1984.
     Google Scholar
  2. WHO “Global status report on road safety 2015”, World Health Organization.
     Google Scholar
  3. J .C. Glennon, W. D. Glaus, M .C. Sharp, and B .A. Thorson. “Critique of the Traffic-conflict Technique”. Transportation Research Record 630, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1977.
     Google Scholar
  4. M. Idris “Research and Development on the Application of Road Safety Technology” (Penelitian dan Pengembangan Aplikasi Teknologi Keselamatan Jalan). Final Report, 2006.
     Google Scholar
  5. M. Mallah “Development of a Conflict Rate Prediction Model at Unsignalized Intersection". University of South Florida. 2009.
     Google Scholar
  6. Guido, G., et al. Safety performance measures: a comparison between microsimulation and observational data, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 20, 217-225, 2011
     Google Scholar
  7. Salamati, K., et al. Development and implementation of conflict-based assessment of pedestrian safety to evaluate accessibility of complex intersections, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 148-155. 2011.
     Google Scholar
  8. Zheng, L., Prevedouros, P. D. Traffic conflict techniques for road safety analysis: open questions and some insights, Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 41, 633-641.2014.
     Google Scholar
  9. P. Liu “Evaluation of the Operational Effects of U-Turn Movement". University of South Florida, 2006.
     Google Scholar
  10. M. R. Parker, and C. V. Zegeer, “Traffic Conflict Techniques for Safety and Operations: Engineers Guide”. FHWA-IP-88-026. Washington, D.C., 1989a.
     Google Scholar
  11. P. C. Box and J.C. Oppenlander “Manual of Traffic Engineering Studies”. Fourth Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers, pgs 66 – 76. 1976.
     Google Scholar
  12. F. Pirinccioglu “Safety Impacts of Right Turns Followed by U-Turns". University of South Florida, 2008.
     Google Scholar
  13. H. Kennedy “Unsignalized Intersection Collisions". NCHRP Report 500, Washington, D.C, Transportation Research Board, Spring 2006.
     Google Scholar