<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.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>MANUAL OF CONTRACT DOCUMENTS FOR HIGHWAY WORKS. A USER'S GUIDE AND COMMENTARY. VOLUME ONE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/368057</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The UK Department of Transport (DTp) Specification for Highway Works (SHW) has become a standard component of UK highway contracts since its introduction in 1951.  This book brings together in an accessible form the requirements of the SHW, advice from the Notes for Guidance and other background documentation, and links these to the rules of measurement.  It highlights the changes to the documents brought about by the Seventh Edition and comprehensively covers all aspects of the documents whether these have changed or not.  It also draws to the user's attention those areas of difficulty where problems are likely to occur and where there are anomalies or inconsistencies in the documents.  It is organized as follows: Introduction to the DTp SHW (Seventh Edition); 100 Series: Preliminaries; Introduction to the Technical Changes; 200 Series: Site Clearance; 300 Series: Fencing and Environmental Barriers; 400 Series: Safety Fences, Safety Barriers and Pedestrian Guardrails; 500 Series: Drainage and Service Ducts; 600 Series: Earthworks; and Fourth Edition of the Method of Measurement for Highway Works.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 1993 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/368057</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE TRAFFIC ENVIRONMENT AND VEHICLE ACCIDENTS. EXPERIENCE FROM VOLVO ACCIDENT RESEARCH IN SWEDEN. PROCEEDINGS OF STRATEGIC HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM AND TRAFFIC SAFETY ON TWO CONTINENTS, GOTHENBURG, SWEDEN, 27-29 SEPTEMBER, 1989</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/308099</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A high standard of road safety requires a good interaction between people, vehicles and traffic environment.  This presentation is devoted to experience gleaned from road accidents involving collisions with selected objects in the traffic environment.  The report shows that a significant proportion of these collisions, which caused serious personal injury, were with objects off the actual road. Trees and heavy lamp posts are the type of object involved in most of these cases of personal injury.  In addition, the report includes many accidents in which significant injury was caused by road rails/pedestrian pass rails, which from a traffic safety point of view were unfavourably designed.  In all new road constructions, as well as when revising traffic systems, the objective should be to attain a high standard of safety with regard to road environment. Exclusive use of energy absorbing posts and other safe types of road furniture would significantly increase the overall standard of road safety.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 1990 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/308099</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>PEDESTRIAN GUARDRAILS AND ACCIDENTS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/288978</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Conventional guardrails are shown to be beneficial for pedestrians, but only if they are adults.  Lack of visibility through guardrails endangers children, and helps to explain why child pedestrians have a higher accident rate in Britain than in any comparable country.  An accident study of a high-visibility guardrail, Visirail, reveals accident reduction for adults , children and vehicles which ar significantly greater and more cost-effective than those for ordinary guardrails.  These improvements were achieved both by replacing masking guardrails, and at sites with no previous guardrail.  Accident savings correspond to predictions from an accident model based on reduction in risk with increase in pedestrian flow.  It is proposed that this effect could readily be utilized to reduce deaths and injuries greatly, both to pedestrians and to other road-users.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 1988 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/288978</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>AN ASSESSMENT OF THE SAFETY PERFORMANCE OF PELICAN CROSSINGS IN RELATION TO CRITERIA VALUE. TRAFFIC OPERATION AND MANAGEMENT. PROCEEDINGS OF SEMINAR M HELD AT THE PTRC SUMMER ANNUAL MEETING, UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX, ENGLAND, 15-18 JULY 1985, VOLUME P269</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/281869</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper describes a study of the safety of pelican crossings at new sites and where an existing zebra crossing has been converted to a pelican crossing.  During the period covered by the study, 84 pelican crossings were introduced, but only 55 of these could be included as having siting conditions unaffected by other traffic management measures. Before and after installation periods of three years have been used to give validity to accident results.  For the sites studied, an overall reduction of 6% in all accidents and 23% in pedestrian accidents was noted.  When the sites were classified according to a criterion suggested to the highways authorities, those sites falling below the criterion suffered a 41% and 42% increase, and those above the criterion value a marked reduction in all and pedestrian accidents.  Similar results were noted for both conversions from existing zebra crossings and new crossing sites. However the reduction for the latter were less marked, with bigger increases for the "under criteria" new pelicans. Mention is also made of the effect of the provision of guardrails for pedestrians. For the covering abstract of the seminar see IRRD 286745.  (TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 1988 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/281869</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>BETTER WAY TO RAMP A SIDEWALK</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/211077</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Ramped surfaces on sidewalks at street crossings to aid the handicapped and the elderly are becoming commonplace in many communities throughout the country.  The general construction procedure for converting a sidewalk into a ramped design is to employ jackhammers to break out the concrete sidewalk and curb, and then pour new concrete. This tradiational method can be time-consuming and expensive.  A faster, more cost-effective technique has been developed by National Concrete Cutting, Pasadena, California.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 1985 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/211077</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE FEASIBILITY OF PROTECTING PEDESTRIANS ADJACENT TO ROADWAYS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/41066</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The incidence of pedestrian-vehicle accidents is so minimal and scattered that a general policy for installing guiderail or other devices to protect pedestrians adjacent to roadways is unwarranted.  This is especially true involving vehicles that run off the roadway.  Run-off-road accidents occur more frequently at intersections in urban areas than anywhere else, but guiderail is inappropriate at these locations, because its protective qualities are reduced when it is impacted at large angles of impact.  Guiderail and other appropriate devices could be installed at locations exhibiting hazardous geometric conditions and/or engineering judgment advocates the usage of such devices.  The establishment of improved pedestrian control could possibly eliminate a major portion of the pedestrian-vehicle conflicts that occur on the roadway.  A comprehensive pedestrian safety program and strict enforcement of existing pedestrian regulations could achieve such control.  /Author/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 1977 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/41066</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FEET FIRST. A PEDESTRIAN SURVIVAL HANDBOOK</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/52442</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This book discusses the safety of the pedestrian in the motor vehicle environment.  Planning and traffic management suggestions for the improvement of pedestrian safety include speed restrictions, traffic segregation and the provision of footways guard rails and pedestrian crossings.  The legal rights of the pedestrian are explained, with emphasis on the law of compensation and the claims which are possible.  The role of local authorities and the participation of the public (including campaigns and pressure group activities) in planning policies, are also discussed. /TRRL/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 1977 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/52442</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>PEDESTRIAN GUARD RAILS (METAL)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/65397</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This British standard specifies the design, materials, construction and finish of metal guard rails suitable for restraining pedestrians using the footway from entering the carriageway.(a) /TRRL/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 1977 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/65397</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ACCIDENT PREVENTION EFFECTS OF ROAD SAFETY DEVICES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/113402</link>
      <description><![CDATA[ACCIDENT PREVENTION EFFECTS OF FOUR TYPES OF ROAD SAFETY DEVICES WERE EXAMINED THROUGH BEFORE AND AFTER STUDIES BY THE COMMITTEE IN JAPAN SOCIETY OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ON THE REQUEST OF AND SPONSORED BY TOKYO METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT. NINETY-NINE SAMPLES OF ROAD SAFETY DEVICES INSTALLED WITHIN A CERTAIN PERIOD IN TOKYO AREA WERE SELECTED FOR THE STUDY, OF WHICH THIRTY-ONE ARE CROSSWALK BRIDGES, THIRTY ARE PEDESTRIAN PUSH-BUTTON SIGNALS, TWENTY ARE OVER-HEAD CROSSWALK SIGNS ILLUMINATED BY LIGHTS WITHIN THEM AND THE OTHER EIGHTEEN ARE PEDESTRIAN GUARD FENCES. ACCIDENTS OCCURRING DURING THE SIX MONTHS PERIOD BEFORE AND AFTER INSTALLATION OF EACH OF THE DEVICES WERE TESTED. STREET SECTIONS 200 METERS LONG, 100 METERS ON EACH SIDE OF THE SPOT-TYPE DEVICES OF CROSSWALK BRIDGES, PUSH-BUTTON SIGNALS AND ILLUMINATED CROSSWALK SIGNS WERE TAKEN UP IN ORDER TO TEST THE AFFECT ON ACCIDENTS. SINCE THE DEVICES EXAMINED IN THE STUDY ARE ALL PRIMARILY AIMED TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS CROSSING ROADWAYS, ACCIDENTS WERE CLASSIFIED INTO TWO CATEGORIES OF RELATED AND NONRELATED ACCIDENTS. RELATED ACCIDENTS ARE THOSE WHICH ARE RELATED EITHER DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY WITH PEDESTRIANS CROSSING ROADWAYS, & NON-RELATED ACCIDENTS ARE THOSE WHICH ARE NOT RELATED WITH SUCH PEDESTRIANS AT ALL. THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY CAN BE SUMMARIZED AS FOLLOWS: (1) THE MOST EFFECTIVE OF THE FOUR WAS PEDESTRIAN PUSH-BUTTON SIGNALS WHICH REDUCED, IN AVERAGE 45 PERCENT OF RELATED ACCIDENTS AND 29 PERCENT OF NON- RELATED ACCIDENTS, AND 38 PERCENT ALTOGETHER, (2) ILLUMINATED OVER-HEAD CROSSWALK SIGNS WERE FOUND TO BE LEAST EFFECTIVE. RELATED ACCIDENTS AND NON-RELATED ACCIDENTS INCREASED BY 39 PERCENT AND 26 PERCENT, RESPECTIVELY. DAYTIME AS WELL AS NIGHTTIME ACCIDENTS INCREASED 30 AND 33 PERCENT, RESPECTIVELY, IT MAY BE ASSUMED THAT THE SIGNS TEND TO MAKE PEDESTRIANS OFF THEIR GUARD WHILE DRIVERS DO NOT PAY MUCH ATTENTION TO THEM. (3) CROSSWALK BRIDGES WERE OF COURSE MOST EFFECTIVE IN PROTECTING CROSSING PEDESTRIANS. RELATED ACCIDENTS WERE REDUCED BY 85 PERCENT BUT NON- RELATED ACCIDENTS INCREASED BY 23 PERCENT RESULTING IN 30 PERCENT REDUCTION AS A WHOLE, (4) ONLY COORDINATED PUSH- BUTTON SIGNALS COULD PREVENT NON-RELATED ACCIDENTS TO A CONSIDERABLE DEGREE. THEY REDUCED NON-RELATED ACCIDENTS BY 42 PERCENT WHILE THE INDEPENDENTLY OPERATED ONES DID NOT REDUCE THEM AT ALL, (5) REAR-END COLLISIONS DID NOT INCREASE AFTER INSTALLATION OF THE SIGNALS BUT EVEN DECREASED BY 12 PERCENT, (6) PEDESTRIAN GUARD FENCES REDUCED ACCIDENTS RELATED WITH PEDESTRIANS CROSSING ON THE CROSSWALK AS WELL AS THOSE RELATED WITH PEDESTRIANS CROSSING OUT OF CROSSWALK EQUALLY BY ABOUT 20 PERCENT, AND (7) THE EFFECTIVE RANGES OF CROSSWALK BRIDGES AND PUSH-BUTTON SIGNALS WERE FOUND TO BE 200 AND 100 METERS IN LENGTH, OR 100 AND 50 METERS ON EACH SIDE, RESPECTIVELY. /AUTHOR/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 1970 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/113402</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>