<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>THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF TRAFFIC SAFETY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/126546</link>
      <description><![CDATA[HERE ARE THE CHIEF ELEMENTS IN THIS PROBLEM OF THE LEGAL ASPECTS OF TRAFFIC SAFETY, FIRST, LAW AND REGULATION, WHERE THE ADOPTION OF THE UNIFORM TRAFFIC CODE APPEARS TO BE GENERALLY RECOGNIZED AS THE GREATEST NEED, SECOND, APPROPRIATION BY LEGISLATIVE UNITS OF REASONABLE SUMS FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION AS WELL AS FINANCIAL BACKING FOR A RESEARCH PROGRAM TO DETERMINE WHAT LAWS WE SHOULD HAVE AND THE BEST MEANS OF ADMINISTERING THEM, AND THIRD, COMPULSORY DRIVING COURSES IN HIGH SCHOOLS, THE USE OF WHICH SHOULD EXTEND EVENTUALLY TO ALL HIGH SCHOOLS.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Dec 2001 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/126546</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TOWARD UNIFORM LEFT-TURN GUIDELINES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/542802</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In the 1960s, left-turn phasing started to come into widespread use. However, the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices still remains silent on left-turn phasing application, and the Traffic Engineering Handbook provides only general guidance. As a result, ad hoc practices are used by agencies based on the whim or experience of the traffic engineers. Far too often, the lack of nationally accepted guidelines results in inconsistent and misunderstood applications of this important traffic-engineering tool. This article aims to provide guidance and to focus discussion on the issue that hopefully will lead to uniform guidelines that the profession may adopt.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/542802</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>SYMBOL SIGNING DESIGN FOR OLDER DRIVERS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/473319</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project evaluated the effectiveness of symbol traffic signs for young, middle-aged and elderly drivers.  Daytime legibility distance and comprehension of 85 symbols in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) were measured. Legibility distance under night and night-with-glare conditions, glance legibility, reaction time and conspicuity were measured for 18 of these symbols.  Selected symbols were modified or redesigned and five novel symbols were designed, using an image-processing iterative filter-design approach.  These new signs were evaluated on measures of comprehension and legibility distance under day, night and night-with-glare conditions.  Of the 85 symbols many were well understood, but 10 were understood by fewer than 40% of drivers.  Increased driver age was associated with lower comprehension levels and legibility distances (under all test conditions), as well as higher glance legibility thresholds, reaction times and conspicuity search times.  Modifications and redesigns to the symbols resulted in better understanding of three messages and improved daytime legibility distances of 11 of the new signs.  Glare reduced legibility of the signs only for the elderly drivers. recommendations were made for changes to specific symbol signs. Guidelines were proposed for the design of symbol traffic signs, and a proposal was made for design optimization techniques to be employed in the future development and evaluation of such signs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 1998 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/473319</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ARE THERE TOO MANY TRAFFIC LAWS?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/461911</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article examines the current trend in the United States toward a proliferation of traffic laws and ordinances.  While much of this legislation has had a positive impact, there is concern over the "alarming rate" at which traffic laws have increased over the past 10 years, and the impact of this increase on (1) citizens who may get confused by inconsistencies as they travel from one locale to another, (2) officers who must enforce an increasingly complex code, and (3) courts that must deal with a greater caseload and often confusing sentencing requirements.  One possible solution to this problem is examined--the adoption of a uniform code.  Some of the pros and cons to the adoption of the Uniform Vehicle Code are briefly discussed.  In conclusion, it is pointed out that the move toward greater uniformity and the driving force behind even more new legislation may be one and the same--the public.  It is the public that, through public interest groups, will draw attention to the problem and lead the charge for change.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 May 1996 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/461911</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RECENT CHANGES IN THE MANUAL OF UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES IN CANADA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/113520</link>
      <description><![CDATA[TRAFFIC SIGNS ARE CONTINUALLY BEING STUDIED AND CHANGED. THIS PAPER DESCRIBED THE MOST RECENT CHANGES. NOTABLY, LEGENDS ON SIGNS ARE BEING DELETED AND REPLACED BY SYMBOLS. IT IS A NECESSARY STEP TOWARD UNIFORM TRAFFIC LAWS THAT A SET OF STANDARD TRAFFIC SIGNS BE ADOPTED. /CGRA/]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 1994 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/113520</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>IS THE MUTCD DOING THE JOB? IN: COMPENDIUM OF TECHNICAL PAPERS. INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, 61ST ANNUAL MEETING, SEPTEMBER 22-25, 1991, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/361278</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The subject of this session was the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), and the papers include: History of the National MUTCD; The MUTCD at Court; Signal Warrants - Are They Doing the Job?; and, A New Format for the MUTCD.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Dec 1991 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/361278</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MODEL RULES OF THE ROAD</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/287276</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Because road and highway traffic regulations in Canada fall largely under the jurisdiction of the ten provinces and two territories, there exists a good deal of variation in the rules of the road across the country.  A joint committee was formed by rtac (the roads and transportation association of Canada) and ccmta (the Canadian conference of motor transport administrators) to act as a forum for discussion of the provincial and territorial rules of the road, and to make recommendations aimed at achieving greater uniformity across Canada.  The model rules presented in this document are a result of the identification of the rules common to the greatest number of jurisdictions, as well as analysis and review of all rules by core and advisory committees.  It is hoped that the use of the model rules as a reference document for all Canadian jurisdictions will lead to greater uniformity and hence less confusion and greater safety for the Canadian driver. (TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Jan 1989 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/287276</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>ROAD TRAFFIC LAWS AND REGULATIONS IN SOUTHERN AFRICA</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/281526</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report contains a study of the laws and regulations on road traffic in the Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC) countries.  In connection with the work for a harmonized legal system in these countries, this report purposes a Road Traffic Act and important subsidiary regulation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 1987 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/281526</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>INCONSISTENT TRAFFIC CONTROL COSTS INDIANA CITY MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE DAMAGES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/217216</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A recent Indiana case indicates that jurisdictions should be consistent in their use of traffic control devices.  The plaintiff had been severly injured when his motorcycle collided with a Ford Bronco at an unmarked city intersection in Tell City, Indiana.  An expert witness for the plaintiff noted in analyzing traffic control of the city's parks that all had traffic control at all bordering intersections except the park in question.  Further, under MUTCD criteria for signing, a sight distance problem existed due to an embankment.  Therefore, traffic control was necessary at the intersection.  The jury found for the plaintiff and awarded him the maximum allowable damages.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 1985 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/217216</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRAFFIC LAWS ANNOTATED 1983. ANNUAL CUMULATIVE SUPPLEMENT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/206390</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This Supplement makes information in "Traffic Laws Annotated" (1979) current as of January 1, 1983, by reflecting all relevant 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982 State legislation.  This Supplement also includes changes made in the "Uniform Vehicle Code" by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances when it met on August 15-17, 1979.  This Supplement is designed for use in updating the information presented in the main volume of the TLA.  It augments, but does not replace, the Statutory Annotations shown.  It utilizes an identical numbering and caption system, but thereafter contains only a report on State laws adopted, amended or repealed in 1979, 1980, 1981, or 1982 that would in any way alter the original Annotation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 1984 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/206390</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE NATIONAL ROAD TRAFFIC CODE</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/194087</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The existence of the national road traffic code has provided a focus for efforts to achieve uniformity in traffic law. This current revision of the code, which was endorsed by the Australian Transport Advisory Council in February, 1981, updates the code in line with current practice in road design traffic management and enforcement.  The code is divided into separate parts covering scope and effect of regulations, erection and operation of traffic-control items, obedience to traffic-control signals and signs, driving on left and overtaking, giving way, pedestrians, turning, starting and stopping, railway level crossings, speed restrictions, stopping and parking vehicles, lighting, warning signs, equipment, etc, bicycles, toy vehicles and animals, passing stationary trams and safety zones, careless and dangerous driving, freeways, safety of persons on motor vehicles, drink/driving regulations, miscellaneous, and licensing.  (TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jan 1984 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/194087</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>TRAFFIC LAWS ANNOTATED 1981. ANNUAL SUPPLEMENT</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/193051</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This Supplement makes information in Traffic Laws Annotated (1979) current as of January 1, 1982, by reflecting all relevant 1979, 1980, and 1981 state legislation.  This Supplement also includes changes made in the Uniform Vehicle Code by the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances when it met on August 15-17, 1979.  This Supplement is designed for use in updating the information presented in the main volume of the TLA.  It augments, but does not replace, the Statutory Annotations shown.  It utilizes an identical numbering and caption system but thereafter contains only a report on state laws adopted, amended or repealed in 1979, 1980, or 1981 that would in any way alter the original Annotation.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 1983 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/193051</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>FLAGGING HANDBOOK (HIGHWAY FLAGMEN)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/193058</link>
      <description><![CDATA[A handbook consistent with the 1978 edition of the "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices" has been prepared to assist flaggers in understanding their duties in protecting project personnel and providing directions to motorists in highway construction/maintenance/utility zones. Sections cover the following aspects of the flagman's job: equipment (clothing, tools), flagger's position, advance flagger, attention to job, stopping traffic, releasing traffic, slowing traffic, traffic control at haul road intersections, flag carrying, flagging for pilot car operation, additional aids, and rules of conduct.  The booklet concludes with comments to the supervisor, including selection, control and training of flagmen.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 1983 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/193058</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>DESIGN AND EVALUATION OF A NEW TRAFFIC SIGN: DANGEROUS GOODS ROUTES</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/192065</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The purpose of this paper is to summarize the development of a new Canadian traffic sign, a process that combined a traffic engineering knowledge and judgement approach ("subjective") with laboratory investigation ("objective"). The process commenced in September 1980 when the technical and research (t&r) committee of the Council on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CUTCD) agreed to develop a uniform traffic sign in support of regulation of transportation of dangerous goods.  (TRRL)]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 30 Oct 1983 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/192065</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MANUAL ON UNIFORM TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES FOR STREETS AND HIGHWAYS</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/61397</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This document serves as a useful reference work for law enforcement personnel engaged in programs of traffic needs of the state law enforcement system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Jul 1983 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/61397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>