Determining the impact of directionality on road markings retroreflectivity using dynamic method
Abstract
Road markings are an important component of delineation, intended to provide guidance and warning, to manage and regulate road traffic. In order to properly fulfil their function, road markings must be visible and it is precisely the visibility, in terms of road safety, that presents their most important characteristic. Practical tests showed that the marking visibility, or retroreflectivity, changes depending on directionality, showing higher values in the direction the marking is applied than in the opposite direction. This paper addressed the impact of road markings directionality on their retroreflectivity using the dynamic method for testing retroreflectivity. The research considered paint, thermoplastic and structural markings made of cold plastic. The results showed that the impact of directionality of paint and flat thermoplastic markings on their retroreflectivity is negligible. The average difference in retroreflectivity of renewed paint markings is 13.1 mcd/m2·lx and 11.85 mcd/m2·lx for existing paint markings, while the respective difference concerning flat thermoplastic markings is 9.60 mcd/m2·lx for renewed markings and 9.20 mcd/m2·lx for existing markings. A more significant difference was noted with structural markings made of cold plastic, namely 62.80 mcd/m2·lx for renewed markings and 49.60 mcd/m2·lx for existing markings. The results for paint and thermoplastic markings show that directionality should not be taken into consideration when evaluating their quality, which greatly facilitates and simplifies the process of testing the markings retroreflectivity. The stated results are of great importance for traffic safety and markings maintenance system.
First Published Online: 4 Sept 2017
Keyword : road markings, directionality, retroreflectivity, road markings materials, traffic safety, road markings management.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Babić, D.; Burghardt, T. E.; Babić, D. 2015. Application and characteristics of waterborne road marking paint, International Journal for Traffic and Transport Engineering 5(2): 150–169. https://doi.org/10.7708/ijtte.2015.5(2).06
Craig, W. N.; Sitzabee, W. E.; Rasdorf, W. J.; Hummer, J. E. 2007. Statistical validation of the effect of lateral line location on pavement marking retroreflectivity degradation, Public Works Management & Policy 12(2): 431–450. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X07308773
Debaillon, C.; Carlson, P.; He, Y.; Schnell, T.; Aktan, F. 2007. Updates to Research on Recommended Minimum Levels for Pavement Marking Retroreflectivity to Meet Driver Night Visibility Needs. Report No. FHWA-HRT-07-059. US Department of Transportation. Federal, Highway Administration, McLean, VA, US. 50 p. Available from Internet: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/07059/07059.pdf
Elwakil, E.; Eweda, A.; Zayed, T. 2014. Modelling the effect of various factors on the condition of pavement marking, Structure and Infrastructure Engineering: Maintenance, Management, Life-Cycle Design and Performance 10(1): 93–105. https://doi.org/10.1080/15732479.2012.701650
EN 1436:2009. Road Marking Materials. Road Marking Performance for Road Users.
Gibbons, R. B.; Williams, B. M. 2012. Assessment of the Durability of Wet Night Visible Pavement Markings: Wet Visibility Project Phase IV. Report No VCTIR 12-R13. Virginia Center for Transportation Innovation and Research, US. 52 p. Available from Internet: http://www.virginiadot.org/vtrc/main/online_reports/pdf/12-r13.pdf
Gibbons, R.; Williams, B.; Cottrell, B. 2012. Refinement of drivers’ visibility needs during wet night conditions, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2272: 113–120. https://doi.org/10.3141/2272-13
Gibbons, R.; Williams, B.; Cottrell, B. 2007. Assessment of durability of wet night visible pavement markings: visibility experiment, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2337: 67–73. https://doi.org/10.3141/2337-09
Graham, J.; Harrold, J.; King, L. 1996. Pavement marking retroreflectivity requirements for older drivers, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1529: 65–70. https://doi.org/10.3141/1529-08
Hrvatske ceste. 2010. Technical Terms of Company Croatian Roads Ltd. Hrvatske ceste d.o.o. Available from Internet: http://www.hrvatske-ceste.hr
Kopf, J. 2004. Reflectivity of Pavement Markings: Analysis of Retroreflectivity Degradation Curves. Report No WA-RD 592.1. Washington State Transportation Center (TRAC). 48 p.
Lee, J.-T.; Maleck, T. L.; Taylor, W. C. 1999. Pavement marking material evaluation study in Michigan, ITE Journal 69(7): 44–51.
Lindly, J. K.; Wijesundera, R. K. 2003. Evaluation of Profiled Pavement Markings. UTCA Report Number 01465. University Transportation Center for Alabama (UCTA). 112 p. Available from Internet: https://ntl.bts.gov/lib/24000/24900/24956/01465FnlRpt.pdf
Loetterle, F.; Beck, R.; Carlson, J. 2000. Public perception of pavement-marking brightness, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1715: 51–59. https://doi.org/10.3141/1715-08
Migletz, J.; Graham, J.; Harwood, D.; Bauer, K. 2001. Service life of durable pavement markings, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1749: 13–21. https://doi.org/10.3141/1749-03
Mull, D. M.; Sitzabee, W. E. 2012. Paint pavement marking performance prediction model, Journal of Transportation Engineering 138(5). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000360
O’Donell, B. M.; Colombo, E. M. 2008. Simple reaction times to chromatic stimuli: luminance and chromatic contrast, Lighting Research & Technology 40(4): 359–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153508097709
Parker, N.; Meja, M. 2003. Evaluation of performance of permanent pavement markings, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1824: 123–132. https://doi.org/10.3141/1824-14
Rasdorf, W. J.; Zhang, G.; Hummer, J. E. 2009. The impact of directionality on paint pavement marking retroreflectivity, Public Works Management & Policy 13(3): 265–277. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X08330824
Sarasua, W. A.; Davis, W. J.; Robertson, J.; Johnson, J. A. 2013. A methodology for evaluating centerline markings in temperate climates, Journal of Transportation of the Institute of Transportation Engineers 5(1): 17–30.
Sitzabee, W. E.; Hummer, J. E.; Rasdorf, W. 2009. Pavement marking degradation modeling and analysis, Journal of Infrastructure Systems 15(3). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1076-0342(2009)15:3(190)
Ščukanec, A. 2003. Primjena retroreflektirajućih materijala u funkciji cestovnoprometne sigurnosti: doktorska disertacija. Sveučilište u Zagrebu, Fakultet prometnih znanosti. 187 l. (in Croatian).
Zehntner. 2009. Translation of Test Certificate No. 0913-2009-05 of the Suitability of the Dynamic Retroreflectometer ZDR 6020 for the Dynamic Measurement of the Coefficient of Retroreflected Luminance RL of Road Markings. Zehntner GmbH Testing Instruments. 13 p. Available from Internet: http://www.zehntner.com/download/ZDR6020_test_re-port_StrausZert_e.pdf
Zhang, G.; Hummer, J. E.; Rasdorf, W. 2010. Impact of bead density on paint pavement marking retroreflectivity, Journal of Transportation Engineering 136(8). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000142
Zhang, Y.; Wu, D. 2006. Methodologies to predict service lives of pavement marking materials, Journal of the Transportation Research Forum 45(3): 5–18. https://doi.org/10.5399/osu/jtrf.45.3.601