BACKGROUND
In-service performance evaluations (ISPEs) of roadside safety features have been recommended for over 40 years. Michie recommended ISPEs for crash-test and evaluation procedures in NCHRP Report 230: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Appurtenances, published in 1981. The importance of and need for ISPEs was reiterated by Ross et al. in NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features and by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). The ISPE criteria were finalized in NCHRP Research Report 1010: In-Service Performance Evaluation: Guidelines for the Assembly and Analysis of Data. These reports outline the potential use of ISPEs into establish crashworthiness without crash tests.
Although it has been established that ISPE studies could help state departments of transportation (DOTs) to establish crashworthiness without having to conduct many crash tests, additional investigation on how ISPE data can be used to determine roadside safety hardware crashworthiness in lieu of crash tests would be helpful. Research is needed to incorporate ISPE data into crash-testing and evaluation protocols for roadside safety hardware to support state DOTs in delivering a safer highway network for all users.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this research project is to investigate how state DOTs can incorporate collected ISPE data and results in commonly used crash-testing protocols for roadside safety hardware.
Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least the following tasks.
RESEARCH PLAN
At a minimum, the proposed tasks shall include:
Phase I
Task 1. Assemble existing routine and investigative ISPEs conducted using the NCHRP Research Report 1010 criteria.
Task 2. Identifying, at a minimum:
- A method for using ISPEs with relevant contributing factors to accomplish the project objective
- Other contributions of ISPEs to advancing the state of the practice beyond crash-testing protocol development
The contractor is expected to include these findings and how they may benefit state DOTS, manufacturers, maintenance, and others in the final report. In addition, the contractor is expected to use liability neutral language in the development of any project-related materials. Refer to NCHRP Legal Research Digest 83: Guidelines for Drafting Liability Neutral Transportation Engineering Documents and Communication Strategies for details.
Task 3. Prepare an interim report documenting the results of Tasks 1 and 2 and provide an updated work plan for the remainder of the research no later than 10 months after contract award. The updated plan must describe the method and rationale for the work proposed for Phase II.
Phase II
Task 4. Execute the work plan as approved in the interim report. Assess and revise the method developed in Phase I and summarize the findings in a technical memo for the NCHRP’s review and approval.
Task 5. Based on the research results, prepare draft language for consideration by AASHTO to incorporate the research results in the next edition of MASH (hereafter called AASHTO Deliverable), supported with design examples.
Task 6. Present the AASHTO Deliverable virtually to the AASHTO Technical Committee on Roadside Safety for review and comment and propose revisions to the NCHRP. Revise the AASHTO Deliverable considering the NCHRP approved comments.
Task 7. Prepare final deliverables, including:
- The final report. A final report that documents the entire research effort.
- The AASHTO Deliverable. Draft language suitable for consideration by AASHTO to incorporate the research results in the next edition of MASH.
- A technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products”.
- A slide deck for use in webinars that presents the research findings and conclusions.
STATUS: Proposals have been received in response to the RFP. The project panel will meet to select a contractor to perform the work.
