<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Traffic Control Device Analysis, Testing, and Evaluation Program</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731978</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Traffic control devices (TCDs) are the primary means of communicating highway information to road users and play a key role in highway automation. The design, application, and maintenance of TCDs is under constant transformation as new technologies, methodologies, and policies are introduced. In addition, vehicle technologies and the roadway infrastructure industry are rapidly evolving, spurred by technology advancements, customer demand, changes in the vehicle fleet, and changes in national and state policies. The research team will provide Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) a mechanism to quickly and effectively conduct high priority evaluations of issues related to TCDs. The TCD issues to be evaluated in this project could represent new devices or technologies, new applications of an existing device or technology, TCD material performance, changes in TxDOT’s practices regarding a TCD, or other TCD related needs. Examples of various evaluations include human factors, machine vision performance, safety and operational effects, visibility assessments, and cost effectiveness analyses. The activities conducted through this project will support the development of TCD related policy, specifications, guidelines, handbooks, and training.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2026 16:11:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731978</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluate Traffic Control Devices Viable Use to Reduce Speeding Behavior at High-Low Speed Zone Locations in Michigan</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731925</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Determine the effectiveness of various traffic control devices currently in use to reduce driver speeding behavior, when traveling from
a high-speed zone to low-speed zone. Site locations of interest in Michigan are where the speed limit is reduced due to a change in
roadway context, such as locations with increased pedestrian traffic, within school vicinity, and where bicycle traffic exist. Devices
proposed for study under this research project are signs of various sizes, dynamic signs, and experimental type devices.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Jul 2026 14:50:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2731925</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluation of Transit Signal Display Options</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2716608</link>
      <description><![CDATA[There is a need to assess the operational and safety impacts of alternative transit signal
displays and inform recommendations to be incorporated in state and national transit signal
design guidelines. OBJECTIVES: 1. Understand the current state of practice on the implementation of transit signal displays through a thorough review of the literature and outreach to transit agencies and other relevant stakeholders. 2. Explore transit operator preferences regarding positioning and display of transit signals through a survey to transit operators. 3. Investigate correlations between crashes and transit signal displays, through crash report analyses. 4. Understand driver behavior when encountering transit signals through field observations, static evaluation surveys, and driving simulation. 5. Develop recommendations for consideration in the next version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) regarding positioning and display design of transit signals.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2026 10:03:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2716608</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Scoping Study: Vertical Visibility Constraints -- Vertical Curvature Traffic Control Devices</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2709249</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Horizontal and vertical curves can obscure key roadway features or activity that may lie ahead of unaware drivers. Roadway curvature is a significant factor in roadway departure crashes, injuries, and fatalities. As land use has developed and activities on roads have changed, the potential for conflicts has grown. It is impractical and beyond the resources of roadway authorities to improve all roadway alignments to attain optimal sight distance. This is a growing concern as active transportation increases in many rural areas, especially those experiencing increased tourism. Horizontal curvature on roadways where drivers’ views are obstructed has been thoroughly researched, leading to well-accepted strategies for traffic control devices in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). However, similar research has yet to be conducted for vertical curves.

OBJECTIVE; The objective of this research is to develop a scoping study to clearly define and refine the research needs, objectives, and expected products necessary to address vertical visibility constraints, including exploring the relevance of crash data to vertical curves and developing a research work program to explore solutions. The intent of potential larger, follow-on, NCHRP study is to obtain data from vertical-curvature-related crashes to assess the details of occurrence, frequency, and severity, and to better understand road user needs, rather than relying on approaches used in prior studies.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 13:49:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2709249</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Develop and Evaluate Long Median Barrier Gate to Assist with Emergency Response</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2636104</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Median barriers are commonly used to separate opposing lanes of traffic on divided highways and to separate managed lanes from general purpose lanes. Concrete Median Barriers (CMBs) are often preferred on urban freeways with narrow medians due to their minimal deflection and low maintenance. However, long, continuous runs of CMBs limit access of emergency and maintenance vehicles to the other side of a roadway or a managed lane. Implementation of crashworthy median barrier gates at these locations can maintain the desired level of median protection for motorists while offering improved cross-median access for emergency and/or maintenance vehicles. The current Texas Department of Transportation's (TxDOT) Barrier Gate (detailed on standard sheet BG-11) is 30-ft long and provides a clear opening of 27 ft between the mounting brackets. For this project, the research team will develop a longer median barrier gate to provide a greater clear opening for larger emergency vehicles and contraflow during evacuation operations. The research team will design the median barrier gate to operate without power and perform crash testing of the median barrier gate to verify compliance with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2025 09:44:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2636104</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Placement Options for In-street Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R1-6a)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2593953</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study evaluated the effects of R1-6a pedestrian crossing signs, installed in various configurations, on driver yielding behavior at uncontrolled marked crosswalks across six Oregon locations. The research analyzed both staged and naturalistic crossings under different experimental conditions, including baseline, tubular markers, single and multiple R1-6a signs, and gateway installations. Video data were coded to assess crossing volumes and yielding rates for over 5,900 pedestrians. Baseline yielding was already high, averaging 85% nearside and 89% farside, but increased further with sign treatments. The gateway configuration achieved the highest yielding rates of 92% (nearside) and 97% (farside), while curb-top edge sign placement produced 87% nearside yielding and 99% farside yielding. These findings demonstrate that R1-6a signs, particularly in gateway configurations, enhance driver yielding even when baseline compliance is high, though variations across sites highlight the influence of differing roadway contexts and pedestrian environments.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 12:29:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2593953</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Research and Assessment of Needs for Sign Maintenance</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2593930</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) District offices need to verify in-house sign/signal installation and maintenance crews are prepared to implement criteria set forth in the new Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). This requires a thorough assessment of each District’s sign and signal crews to identify needs. This evaluation must review crew staffing levels, equipment and material needs, and training schedules. Based on findings of this assessment, KYTC’s sign installation handbook can be updated with best practices for assembling and managing effective sign and signal crews as well as for conducting effective and safe sign maintenance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 11:32:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2593930</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluating the Effectiveness of Dynamic Speed Feedback Sign (DSFS) at Safety Critical Locations in Connecticut </title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2566902</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This research study will use the field data collected at horizontal curves and speed transition zones to evaluate the effectiveness of dynamic speed feedback sign (DSFS) in improving speed compliance at these locations. The research team will extensively collect speed data at numerous horizontal curves and speed transition zones to obtain a meaningful sample size; and estimate the ideal range of longitudinal position of DSFS that produces maximum impact on speed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2025 13:29:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2566902</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Size of Regulatory and Warning Signs







</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2558385</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways (MUTCD) defines the standards used by road managers nationwide to install and maintain traffic control devices on all streets, highways, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and site roadways open to public travel. Regulatory and warning signs are covered in MUTCD Chapters 2A (Dimensions), 2B (Size of Regulatory Signs), 2C (Size of Warning Signs and Plaques), 6G (Regulatory Sign Design and Size), 6H (Warning Sign Function, Design, and Application), 7B (Design of School Signs), 8B (Sizes of Grade Crossing Signs), 9A (General), 9B (Regulatory Signs), and 9C (Warning Signs and Object Markers). Transportation agencies face challenges with the size of regulatory and warning signs because real-world roadway features do not always clearly match the categories (e.g., conventional, expressway) in the MUTCD tables (e.g., Table 2C-1, Warning Sign and Plaque Sizes). For example, some high-speed roads pass through urban areas without a reduction in speed, which can lead to sign clutter and sign sizes that do not match roadway conditions. These issues can increase costs, create maintenance difficulties, and result in the overuse of larger signs.

Human factors is an applied scientific discipline that tries to enhance the relationship between devices and systems and the people who are meant to use them. As a discipline, human factors approaches system design with the user as its focal point. Human factors research can help address transportation agencies’ challenges with the size of regulatory and warning signs by focusing on how drivers and other road users see and respond to signs. This user-centered approach can provide transportation agencies evidence-based guidance on choosing optimum sign sizes. With this kind of support, states can reduce costs, improve consistency, and make sure regulatory and warning signs are both effective and easy to understand.

Research is needed to incorporate human factors into regulatory and warning signs to help transportation agencies select optimum sign sizes.

The objective of this research is to provide guidance for selecting sizes of regulatory and warning signs based on traffic speed and highway context, considering human factors. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 14:05:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2558385</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Traffic Control Device (TCD) Consortium (4)
</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2519214</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Traffic Control Device (TCD) Consortium was originally established in 2003. It was previously Pooled Fund Project TPF-5(065), TPF-5(316), and TPF-3(447).
Members include state departments of transportation (DOTs), national organizations, city, county, and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Program Offices. All new Funding Commitments will need to be made on the Pooled Fund Website to this new project and all new funds will be transferred to the Lead State/Agency by the partners. The Lead State/Agency will have the responsibility for Receiving, Obligating, Expending, and Balancing the funding for this project. OBJECTIVES: To assemble a consortium composed of State Departments of Transportation; additional interested entities or organizations; County, regional, and/or local transportation agencies; and FHWA program offices to meet national and state needs in support of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Activities of the consortium include: a) Identify human factors, safety, and operational issues related to TCDs; b) Select new and existing TCDs for evaluation; c) Initiate and monitor research projects; d) Disseminate results; and e) Facilitate collaboration and information sharing among members.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Mar 2025 17:09:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2519214</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Application of MASH Test Criteria to Breakaway Sign and Luminaire Supports and Crashworthy Work Zone Traffic Control Devices



</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2433905</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recent crash testing of small and medium sign supports and work-zone devices has been problematic for both of the test vehicles required in the 2009 AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH). Many of these designs have previously been successfully full-scale crash tested under NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features. Only the small car (1800-lb, Geo Metro or similar) test was performed under NCHRP Report 350. MASH requires testing with both a small car (2420-lb, Kia Rio or similar) and a pickup truck (5000-lb, ½-ton Dodge Quad Cab or similar) into these types of devices. Occupant Impact Velocities (OIVs) and Occupant Ride-Down Accelerations (ORAs) have not been a problem because of the increased weight of the test vehicles, even with the commensurate reduction in impact speed in MASH Test 3-60. However, the change in frontal geometry (i.e., bumper heights, increased frontal area, and wrap around distances) and increased ground clearance has changed the interaction between the vehicle and object struck. In general, small and medium sign supports used to pass over the top of the impacting vehicle with limited or no vehicle contact. With the newer MASH test vehicles, sign supports are now striking the windshield and roof of the test vehicles and failing the occupant compartment intrusion and/or penetration requirements of MASH. Similarly, vehicle collisions with portable work-zone devices are causing unacceptable windshield and roof penetrations and/or deformations as well as floor pan penetrations. No testing has been conducted to date on luminaires (light poles) under MASH, but this recent testing on other breakaway and portable work-zone devices raises questions as to the expected performance of breakaway luminaire poles under the MASH impact safety criteria. The addition of objective vehicle intrusion and deformation criteria has also brought into question the future usefulness of pendulum/bogie testing of breakaway and crashworthy designs.
 

The objective of this research is to identify and evaluate the crash performance of breakaway sign and luminaire supports and crashworthy work-zone traffic control devices that are non-proprietary and commonly used. The evaluation should address their in-service safety performance, potential failure modes (and, if possible, design modifications that might address those failure modes), and their likelihood to comply with the current MASH crash test criteria.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Sep 2024 17:40:19 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2433905</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Field Assessment of Traffic Control Devices</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2417470</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The aim of this project is to develop a contractor certification program that ensures traffic control devices are field ready each construction season. Researchers will develop an inspection framework for roadway contractors as well as develop field-inspection methods and equipment for Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) personnel. Establishing a contractor certification program will improve traffic control devices’ retroreflectivity, appearance, legibility and structural integrity.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Aug 2024 09:14:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2417470</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Roadside Safety Device Analysis, Testing, and Evaluation Program</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2256266</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Road to Zero has targeted a goal of zero deaths and serious injuries on Texas roadways. Recent trends in Texas indicate a continued increase in highway fatalities each of the past three years. In 2021, roadway departure crashes were responsible for 40 percent of all crash-related fatalities in Texas, which is the largest single category by crash type. In October 2021, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) designated Texas as one of 16 Roadway Departure Focus States based on being over-represented on three (3) different roadway departure crash fatality metrics. Roadside safety devices are a key element of an effective roadway departure safety strategy. These safety devices shield motorists from roadside hazards such as non-traversable terrain and fixed objects, thereby reducing injuries and fatalities associated with roadway departure crashes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:49:58 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2256266</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Compliance and Best Practices for Pavement Markings</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2244520</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In August 2022, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published a new rule in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) establishing minimum retroreflectivity values for longitudinal pavement markings. Under the new rule, states have four years to develop a pavement marking maintenance method and six years to replace pavement markings that fail to meet the new minimum retroreflectivity values. Pavement markers are key components of pavement markings. Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) is currently migrating to plastic inlaid markers (PIMs) from traditional snow-plowable raised pavement markers (SPRMs) on new and resurfaced roads. During this transition, KYTC and contractors are facing challenges related to durability, material availability, equipment needs, staffing/training needs, and the maintenance requirements required to prevent marker dislodgement. This project will identify roads subject to the new pavement marking requirements and investigate methods to assess compliance with new retroreflectivity minimums.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Sep 2023 08:49:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2244520</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Legal Problems Arising out of Highway Programs. Topic 27-01. Transportation Agency Liability for Roadside Safety Hardware</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2209730</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Transportation agencies install a large amount of roadside safety hardware purchased from manufacturers. Included in this hardware are various kinds of guiderail and other barriers, impact attenuators, and breakaway light poles and sign supports.
  
NCHRP Report 350: Recommended Procedures for the Safety Performance Evaluation of Highway Features, includes guidelines for crash testing roadside safety hardware and criteria to assess the test results. After the publication of NCHRP Report 350, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) required all road safety hardware utilized on a federal aid eligible roadway to be tested using testing criteria reported in NCHRP Report 350. The FHWA issued certification letters for all devices whose testing satisfied the NCHRP protocols. 
 
In 2009, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) published the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) for use in testing safety hardware. FHWA adopted MASH in 2016, requiring all newly installed roadside safety hardware to be tested and certified under MASH. Prior hardware tested under NCHRP Report 350 can remain in place until replacement due to damage or highway rebuild when MASH-certified hardware must be installed. The federal testing and certification requirements do not apply on roads funded only by non-federal money. Each state must determine what road safety hardware is satisfactory for non-federal aid roads. 

In most, if not all, jurisdictions, transportation agencies have potential liability for claims of alleged negligence in the design, construction, maintenance, and operation of state and local roads. These claims can include allegations that roadside safety hardware was improperly designed, installed, or maintained.  

The complex processes for testing and approval of roadside safety hardware add an extra level of complexity to evaluating potential liability and defenses to liability in the event of tort claims relating to the safety hardware.  

An analysis of liabilities on claims alleging deficient or defective roadway safety hardware, and defenses to such actions, would be of value to transportation agencies and the attorneys that defend them.

The objective of this research is to produce a report that includes a description of the liability that applies to parties involved in the design, manufacture, testing, certification, and installation of roadside safety hardware. These parties include state and local transportation agencies, the relevant federal highway entity, installation contractors, testing facilities, designers, and manufacturers.  ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Jul 2023 21:19:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2209730</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>