<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>Evaluation of Alternative Intersection and Interchange Options for Nebraska </title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2689408</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Nebraska Department of Transportation (NDOT) has implemented and developed guidance for a limited set of unconventional designs (e.g., certain RCUTs and diverging diamond interchanges) and has accumulated experience through selected projects and research studies. NDOT lacks robust, Nebraska-specific tools to: (1) screen and select candidate unconventional facilities; (2) quantify trade-offs in operations, safety, and cost; and (3) develop practical guidelines that can be directly used by designers, planners, and district staff. This gap creates uncertainty when considering unconventional options and may limit NDOT’s ability to fully leverage designs that could offer meaningful safety and mobility benefits. The proposed research will provide NDOT with a structured and evidence-based approach for identifying the most suitable unconventional intersection and interchange options for Nebraska. By evaluating both the designs already implemented within the state and additional alternatives that may be considered soon, the study will broaden NDOT’s understanding of how various unconventional treatments perform under different traffic, geometric, and environmental conditions in Nebraska.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jun 2026 12:26:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2689408</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Safety and Operational Performance Assessment of CFIs and DDIs in Utah</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2632836</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This research project will assess the safety and operational performance of Continuous Flow Intersections (CFIs) and Diverging Diamond Interchanges (DDIs) in Utah. The study will develop Utah-specific Safety Performance Functions (SPFs), Crash Modification Factors (CMFs), and Adjustment Factors (AFs), using Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) data resources and advanced analytical techniques including statistical modeling, machine learning, and computer vision. The findings will support updates to UDOT design guidelines and planning tools such as CAP-X, SPICE, and ICE.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:54:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2632836</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Evaluating the Economic and Safety Trade-offs of Interchange and Access Drive Separation Distances
</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2627344</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The research project will evaluate whether the Iowa Department of Transportation’s (Iowa DOT) minimum separation standards between interchanges and first access points are overly restrictive and potentially detrimental to development opportunities around those interchanges. To achieve this, the project will utilize deep learning techniques to analyze high-resolution aerial photographs to identify interchanges on state-owned roadways, their first driveway access points, and the specific aspects of development status, such as the presence of commercial or residential buildings, vacant land, or agricultural use of the surrounding land. Crash data from the Iowa dataset will be examined to assess safety outcomes about these separation distances. A critical part of the analysis will involve evaluating the economic potential of these lands and estimating the impact of separation standards on land utilization and potential economic growth. 
In addition to state-owned interchanges, the study will identify non-interchange intersections with roadways with similar AADT levels, the number of lanes, if a median is present, and other relevant geometric features to access management. The closest access point will be determined for these intersections, mirroring the approach taken with the interchanges. The crash history for these locations will be retrieved to compare the safety performance of interchanges and non-interchange intersections directly.
This analysis, focusing on interchange and access point separation distances, will help isolate the effect of these separation standards on safety and development, controlling for traffic volume and other features. By examining interchange and non-interchange sites under similar conditions, the research will determine if the minimum separation distances at interchanges are justified or could be adjusted to better balance safety with economic development, potentially informing future policy decisions. The research will also determine the amount of developable land that could be available should the standards be relaxed.
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Nov 2025 14:36:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2627344</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Develop a Data-Driven Intersection &amp; Interchange Control Evaluation (DIICE) Tool</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2614516</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Innovative intersection and interchange designs and smart technologies (e.g. adaptive traffic signal systems, connected vehicle technology, and real time traffic management) are often considered as methods to reduce congestion and promote safety. However, these designs are challenging and time-consuming to consider for a given project. The research team will develop a data-driven innovative design recommendation tool to provide guidance toward feasible design selections of innovative intersections and interchanges. The tool will be applicable in urban settings and consider factors like traffic volumes, safety enhancements, constructability, pedestrian and bicyclist accommodations, and costs. The tool will be complimented by guidance gathered from the literature and stakeholder interviews to help provide context and considerations that cannot be incorporated into the too. This will promote a consistent solution to aid in the intersection design selection process that can be used to reduce costs for considering innovative intersections and can be presented to policymakers as a data-driven recommendation. The research team will vet this prototype tool by applying the tools to existing innovative intersection/interchange design selections within Texas to demonstrate the effectiveness of the design selection solution.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 11:20:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2614516</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessment of Safety and Operation Performances of CFIs and DDIs in Utah</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2394799</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Alternative intersection and interchange designs, such as the Diverging Diamond Interchange (DDI) and the Continuous Flow Intersection (CFI), have garnered significant attention among transportation agencies, researchers and practitioners over the past 15 years, due to their ability to improve operations and safety of transportation systems. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) is recognized as a national leader in the design and implementation of innovative intersections and interchanges. Currently there is not a lot of information on field-based performance measures of these designs. As it has been 16 years since the first CFI was implemented, followed by many more CFIs and DDIs, UDOT's databases contain a lot of useful data regarding operations and safety of these designs. The accelerated deployment of DDIs and CFIs necessitates the needs for more in-depth assessment of their benefits and impacts. The objective of this study is to perform safety and operational assessment of CFIs and DDIs in Utah. It will develop Utah-specific Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) and Crash Modification Factors (CMFs) for these designs. The study will also assess the operational performance of CFIs and DDIs, and explore ways in which operations can be improved (geometry, control, signalization).]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jun 2024 16:23:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2394799</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A Guide on Alternative Intersections and Interchanges


</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381742</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Alternative intersection and interchange (AII) designs initially emerged as a way to improve safety and operations while reducing project costs and impacts, with the potential to enhance facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Early consideration and implementation by agencies were supported by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Alternative Intersections/Interchanges Informational Report and a series of informational guides published since 2014. More recently, the North Carolina Department of Transportation (DOT) released an annotated outline for an updated informational report, and FHWA published a new guide focused on pedestrian and bicyclist safety at alternative intersections. Additionally, recent NCHRP reports provide detailed guidance on roundabouts, multimodal safety at alternative intersections, and intersection control evaluation.

Research is needed to develop a guide on several widely adopted intersection types, reflecting the growing knowledge and experience from successful implementations by many DOTs. The guide also will focus on expanding the toolbox of AII types and options to help DOTs enhance multimodal transportation safety and operational efficiency.

The objective of this research is to develop a guide to support state DOTs and other transportation agencies in considering AIIs in their project planning and development process. The guide will consist of two parts: (Part I) will provide comprehensive information on U-turn-based intersections, covering key issues related to planning, implementation, operation, and maintenance; and (Part II) will provide an expanded resource on AIIs, focusing on the efficacy of underutilized, emerging, or new concepts, as well as their variations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2024 12:59:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2381742</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessing Safety Performance of Atypical Service Interchanges

</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2219016</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many service interchanges include custom designs that do not fit into the traditional interchange definitions contained within the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Green Book, which makes it challenging to forecast and compare the relative predicted crash frequency of various atypical service interchanges. While the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) provides crash prediction for interchange elements such as basic ramps and ramp termini configurations, it does not offer a comprehensive crash prediction methodology applicable to such atypical service interchanges.

Atypical service interchanges lack a one-size-fits-all safety assessment method due to their uniqueness and complexities. To address this, engineers envision a "building-block" approach to deconstruct these interchanges into fundamental elements, e.g., ramp geometries, configurations, termini, weave segments, merge and diverge areas, access points and connections to managed lanes, active transportation, and transit facilities. This could involve assessing safety performance functions (SPFs) as well as crash modification factors (CMFs) for each element, and then aggregating these assessments to form a comprehensive analysis. However, such a generalized method is not currently available for engineers to analyze the safety performance of atypical service interchanges. 

Research is needed to apply conflict or exposure-based methods specifically tailored to these atypical service interchanges, analyzing each fundamental element, and then integrating the results from individual safety performance analyses into a comprehensive final result.

The objective of the project is to develop a method to partition interchanges into fundamental elements; analyze, quantify, and assess the safety performance of each element; and develop customized SPF models that will integrate the results from individual safety performance analyses into a comprehensive final result for atypical service interchange designs. 
]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2023 08:09:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2219016</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guide for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety at Alternative Intersections and Interchanges (A.I.I.)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2166263</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this research is to develop a guide for transportation practitioners to improve and integrate pedestrian and bicycle safety considerations at alternative intersections and interchanges (AII) through planning, design, and operational treatments that (1) identifies and evaluates current practices, and emerging technologies and trends, in the U.S. and internationally; (2) describes current best practices for measuring the effectiveness of such AII treatments; (3) evaluates the safety and operational outcomes of specific AII treatments; and (4) identifies and ranks treatments for typical types of projects. The primary focus of the research is roadway functional classifications of collector and above.   The approaches to evaluate pedestrian and bicycle treatments can be separate, but implementation of the treatments should be coordinated. The guide should address a broad range of issues related to improved pedestrian and bicycle safety at AII such as, but not limited to, the following: 
(1) Describing new and emerging AII designs (e.g., Diverging Diamond Interchanges (DDI), Displaced Left-Turn (DLT) or Continuous Flow (CFI) intersections, Restricted Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) intersections, Median U-Turn (MUT) intersections, Quadrant Roadway (QR) intersections) and evaluating their impacts on pedestrians and bicyclists;  
(2) Documenting domestic and international best practices for integrating pedestrian and bicyclist movements into AII designs;  
(3) For each AII type, documenting key considerations such as wayfinding, accommodation for pedestrians with disabilities (including visually and hearing impaired), delay for pedestrians and cyclists, and safety for pedestrians and cyclists;  
(4) Documenting benefits and trade-offs of pedestrian and bicycle AII design and operational treatments; 
(5) Developing a design and operational matrix for evaluating, selecting, and incorporating pedestrian and cyclist safety considerations for AII treatments;  
(6) Designing and implementing one or more approaches (e.g., simulation, case studies, modeling, scenario planning) to evaluate the impacts of AII on pedestrian and bicyclist behavior; and  
(7) Providing a foundation for future data collection to produce Crash Modification Factors (CMFs).    While the guide should be directly applicable to most situations, it should also outline decision-making processes and criteria that would assist agencies in identifying flexible solutions.  ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 May 2023 17:59:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2166263</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>NCHRP Implementation Support Program. Implementation for NCHRP Research Report 948—Guide for Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety at Alternative Intersections and Interchanges</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1957067</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The implementation project focuses on NCHRP Report 948 Guide for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety at Alternative and Other Intersections and Interchanges. The implementation plan is divided into three principal categories that would directly promote the implementation and technology transfer of the research products: (1) training and outreach efforts, (2) pilot applications and case studies, and (3) integration with other guidance documents.
NCHRP Report 948 had the objective to develop a guide for transportation practitioners to improve and integrate pedestrian and bicycle safety considerations at alternative intersections and interchanges (A.I.I.) through planning, design, and operational treatments. The implementation project's objective is to share and disseminate the results of the research with public agencies, and to provide hands-on technology transfer assistance to these agencies.

]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 May 2022 12:50:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1957067</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guide for Lighting at Innovative Intersections/Interchanges, including Roundabouts



</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1957085</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Innovative intersections and interchanges are junctions of two or more roads that do not use traditional intersection or interchange layouts. Examples include diverging diamonds, restricted crossing U-turns, displaced left turns, and roundabouts. Most innovative intersections/interchanges installed in the United States have roadway lighting, in part because lighting is supported by Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Alternative Intersection and Interchange Report, and NCHRP Report 672: Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, second edition. Lighting, however, adds significantly to construction and maintenance costs, which can be a barrier to constructing roundabouts and other innovative intersections/interchanges. Research is needed to help practitioners determine what factors, in addition to safety, should be considered when designing lighting at these locations, such as social, environmental, economic impacts, maintenance, constructability, community concerns, and light pollution.  

The objective of this project is to develop a practitioners’ guide for lighting at innovative intersections/interchanges, including roundabouts that (1) documents quantitative safety benefits associated with lighting for motorists and vulnerable road users (e.g., motorcyclists, pedestrians, bicyclists) at innovative intersections/interchanges; (2) establishes evidence-based criteria for determining whether or not to install lighting; and (3) identifies best practices, noteworthy considerations, and emerging approaches for lighting design at innovative intersections/interchanges, including roundabouts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2022 16:53:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1957085</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Groundwork for the Second Edition of the Alternative Intersection and Interchange Informational Report</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1870698</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Alternative Intersection and Interchange (AII) designs are those which provide an innovative approach to the geometric or control features which may improve operations and/or safety for different road users. In 2010, the U.S. Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published the first edition of "Alternative Intersections/Interchanges: Informational Report" (AIIR), which provided information on six alternative treatments including: displaced left turn (DLT) intersections, restricted crossing U-turn (RCUT) intersections, median U turn (MUT) intersections, quadrant roadway (QR) intersections, double crossover diamond (DCD) interchanges, and DLT interchanges. For each treatment, the report provides detailed information in a standardized format, including salient geometric design features, operational and safety issues, access management, costs, construction sequencing, environmental benefits, and applicability. 

This report has been used by various agencies and has proven to be a valuable resource for planning and designing AIIs; however, there are still unconventional design concepts that have not been fully explored and some of the current ones could use updates. During the past decade, there have been an increasing number of AIIs installed in the United States, and additional new AII designs that are not documented in the AIIR first edition have emerged since 2010. Examples of these designs include Reverse RCUTs, Partial Median U-turns, and Grade-Separated Alternative Intersections. These new AII designs may involve different traffic patterns, which may introduce confusion and create new safety hazards for drivers.

This research will provide a state-of-the-practice literature review and expert interviews on AII designs, draft an annotated outline for the AIIR second edition, and provide supplemental tools to help planners and engineers select site-specific AII's during the project planning and design process.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2021 13:05:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1870698</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Developing a Crash Modification Factor for Converting from an At-Grade Intersection to a Diamond Interchange
</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1870697</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Conversion of an at-grade intersection into a diamond interchange is an expensive effort that in some instances could result in a multiple million-dollar project. However, there is very little information relating to the resulting safety improvements of this conversion relative to the original design. 

Crash modification factors (CMFs) can be found in a clearinghouse which is a repository of CMFs from studies all over the world. This clearinghouse includes CMFs from one study in 2007 for the conversion to a diamond interchange based on a meta-analysis of evaluations from Europe. It is unknown how reliable and useful these specific CMFs if they were applied in the United States (U.S.). Therefore, there is a need to develop CMFs specifically for U.S. intersections.

The objective of this research is to develop a CMF for converting from an at-grade intersection to a diamond interchange. This evaluation will compile data from intersections that have been converted to diamond interchanges in multiple States in the U.S. Data will also be collected from reference sites (e.g., at-grade intersections) to allow for a reliable before-after evaluation that will yield a CMF with a high star rating in the CMF Clearinghouse to ensure the highest quality and confidence in the results of this study.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Aug 2021 12:55:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1870697</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Innovative intersection and Interchange Designs and Their Use Across the Southeast (Project E4)</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1843144</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Over the last decades, it has become apparent that, in certain contexts, there is a need to improve operational and safety performance of “conventional” intersection and interchange designs. To meet this need, several “unconventional” (or “innovative”) intersection and/or interchange design approaches have been proposed and/or implemented as a replacement for more “conventional” designs. Some of these approaches, notably the roundabout, have demonstrated significant safety and delay benefits and have been implemented on a scale that such designs are no longer considered “unconventional”. In more recent years, additional innovative intersections have been designed and constructed such as the Median U-Turn or MUT (formerly the “Michigan U-Turn”), the Restricted Crossing U-Turn or RCUT (formerly the “Superstreet”), Divergent Left Turn or DLT (formerly the “Continuous Flow Intersection”), and the Quadrant Intersection. Although many states have aggressively pursued implementation of these intersections, there is still a demonstrated need to provide additional insight on the design, operation and safety of these innovative intersections. This project helps address this need by both evaluating use of existing innovative intersections and supporting further implementation of these innovative intersection designs through the development of training and communication material, advancing safety analysis through the application of movement-based safety performance functions (MB SPF’s) currently developed for innovative grade separated intersections (GSIXs), providing guidance on the comfort and safety of pedestrians and bicyclists at innovative intersections, expanding available performance measures (e.g., estimation of the emissions and fuel consumption impacts of innovative intersections), and improving operational analysis through the application of Naturalistic Driving Study (NDS).  ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Mar 2021 20:59:41 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1843144</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SPR-4545: Alternate Interchange Signing Study for Indiana Highways</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1724241</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Current highway interchange signs are designed based on established standards, but some drivers have expressed that signing is confusing, not intuitive or perhaps not explanatory enough. This project is to develop possible recommendations for the better design of interchange signing in Indiana to improve the safety and efficiency of highway traffic operations. Naturalistic driving data collection and driver survey will be the means to collect information.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2020 10:34:10 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1724241</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wrong-Way Driving Solutions, Policy, and Guidance</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/1513307</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this research was to develop a handbook for practitioners implementing traditional and advanced safety countermeasures to achieve reductions in wrong-way driving (WWD) incidents and crashes on roadways. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2018 21:37:03 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/1513307</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>