Nature and Frequency of Secondary Conflicts at Unsignalized Intersections
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 126, Issue 2
Abstract
This research aims to shed more light on the nature and frequency of secondary conflicts. Data for 15 unsignalized intersections located in Amman, Jordan, were collected by the use of a video camera. It was concluded that conflict types and grades are correlated significantly with their corresponding secondary conflict types and grades. Also, conflicts are more closely correlated with their secondary conflicts for through-cross movements, rather than for same-direction movements. Secondary conflicts of a particular grade and type may result from any conflict grade and type. It was found that for every 100 conflicts, approximately 14 secondary conflicts resulted. Moreover, same-direction secondary conflicts (C1–C4) together with through-cross secondary conflicts (C8 and C11), constitute approximately 69.1% of the total secondary conflicts. In addition, through-cross conflicts (C8 and C11) result in the highest percentage of the severest grade (G4) secondary conflicts.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
References
1.
Crowe, E. C. (1989). “Traffic conflict values for three-leg, unsignalized intersections.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1287, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 185–194.
2.
Gluaz, W. D., and Migletz, D. J. (1980). “Application of traffic conflict analysis at intersections.” NCHRP 219, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C.
3.
Gluaz, W. D., and Migletz, D. J. (1985). “Expected traffic conflict rate and their use in predicting accidents.” Transp. Res. Rec. 1026, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1–12.
4.
Haure, E., and Garder, P. (1986). “Research into the validity of traffic conflicts technique.” Accident Analysis and Prevention, 18(6), 471–481.
5.
Katamine, N. M., and Hamarneh, I. M. (1998). “Use of traffic conflict technique to identify hazardous intersections.” Australian Road Res. Board, Road and Transport Res., 7(3), 17–35.
6.
Kraay, H. J., ed. (1982). “Proceedings of the third international workshop on traffic conflicts technique.” Organized by ICTCT, Institute for Road Safety Research, SWOV R-82-27, 1–98.
7.
Kraay, H. J., ed. (1984). “Proceedings of the fourth international workshop on traffic conflicts technique.” Institute for Road Safety Research SWOV, September.
8.
Malaterre, G. et al. (1980). “Conflicts and accidents as tools for safety as diagnosis.” Transport and Road Res. Lab., SR 557, 43–63.
9.
McDowel, M. R. C. et al. (1983). “Gap acceptance and traffic conflict simulation as a measure of risk.” Transport and Road Res. Lab., SR 776.
10.
Older, S. J., ed. (1980). “Proceedings of the second international workshop on traffic conflicts technique.” Transport and Road Res. Lab., Monograph SR557, 1–245.
11.
Parker, M. R., and Zegeer, C. V. ( 1988). “Traffic conflict technique for safety and operations.” Engrg. guide, FHWA-IP-88-26, Federal Highway Administration.
12.
Parker, M. R., and Zegeer, C. V. ( 1989). “Traffic conflict techniques for safety and operation.” Observer's Manual, FHWA-IP-88-027, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C.
13.
Perkins, S. R., and Harris, J. F. ( 1967). “Trafic conflict characteristics: Accident potential at intersections.” Hwy. Res. Rec. No. 225, General Motors Corporation, Warren, Mich., 35–43.
14.
Proceedings of the first workshop on traffic conflicts technique. (1997). p. 138.
15.
Spicer, B. R. (1973). “A study of traffic conflict at six intersections.” Transport and Road Res. Lab., LR 551.
16.
Spicer, B. R., et al. (1980). “Variation in vehicle conflicts at a `T' junction and comparison with recorded collision.” Transport and Road Res. Lab., SR 545.
17.
Walsh, K. et al. (1986). “Traffic conflict studies a tool for accident assessment.” Hwy. and Transp., 33(1), 22–25.
18.
Zegeer, C. V., and Deen, R. C. ( 1978). “Traffic conflict as a diagnostic tool in highway safety.” Transp. Res. Rec. 667, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 48–55.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 126 • Issue 2 • March 2000
Pages: 129 - 133
History
Received: Jul 27, 1998
Published online: Mar 1, 2000
Published in print: Mar 2000
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.