<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>Salem District Distributed Acoustic Sensing Pilot on I-81: Performance Evaluation Research Proposal</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778217</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has an extensive network of fiber optic cables that provide the opportunity for Distributed Acoustic Sensing (DAS) to monitor traffic. DAS operates on existing dark (i.e., unused) fibers, using vibrations to characterize events such as passing cars or incidents like vehicles stopping or crossing over rumble strips. By following traces along a cable, these systems can often identify vehicle trajectories and impute speeds and vehicle class. The accuracy and sensitivity of DAS systems is greatly impacted by fiber installation parameters, including the cable type, installation method, depth, and distance from the roadway. This has the potential to greatly add to VDOT’s sensing space along rural roads without additional capital investment, supplementing existing camera systems. Salem District is piloting a DAS unit at three different sites to determine its effectiveness for TOC alerts of events like disabled vehicles. This project will evaluate the system’s effectiveness for alerts and traffic parameter measurements, enumerate considerations for statewide deployment, and study how VDOT’s fiber installation policies impact DAS sensing capabilities.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2026 09:02:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778217</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Public Utilities Within SDDOT’s Highway Right of Way</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2704041</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Utilities located within or near the highway right of way (ROW), whether existing or planned, pose significant challenges for the South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT). These challenges include managing and documenting final utility placement and minimizing conflicts with future construction. A lack of planning and coordination often results in insufficient space for additional utilities and complicates future infrastructure projects.
Permitting practices across SDDOT vary significantly, particularly for non-traditional or private utility installations such as drain tile, methane lines, and private water systems. This inconsistency is exacerbated by outdated South Dakota Administrative Rules, which do not reflect modern installation methods, materials, or industry standards. For example, current rules still require steel casing under roadways, even though modern alternative materials like  polyethylene meet structural requirements and are commonly used in other states. While SDDOT does allow alternative materials if they meet Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) criteria, this requirement can be burdensome for smaller utility providers who may lack the resources to hire engineers for custom casing designs. The lack of standardized, pre-approved casing options further complicates permitting process and installation practices. Additionally, the rules provide little to no guidance on modern installation practices such as horizontal direction boring, which has largely replaced trenching in many contexts due to its lower surface disruption and environmental impact. These regulatory gaps contribute to permitting delays, inconsistent enforcement, and increased costs for both the Department and utility owners.
After utility permits are issued and work is completed, the submission of as-built documentation is often inconsistent and lacks standardization. This makes it difficult to accurately verify the depth and location of installed utilities. Submissions can vary widely – from  detailed Computer Aided Design (CAD) files to hand-drawn sketches--resulting in  uncertainty and inefficiencies during future planning, maintenance, and construction activities.
Utility coordination in developed areas remains a significant challenge due to the absence of a unified, enforceable framework. In many cases, coordination among utility providers is nearly nonexistent, resulting in inefficient use of limited ROW space. This lack of coordination has led to overlapping installations, redundant infrastructure—such as multiple dark fiber lines—and increased risk during construction or maintenance activities. Compounding the issue is the absence of a clear process for managing abandoned utilities or maintaining an accurate inventory of existing infrastructure. Without reliable data, future planning becomes more complex and costly.
Federal regulations, including 23 CFR Part 645 Subpart C, require state DOTs to designate broadband utility coordinators and establish a process for registering and notifying broadband providers about planned projects. These rules are intended to reduce redundant installations and promote early coordination. However, SDDOT has faced limited engagement from broadband providers, making compliance difficult and undermining efforts to streamline utility planning.
The growing presence of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) infrastructure—such as fiber-optic lines, sensors, and communication equipment—adds another layer of complexity. ITS systems require secure, uninterrupted access and are particularly vulnerable to damage or interference from uncoordinated utility work. Protecting ITS infrastructure is critical to maintaining traffic safety and operational efficiency.
Although South Dakota Administrative Rules reference utility corridors, there is no consistent enforcement mechanism or incentive structure to encourage shared use or coordinated planning. This approach increases the likelihood of project delays, cost overruns, and safety hazards during construction.
To address these challenges, a comprehensive evaluation of current utility coordination practices is needed, including a SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis. This would identify gaps, assess risks, and provide practical, policy-driven improvements aligned with both state and federal expectations.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2026 12:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2704041</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices. Topic 57-16. Practices Related to Public Art in State DOT Rights-of-Way and Facilities</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630491</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Final Scope
Transportation infrastructure facilitates the movement of people and goods, but sensitivity to the surrounding context is sometimes an afterthought with utilitarian and functional design. Arts and culture play a powerful and unifying role in creating places of lasting value, reinforcing shared experience, and celebrating what makes communities special and unique. Place-based infrastructure design that fits well into its surrounding built and cultural context is more likely to promote thriving economic activity, be responsive to community needs, reduce risk, and improve quality of life. 
An increasing number of state departments of transportation (DOTs) have created and adopted policies related to public art in state rights-of-way. These policies typically focus on requests by external stakeholders to install artwork on existing public infrastructure. However, there have been no known formal discussions between state DOTs on how to design a policy of this type, and it is unclear whether existing policies answer all the questions practitioners are struggling with. Examples of complex issues include maintaining public artwork over the long term and replacement of facilities on which art is installed. It is also unknown to what extent state DOTs have programs or policies that actively encourage the inclusion of art on public infrastructure, or how such programs are funded.
The objective of this synthesis is to document state DOT practices and policies related to public art in state rights-of-way (excluding anything not permitted by the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). 
Information to be Gathered Includes (but is not limited to):
Motivation for state DOTs to include public art or treatments in projects in right-of-away;
Sources of interest in public art (e.g., internal, external, or both), and if/how public benefit is measured; 
Practices and policies related to the types of art installations, ownership rights, liability, transportation facility types where art is allowed, maintenance, installation on existing structures and new construction, and maintaining clear zones; 
Delineating the disciplines that may be represented in art programs;
Planning practices to consider public art during long-range or corridor plan development;
How the public is engaged on public art;
Programming/funding practices to acquire, install, and maintain public art; 
Staffing of public art programs and policies;
Public art accession and deaccession policies; 
Cooperative agreements or contracts (e.g. DOT and artists, local jurisdiction); 
State and federal statutes that enable, limit, or prohibit public art programs.
Information will be gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs for the development of case examples. Information gaps and suggestions for research to address those gaps will be identified.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Nov 2025 17:33:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2630491</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Implementation of NCHRP Research Report 887 - Guidance for Underwater Installation of Filter Systems</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2560834</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Bridge scour -- the erosion of soil or sediment around abutments and piers -- is one of the leading causes of bridge failure. During the construction of a bridge, countermeasures are taken to prevent this erosion. However, small soil particles can still pass through voids and gaps in the countermeasure structure. To prevent this additional erosion through the countermeasure, a filter should be placed between the countermeasure and the underlying soil. Despite the importance of including filters in the construction of countermeasures, a survey of bridge projects showed that few bridges in the United States include them due to constructability or environmental concerns. The goal of the original research undertaken by Ayres Associates on behalf of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) was to provide guidance on the process for installing these filter systems, addressing common concerns and issues that prevent their inclusion (NCHRP Project 24-42, Research Report 887).  In it, the research outlines the ways in which filters— both granular and geotextile filters — can be installed under different construction conditions. The research examined a number of approaches using these two methods:  -  Loose granular filter (placed either by clamshell or tremie, not dumped)   -  Geotextile fabric by itself (typically placed by divers and temporarily secured by sandbags, steel frame, or pins)  -  Self-sinking mat (machine-placed)   -  Self-sinking mat (diver-placed)   -  Pre-filled geocontainers   -  Diver-filled geocontainers   -  Geotextile affixed to armor. In cases using the loose granular filter and geotextiles, many approaches used certified divers to conduct the installation, giving greater flexibility and control over the process. Divers were responsible for filling geocontainers, guiding self-sinking mats, or placing granular materials using a tremie or clamshell depending on the method. The main considerations in determining which materials and methods to use were the access to the site and clearance (e.g. if the filter to be placed under a pier), the depth of the placement, and the velocity of the flowing water. After installation of any filter type and the armor layer is placed on top of the filter, there is no maintenance required unless the armor layer is damaged (for example during a flood event). Implementation & Impact | Training Workshop As part of the project, Ayres Associates produced an implementation document, Training Manual for Underwater Installation of Filter Systems which formed the basis of the implementation work conducted as part of this project 24-44.  Using this training manual as the foundation, Ayres Associates worked with NCHRP to plan a one-day workshop on October 10, 2019, in Fort Collins, CO. Over 60 different state departments of transportation (DOTs) were invited to participate in the workshop, and ultimately representatives from 16 DOTs attended along with two consultants, and a representative from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). Over the course of the workshop, participants learned about the purpose and importance of filters, approaches for their installation, and best practices and recommendations from NCHRP research. At the conclusion of the educational sessions of the workshop, participants had the opportunity to work through a problem-solving session using a real-world case study, where they could apply the knowledge learned earlier in the workshop. Attendees were provided the resources (the Instructor’s Guide, the Power Point® presentation, and a brief video) and the knowledge to return to their agencies and provide essential training on underwater installation of filters to their associates, consultants, and contractors. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2025 13:24:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2560834</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Statewide Pavement Marking Condition Assessment Program</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2485381</link>
      <description><![CDATA[New driver-assist vehicle technologies—such as lane departure warnings, lane-centering systems, and lane-keep-assist systems—rely on pavement striping to function safely and effectively. Therefore, if these systems cannot detect pavement markings due to rain, snow, dust, or roadway damage, they may not operate correctly. Using retroreflective raised pavement markers (RRPM) is one solution to help maintain the visibility of pavement striping under these conditions, but there are tradeoffs. For instance, vehicle technology companies report that RRPMs are effective in helping their systems work, yet deployment is inconsistent throughout many states due to the high expense of installation and maintenance. 
This study would help Arizona Department of Transportation's (ADOT’s) Traffic Engineering Group determine appropriate design and installation guidelines for roadway striping to facilitate the use of new driver-assist vehicle technologies and develop a long-term striping maintenance plan that supports both legacy users and new technology, fine-tune striping assessment programs to optimize where and when new roadway striping should be implemented, and determine how best to inventory the striping’s current condition in order to prioritize striping maintenance activities. This research would then help provide the basis for a statewide system to make sure all Arizona roadways have pavement markings that support and perform at the levels needed for both human drivers and driver-assist vehicle technologies.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Jan 2025 16:27:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2485381</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Long-Term Maintenance Needs and Costs of Green-Colored Pavement Markings and Flexible Post Delineators</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2485225</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In recent years, Virginia localities have expressed interest in installing two specific bicycle infrastructure elements: green-colored pavement markings on bicycle facilities and flexible post delineators (referred to as flexposts) along separated bike lanes to improve visibility and safety. However, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) lacks information on the long-term maintenance costs (for both green-colored pavement markings and flexposts) and does not have a policy on installing green-colored pavement markings due to the lack of formal provisions in the presently adopted 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and 2011 Virginia Supplement. This study will assess the use of green-colored pavement markings and flexposts in Virginia to help localities and VDOT make informed decisions concerning which types of bicycle treatments they can reasonably maintain and to inform their maintenance budgets.  

This study will include a literature review of the existing research regarding both design and maintenance considerations and specifications for green-colored pavement markings and flexposts (in the context of bicycle and, less commonly, pedestrian infrastructure). A screening survey will be disseminated to VDOT Districts and Virginia localities that maintain their own roads to identify locations of either infrastructure element. A more in-depth interview of maintenance and operations personnel will be conducted to gather information regarding the materials used and their applications, along with maintenance costs, frequency, labor, and equipment. In addition, three to five case studies will provide specific examples of installation costs and maintenance frequency, costs, labor, and required equipment.

The information gathered will be utilized to develop a range of lifecycle costs, a table showing the estimated frequency of maintenance, and a table depicting the pros and cons for each of the studied bicycle and pedestrian treatments.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 2024 11:09:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2485225</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Refinement of Reinforced Concrete Box Culvert Installation Guidelines</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2377861</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Reinforced Concrete Box Culverts (RCBCs) are the preferred structure when practical. This is primarily due to RCBCs being typically less expensive than a bridge, less complicated to design, and easier to construct and maintain.  RCBCs are either cast-in-place or precast and both have circumstances in which their construction type is optimum. However, there are many circumstances when choosing the best RCBC option is not clear. Factors such as site conditions, long-term performance, costs, and speed of construction can impact the final selection. The normal practice for South Dakota Department of Transportation (SDDOT) is to provide plans for cast-in-place RCBC installations and include a precast option when certain design criteria are met. Guidelines in the SDDOT Bridge Design Manual specify that if the proposed RCBC has a skew of more than 10 degrees, flared wing walls, slope-tapered aprons, side-tapered inlets, or water control structures, a precast option is not offered.   Refining these guidelines by presenting the optimum RCBC construction type, rather than presenting options, would reduce selection and design time.  Also, with the continual advancements in precast manufacturing processes, design software, and materials science, the development of refined guidelines may reveal innovative options addressing previous limitations regarding the use of precast RCBC. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 06 May 2024 15:54:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2377861</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tightening Criteria for Stainless Steel Bolts</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2100879</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study will develop installation criteria for high-strength structural stainless steel bolts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jan 2023 11:17:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2100879</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SPR-4713: Development of Guidelines for Compatible Sensor Installation, Data Collection, and Database-based Visualization for INDOT</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2059482</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop comprehensive guidelines and example systems for sensor data collection, integration, and analysis to streamline implementation within INDOT’s research division and MIS systems.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2022 10:02:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2059482</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluate Alternative Methods to Examine Visibility of Pavement Markings</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1879839</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Pavement markings are the primary means for an agency to provide longitudinal guidance to drivers. Effective pavement markings can improve safety, improve driver comfort, and increase functionality/reliability of automated driving systems and Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). To be effective, markings must be visible during all driving conditions, day and night. Markings are typically characterized by their retroreflectivity which is a surrogate measure for how visible the marking is at night. Retroreflectivity does not consider other factors that will impact the actual visibility of the marking such as the color or retroreflectivity of the pavement that the marking is applied to, the color or width of the marking, or the viewing conditions (i.e., observation vehicle, observer characteristics, weather conditions). Retroreflectivity is also a metric for nighttime visibility that may not relate to the marking visibility during the day. This project aims to improve current pavement marking installation and maintenance practices such that effective markings are continuously maintained. The project also aims to develop a tool to effectively assess the visibility of pavement markings and to make suggestions for marking maintenance. The Performing Agency shall evaluate marking visibility for both human and automated drivers across a range of conditions. These evaluations shall be used to make recommendations to improve new marking installation specifications and techniques, improve marking maintenance practices, and evaluate other technologies that should be considered to improve pavement marking delineation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Sep 2021 10:46:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1879839</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Acoustic Effectiveness of Vinyl Fence Noise Walls</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1762184</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The goal of this research is to evaluate the acoustic benefits of vinyl fencing and determine its potential as an alternative to a traditional noise barrier. This research will design, construct and acoustically test a vinyl fence noise barrier and compare the results with Ohio Department of Transportation's (ODOT's) conventional concrete and fiberglass noise barriers in terms of cost, installation, material characteristics, maintenance, noise, etc.                                ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jan 2021 11:45:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1762184</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Effects of Construction Installation Methods on the Design and Performance of Drilled Shaft Foundations</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707187</link>
      <description><![CDATA[All state departments of transportation (DOTs) use the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications as standards for design and construction of bridges in public infrastructure projects. However, various state DOTs have developed their own state-specific standards based on experience and differences in local/regional geology. For example, design of drilled shaft foundations varies widely across the United States, as do the construction methods associated therewith. This variation also extends to the various elements of the construction methods used for maintaining a stable drilled shaft excavation.

Some state DOTs have been conservative in their design approach and have discounted partially or completely the estimated friction resistance for shaft installations due to concerns about the effects of the various installation methods. Different types of installation methods, use of steel casing, and/or drilling support fluid may have significant effects on geotechnical load transfer characteristics and long-term performance.

During the past 40 years, design demands have increased with the magnitude of axial, lateral, and flexural loadings, in part due to larger superstructures, increased awareness to extreme events, and associated updated design codes. Concurrently, the diameter and depths to which drilled shafts can be constructed have grown substantially owing to advancements in equipment technology. As the methods and equipment have evolved, there remain concerns about how the various installation methods affect the design and long-term performance of drilled shafts.

Given the widespread use of drilled shaft foundations, research is needed to study the effect of construction installation methods on design and performance.

The objective of this research is to quantify the effects of construction installation methods on the design and performance of drilled shaft foundations for different subsurface conditions and geologic materials. 

 ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 22:16:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707187</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guide to the Contextual Application of Overhead Lighting on Highways



</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707197</link>
      <description><![CDATA[BACKGROUND
 
Roadway lighting is a common countermeasure used to increase visibility at night or in poor weather conditions, and may offer substantial safety benefits for all road users. With the advent of light emitting diode (LED) and adaptive roadway lighting systems, lighting characteristics can be adjusted as a function of need as well as to control for unintended effects. These systems are believed to provide effective safety performance potentially at a lower cost and energy requirements compared with traditional lighting systems.

Decisions regarding the appropriate level of light to provide a given freeway, highway rest area or interchange, or urban streetscape are dependent upon localized characteristics, climate, and other circumstances. What may seem like the ideal quantity of light to support the safety of vehicular users may be less beneficial or even harmful to vulnerable road users, the environment, or community groups. Furthermore, the qualities of light, such as the color, intensity, uniformity, or degree of glare may also impact safety outcomes for all users. This creates a need to strike an appropriate balance to maximize safety benefits while controlling for and avoiding harmful impacts.
 
While the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Highway Safety Manual and other literature provide guidelines to support decisions on the appropriate application of light for different contexts, the industry seeks more robust information and analysis tools to assist in decision-making about the appropriate quantity and quality of light for different environments, contexts, and purposes. Considerations of the different uses and effects of lighting in rural, urban, and suburban contexts are desired, as well as lighting targeted to highway facilities such as rest areas and interchanges. The research will not compare or recommend proprietary lighting products or systems for a given application.
 
OBJECTIVE
 
The objective of this research is to develop a guide for state departments of transportation (DOTs) seeking direction on the appropriate quantity and quality of overhead light for a given highway. This would include considerations of fixed, adaptable, continuous, or targeted lighting with respect to a given highway or site.
 
In preparing this guide, the research should identify all potential issues and considerations for evaluation by state DOTs in planning for and installing overhead lighting on highways. The guide shall at a minimum contain the following components: 
 
1. A literature review on the science and application of overhead highway lighting in consideration of different contexts (e.g., urban, rural, and suburban highways) and other significant considerations such as time of day and weather;
 
2. A state of practice summary and analysis of the methods, tools, and techniques in use by state DOTs and other agencies for evaluating the effects of alternative lighting plans on a given project;
 
3. A set of procedures, tools, and techniques for use by state (DOTs) to identify and evaluate the potential benefits and costs of alternative lighting plans for a given project;
 
4. A process diagram flowchart or decision tree that outlines how and when to analyze and select light plans for a given project; and
 
5. Case studies that illustrate the decision-making and application of a variety of lighting plans for highway projects located in diverse contexts, including at least one rural and one urban example.
 
These resources may be compiled into a single comprehensive guide document or provided as separate deliverables. 
 
Phase I: Data collection and analysis

Task 1 Literature Review
The research team shall conduct a comprehensive review of relevant domestic and international research, guidelines, and current documented practices to ascertain the
lighting strategies, technologies, and systems in use and the implications of these on visibility safety as well as the impacts to the wellbeing of travelers, the public, and
environment. The review will identify the pros and cons of different lighting strategies against potential impacts to specific resources, mitigation strategies and will examine
potential performance methods, measures, and indicators for evaluating different lighting strategies.

The sources of literature should be comprehensive and include other NCHRP and industry research, documented agency guidelines and practices relative to decision making on the
application of different lighting strategies, technologies, and systems.

A literature review report shall be created that lists the literature consulted and summarizes the contents of the literature and information gained.

Deliverable: Literature review report

Task 2 State of Practice Stakeholder Engagement
The research team will conduct stakeholder engagement to supplement data collected through the literature review focused on the current state of practice relative to the
identification and implementation of different lighting strategies, technologies, and systems. The research team shall prepare a stakeholder engagement plan for the purposes of
obtaining information on the state of practice by state DOTs and other industry representatives and stakeholders of highway lighting decisions. This plan will be
submitted to NCHRP and the project panel for review and comment. The project team will also provide the Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval/exemption process for
the engagement plan.

Deliverables: Draft engagement plan and state-of-practice technical memo

Task 3 Analyze Data
The research team will analyze and organize the data and information collected to date into a report of the appropriate available data and practices to analyze for the guide. The
data will naturally break down into several areas of research and practice.

The analysis will specifically seek to identify areas in need of further investigation and testing in Phase II as well as specific gaps in knowledge and practice that can be
addressed in the final guide and tool. It will also generate a list of at least 20 case study test sites demonstrating a diversity in contexts like rural, urban, adjacency to sensitive
receptors, the nature and extent of pedestrian and bicyclist use, and other functional characteristics that are considered key to determining context. The team will map out the contextual influences of each of the test sites identified and present them to NCHRP and the project panel for discussion and approval.

The project team will hold 1 to 3 virtual peer discussion groups with 8 to 10 experts each to obtain an industry perspective and early input on the potential contents and utility of a
tool which will be considered for inclusion within the final deliverables. These peer discussion groups will identify what kind of tool(s) and other information would be useful for the guide for practitioners seeking to develop and implement a context appropriate lighting strategy that fully considers safety and the environment. 
The research team shall develop a specific plan for convening the virtual peer discussion groups, including participant lists, contents, and format the discussions. 

Deliverables: List of test sites with specific characteristics of interest identified; Peer discussion group plan; Peer discussion group meeting(s) held and results documented

Task 4 Develop Workplan
The research team will develop a detailed Phase II work plan that specifies an exact process for the validation of the guide and tools using the data and information collected
in Phase I. A framework for the guide and tool will be used that builds on the industry needs and interests identified in previous tasks. The plan will include process for completing case studies that illustrate the decision-making and application of a variety of lighting plans for highway projects located in diverse contexts, including at least one

Deliverable: Detailed Phase II Workplan

Task 5 Prepare Interim Report
An interim report will be prepared for presentation to NCHRP and the project panel documenting the literature review, data collected, initial assessments, and conclusions
drawn from that data. The research team will meet with the panel either in person or virtually to discuss the next phase of work.

Deliverable: Interim Report

Task 6 Prepare an Outline of the Proposed Guide
Prepare an outline of the proposed guide and any supplemental products proposed as components of the final products of this research.

Phase II: Data refinement and product development
 
Task 7 Validation / Case Study Development
Pilot tests of case study sites identified in Task 3 will compare the results of tool recommendations with actual roadways where crash data has been documented. The pilot
testing and validation methods and process will be specified in the Work Plan which will become an addendum to the scope of work. The purpose will be to identify potential 
inaccuracies or flaws with the tool and guide as anticipated to be developed.
Deliverable: Memorandum documenting the case studies including the testing process, results,
and conclusions drawn from the data collected
 
Task 8 Prepare Draft and Final Deliverables
The research team shall prepare a draft guide and other proposed products as agreed to in
the approved Phase II work plan. 
 
Anticipated final deliverables will include: (1) a guide with supplemental tools and products as defined in an approved Phase II work plan; (2) a Conduct of Research report focused on the research process, methods, and data collected from the research conducted; and (3) an implementation of research plan or report.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 18:48:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707197</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Guidance for Non-Standard Roadside Hardware Installations



</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707224</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Roadside safety hardware (RSH) such as guardrail is crash tested to assess the crashworthiness of the device. The current crash test criteria are contained in the AASHTO Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH), and all state departments of transportation (DOTs) are in the process of implementing MASH hardware on their systems. While MASH-tested hardware is available for the majority of applications, state DOTs and other transportation agencies may encounter situations where the approved RSH is not suitable for the location.

 Transportation agencies may address these situations with special site-specific designs; however, no specific documentation of such practices is currently available, nor are guidelines on how transportation agencies should address these situations. Some examples of non-standard roadside applications could include modifying a crash-tested barrier to fit a location, using an older crash test standard, using less stringent testing criteria, and shielding or not shielding some obstacles at a location. Research is needed to develop guidelines for non-standard RSH applications where standard practices for crash-tested RSH cannot be used.

 OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this research are the following: Identify situations where it is infeasible to use MASH devices for specific roadway criteria from state DOTs and other transportation agencies; For the situations identified through Objective 1, assess whether non-MASH devices or MASH devices with less stringent roadway criteria can be used instead; Identify strategies for situations where MASH system designs may not be practical, such as environmental constraints, right-of-way limitations, and utility conflicts; Develop guidelines that transportation agencies can use to mitigate situations where MASH devices for specific roadway criteria cannot be used.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 May 2020 17:09:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1707224</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SPR-4423: Pavement Markings for Asphalt and Concrete Pavements</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1646228</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Research will characterize the adhesion and durability of pavement marking materials to asphalt and concrete pavement surfaces including temporary tapes and paints as well as permanent markings. Variables will include marking material composition, application temperature and relative humidity, and pavement age, roughness, and chemistry, including sealed and unsealed pavements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Aug 2019 16:33:09 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1646228</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>