Filtern
Dokumenttyp
- Konferenzveröffentlichung (2) (entfernen)
Schlagworte
- Norm (tech) (2) (entfernen)
Institut
- Abteilung Straßenverkehrstechnik (2) (entfernen)
Structured road markings are becoming popular as edge line on high speed roads, ensuring night time visibility (retroreflection) during rain. These markings are often also "audio-tactile": vehicles (un)intentionally driving over it may produce much more tyre/road sound, which may be observed in the vehicle but also in the vicinity. The sound increase inside the car can be considered as a positive side effect, as it alarms the driver and may be very helpful for the prevention of "doze off" traffic accidents. The sound increase perceived outside the car however, may have a positive aspect as it can warn people on the emergency lane about the approaching vehicle, but it may as well annoy people living around. A method for the assessment of the acoustic properties of audio-tactile markings has been developed. It is mainly based on the "Close Proximity" (CPX) method, an ISO method intended for the acoustic assessment of pavements. The results of measurement campaigns with CPX trailers in Belgium and Germany according to a specially designed procedure are presented. The feasibility of the method is discussed. The research has been carried out in the frame of the standardization activities of the CEN working group CEN/TC226/WG2 "Horizontal signalization".
The paper describes the development of transitions between different safety barriers in Germany but also in the context of the European standardization. In the paper practical and impact test expriences with transitions are shown. In view of the sheer number of theoretically possible combinations of safety barriers, the demand for testing every transition, even if the connecting safety barriers differ only slightly, appears to be economically unacceptable. On the other hand the experience from accidents and also from failed impact tests shows that transitions can be a risk to traffic safety. Therefore criteria for the distinction between transitions (impact test required/impact test unnecessary) are explained. In order to distinguish transitions which do not have to be impact-tested from those that require impact tests, criteria were developed and formulated.