Handbook of Driving Simulation for Engineering, Medicine, and Psychology

Driving Simulation Design and Evaluation of Highway-Railway Grade and Transit Crossings

Authors
Jeff K. Caird, University of Calgary
Alison Smiley, Human Factors North
Lisa Fern, San Jose State University Research Foundation
John Robinson, Delphi-MRC

Abstract
The Problem. This chapter addresses the design and evaluation of a section of roadway using driving simulation. Role of Driving Simulators. A driving simulator was used to model a section of roadway which crossed a rail crossing and two at-grade intersections, one of which was a bus transitway, all in close proximity. The purpose of the simulator was to optimize the design through visual simulation as well as through testing with a sample of drivers. Specifically, plans for the section of roadway, on Fallowfield Road, north of Ottawa, Canada, were computer modeled in extensive detail and integrated into the University of Calgary Driving Simulator (UCDS), which was a research first in Canada. After driving the simulated Fallowfield Roadway tile, numerous elements of the design were changed and modified based on expert input from the organizations involved in the project. Approximately 20 design changes were incorporated into the final simulation model. Scenarios and Dependent Variables. To further evaluate the design elements, 47 participants, stratified into the age groups of 18–24, 25–55, and 55 and older, drove the Fallowfield simulation model in both directions, and on selected runs were challenged by two traffic events, namely a late yellow light and a stalled truck just past the railroad tracks. Key Results. Results showed that older drivers had significantly lower speeds at the rail crossing in both eastbound and westbound directions and had lower comprehension of a number of signs than other age groups. Eye movement analyses indicated that several signs were not fixated by the majority of participants and these signs had still fewer fixations when traffic was present. Driver responses to the two challenging traffic events in these contexts were similar to those observed in real-world situations. Platform Specificity and Equipment Limitations. A set of recommendations is made with respect to signs and signals identified in the evaluation phase. The utility of high-fidelity driving simulation models to visualize and problem-solve complex highway engineering designs and evaluate resulting solutions had a number of positive safety and design benefits, which are discussed.

Keywords
Highway-Railway, Grade Crossings, Roadway Design, Driving Performance, Eye Movements

Key Points
• Numerous design changes were made as a result of being able to visualize the highway-railway grade crossing in three dimensions, as well as being able to observe drivers negotiating it.
• A number of signs and signals were identified in the evaluation phase as requiring further design consideration.
• Clearly other road design reconstruction projects that have complex safety concerns could also benefit from the same process.

Web Resources
Web Figures 38.1-38.16. (click for all)

Web Figure 38.1: Aerial view of Fallowfield road with CN Rail line and transitway extensions shown (color version of Figure 38.1 in printed chapter).
Web Figure 38.2: Location of STOP LINE sign (French LIGNE D’ARRET) (left) and with height reduction (right) so that the left rail crossing flashing light was no longer obstructed. The DANGER, DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS signs (NE PAS ARRETER SUR LA VOIE PERVEE) were moved to the right and the $45.00 fine tab was deleted.
Web Figure 38.3: Proposed red light camera (RLC) sign (left) and Alberta specified sign that was tested (right).
Web Figure 38.4: Proposed cantilevered rail crossing lights (left) and pavement treatment between rail and transit crossings (right) shown from the westbound direction.
Web Figure 38.5: Route of bicyclist after the railway crossing (left) and pedestrian activity at the Barhaven Mall intersection (right).
Web Figure 38.6: Westbound transitway crossing illustrating the travel of buses through this intersection (left). Westbound train present in the railway crossing (right).
Web Figure 38.7: The experimenters’ view of the UCDS with the Fallowfield highway-railway grade crossing shown. The displays from left to right are the quadraplex view (face, upper left; center column, upper right; pedals and feet, lower left; center view simulator, lower right), eye movement calibration and control monitor, Hyperdrive (v. 1.9.2) console and SimObserver recording monitor.
Web Figure 38.8: Fallowfield plan view with associated signing.
Web Figure 38.9: Fallowfield plan view with velocity measurement locations. Eastbound locations used to generate the velocity profile are indicated across the bottom, whereas westbound locations are shown across the top from right to left (color version of Figure 38.2).
Web Figure 38.10: Eastbound velocity profile by age group with standard error bars is shown. The locations listed on the x axis are indicated on the plan view of Web Figure 9 (color version of Figure 38.3).
Web Figure 38.11: Westbound velocity profile by age group with standard error bars is shown. The locations listed on the x axis are also shown on the plan view of Web Figure 9. (color version of Figure 38.4)
Web Figure 38.12: The advance warning sign (AWS), which indicates PREPARE TO STOP WHEN FLASHING (PREPAREZ VOUS A ARRETER QUAND LE PUE LIGNOTE), and X roadway treatment on the eastbound approach to Fallowfield.
Web Figure 38.13: Red light, crossing flashers and gates down when train imminent. The sign on the far right indicates DANGER, DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS (in French NE PAS ARRETER SUR LA VOIE PERVEE). The signs immediately to either side of the stop line show STOP LINE (LIGNE D’ARRET) (color version of Figure 38.5)
Web Figure 38.14: The 3M directional sign heads at the transit crossing with right and left NO TURNS signs on light masts.
Web Figure 38.15: Westbound transit intersection showing stop line and STOP HERE (LIGNE D’ARRETE) signs.
Web Figure 38.16: Truck position once it braked to a stop just past tracks (left) and the position of a driver once he or she backed up so as not to be struck by the train (right).

Key Readings
Caird, J. K., Creaser, J. I., Edwards, C., and Dewar, R. E. (2002). A human factors analysis of highway-railway grade crossing accidents in Canada (Rep. No. TP 13938E). Montreal, Quebec: Transport Development Center, Transport Canada.

Green, P. (2007). Where do drivers look while driving (and for how long)? In R. E. Dewar and R. Olson (Eds.), Human factors in traffic safety (pp. 77–110). Tucson, AZ: Lawyers and Judges Publishing.

Lerner, N., Llaneras, E., McGee, H. W., and Stephens, D. E. (2002). Traffic-control devices for passive railroad-highway grade crossings (NCHRP Rep. No. Project 3–57). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.

Upchurch, J., Fisher, D., Carpenter, R. A., and Dutta, A. (2003). Freeway guide sign design and driving simulator for central artery-tunnel. Transportation Research Record, 1801, 9–17.