Road Safety Audit Analysis: A Case Study of National

Highway

REPORT
CE4033D ROAD SAFETY AND MANAGEMENT

Submitted by
ABHISHEK PATNAIK B170413CE
ABHISHEK SAMUEL B170728CE
DEEPAK RATHOD B170195CE
ABHINAV SINGH B171008CE

Department of Civil Engineering

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT

DECEMBER 2020

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 GENERAL 3
1.2 DEFINITION 3
1.3 ROAD SAFETY CONDITIONS IN INDIA 3
1.4 ROAD SAFETY CONDITIONS IN TELANGANA 5
2. OBJECTIVE 6
3. METHODOLOGY 7
4. CHECKLIST 10
5. OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 12
6. REFERENCE 18

2
 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

1.1 General
Road accidents have been a major cause for concern across the Indian subcontinent. Each
year, about three to five percent of the country’s GDP was invested in road accidents and it
also accounted for about six percent of the global road traffic incidents. Almost 70 percent of
the accidents involved young Indians. Road Safety Audit (RSA) is the formal methodology
for getting accident potential and safety potential in the development of new road schemes
which are to be implemented and also for the schemes for the improvement and maintenance
of existing road facilities. The Road safety audit process started in U.K and then spread
across the globe. India has realised the importance of Road safety audit and its being
implemented across the country.

Road safety has become an important concern of many transport agencies. Road safety has a
greater scope for improving safety when applied before the project is built. It helps to ensure
that issues associated with road safety are specifically addressed. In cases where the facility
is already in service, a RSA can identify problems that, if properly addressed by the owner,
would improve the safety of that facility. Mitigative measures to compensate for poor design
and potential safety problems are often disruptive and expensive for “in-service” roads and
are consequently less cost effective. A keystone to the RSA process is that prevention of a
safety problem is more effective than a cure.

1.2 Definition

Road Safety Audit (RSA) can be defined as:

● RSA is a review of a project to assess and identify the safety concerns of road users.

● RSA process emphasis is laid on improving safety for vulnerable road users such as
pedestrians and cyclists.

● To evaluate the safety of an existing road or an infrastructure.

● To identify the safety concerns of a proposed infrastructure during the planning, design and
implementation stages.
3
1.3 Road safety conditions in India:

WHO reveals that 1.24 million people were killed worldwide each year in road accidents (in
year 2013). India accounts for 0.39 million road fatalities per annum (in year 2012).Which is
30% of the world's total road fatalities. Though percentage change is negative total number
of persons injured is very high and proper actions should be taken to reduce number of
accidents and ensure protect for all road users.

Table 1:

Source: Road Accident in India 2018 report, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

Fig.1. Persons Killed – By road user categories.

4
 Source: Road Accident in India 2018 report, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways.

1.4 Road safety conditions in Telangana:

Though there is small decrease in total number of accidents in recent years. Total number
of accidents is still above 20,000. Identification of potential safety hazards and eliminate
them to ensure protection for all road users.

Fig.2. Number of road accidents across Telangana in India from 2014 to 2018 in thousands.

5
 2. OBJECTIVE

Every accident should be systematically studies in a scientific manner. The objectives of

R.S.A are

 To identification of potential safety hazards on existing road or new road projects

 To list out faults in the existing Road Safety by referring to IRC: SP-88-2010.

 To ensure the safety requirements of all road users are explicitly considered in the
planning, design, construction and operation cost
 To develop recommendation as per IS code

6
 3. METHODOLOGY

There are four stages at which a road safety audit can be conducted, regardless of the size and
nature of a project. They are
 Feasibility stage
 Design stage
 Construction stage
 Maintenance stage

Feasibility stage: - An audit assesses the existing roadway considering the safety aspects of
the existing road. The results of any crash investigation, especially any previous road safety
inspection reports must be considered in the feasibility stage. Feasibility stage audit need not
be carried out for a green-field project.

Design stage: - The comments and suggestions noted after completion of the feasibility
stage audit goes as an input to the design of the proposed transport infrastructure. Necessary
changes should be done for the identified deficiencies. The design stage audit needs to be
undertaken, once the detailed design is completed.

Construction stage: - The audit is done when project is under implementation after the
approval of design drawing. During the construction phase a construction zone can pose a
significant danger to the road users. The road safety audit during this stage can be seen as to
check ensure that the intended traffic accommodation plan provided for the necessary levels
of road safety.

Maintenance stage: - In the final stage of the RSA process, Monitoring stage audit needs to
be carried out periodically during the service life of a project to ensure that the facility
continues to serve road users in a safe manner.

7
Fig.3. Stages of Road Safety Audit

The stretch can be divided into segments from intersection to intersection with more or less
uniform cross section throughout the section. Using standard checklist listing out all safety
hazard starting from one end of the segment to the other end for all segments. Take
pictorial data if any potential safety hazards are identified. To perform analysis of these
safety hazards and give recommendations to eliminate them as per IRC: SP-88-2010

 Existing Road - Road Safety Audit

The selected study stretch is from mahabubnagar to jadcherla on NH 167. NH-167 starts at
Hagari in Karnataka and ends at Kodad in Telangana. It is a secondary route of National
Highway 67. Selected stretch is of length approximately 7.4km shown in fig.5 . Road safety
audit is done on this whole stretch using standard checklist.

8
 Fi.4. Route map of NH-167.

Fi.5. Route map of study stretch.

9
Fig.6. Location of identified potential hazards.

10
 4. CHECKLIST

Item Issues to be considered Yes No NA

1. Landscaping ● Is landscaping in accordance with guidelines Yes

(eg: clearances, sight distance?)

Yes
● Are required clearances and sight distances likely
to be maintained following future plant growth
(landscaping and natural)?
2. Parking Are provisions for any car parking in the vicinity of the Yes
path satisfactory in relation to operation and safety for
path users?
3. Temporary Are all locations free of construction or maintenance Yes
Works equipment, and any signing or traffic control devices that
are no longer required?
4. Headlight Glare Have any problems due to headlight glare (eg: two-way Yes
path close to road) been addressed?
5. Conflict Have any potential problems of conflict between various Yes
Between Path path users (eg: pedestrians and cyclists) been addressed?
Users
6. Visibility , Yes
 Is sight distance adequate for the speed of
Sight Distances traffic using the path?

Yes
 Is there adequate sight distance at intersections
and crossings (eg: with other dual- use paths,
roads, railways, etc)?
7. Design Speed Yes
 Is the horizontal and vertical alignment
suitable for the likely traffic speed on the
Yes
path?

11
  Are warning signs installed?
8. Overtaking Are adequate overtaking opportunities provided? Yes
9. Readability by Are there any sections of path which may cause
Users confusion for users, eg: Yes

 Is alignment of path clearly defined,

particularly at unexpected bends or at night?
10. Widths Is the path width, including bridges, adequate? Yes
11. Edges Yes
 Are the edges of the path in good condition?

12
 5. AUDIT OBERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

S. No. Observation Recommendation Priority

1. Essential
Chainage:600m

 Abandoned car should be

removed.
 Lane marking should be
provided.
 Proper maintenance of
road edge should be done.
 Paving of shoulder

● Abandoned car should placed on

road.
● No Proper maintenance of road edge
● No Lane marking
● Shoulder not paved

2. Essential
Chainage:1200
m
● Radius of curve should
be less
● Mirrors should be
provided.
● Traffic warning sign
boards should be
provided such as speed
limit, curve ahead.
● Banking of road should
● No convex Mirror be done
● Too steep curve
● No traffic warning sign boards are
provided such as speed limit
● No Road banking done

3. ● Edge should be
Chainage:1800 maintained properly
m and Edge marking is
recommended.
● Traffic signal boards
could be provided

● Lane marking should Essential

be provided

13
 ● Traffic delineators are
recommended to guide
vehicles at night

● Traffic warning sign

boards should be
provided such as speed
limit, surve ahead as
intersection is there

● Edge are not maintained properly

and no Edge marking is there
● No traffic signal board
● No traffic delineators.
● No traffic warning sign boards are
there such as limit, curve ahead as
there is an intersection

4.
Chainage:2400  Guard rail of adequate
m strength should be
provided for
embankment more than
2.5.
 Road geometry is Essential
improper and risky for
road users.
 Lane marking should
be provided
● No guard rails
● Road geometry is improper and  Road should be
risky for road users. paved
● No Lane marking
● Unpaved road

5.
Chainage:3000 ● Traffic sign board
m should be as per the
standards of IRC
codes.
● Reflective sheeting can
be provided at traffic
Highly Desirable
board
● Lane marking should
be provided.

● Traffic sign board is not as per the

standards of IRC codes.
14
 ● No reflective sheeting at traffic sign
board
● No Lane marking is provided.

6.
Chainage:3600
m

● Warning sign such as

No-Overtaking Zone is
recommended.

● Road divide should be

Essential
provided

● Guard rail of adequate

● No Warning sign such as No- strength should be
Overtaking Zone provided for
● No Road divider embankment more than
● No Guard rail of adequate strength 2.5.
should be provided for embankment
more than 2.5. ● Lane marking should
● No Lane marking is provided. be provided.as per IRC
standards

7.
 Street light should be
Chainage:4200 there for night time
m travelling
 Sufficient road width
should be there
 Guard rail of adequate
strength should be
provided for
Essential
embankment more
than 2.5.
 Traffic warning sign
boards should be
provided such as
speed limit, surve
● No steet light facility ahead.
● Narrow road  Lane marking should
● No Guard rail be provided
● No traffic warning sign boards.

15
 8.
Chainage:4800 ● Geometrics of the
m curve should be
improved in order to
provide adequate sight
distance.
● Traffic warning sign
Essential
boards should be
provided such as speed
limit, surve ahead.
● Chevron signs can be
provided for safe night
driving.
● Lane marking should
be provided
● Geometrics design of the not proper.
● No traffic warning sign boards are
there
● No chevron signs are there for safe
night driving.
● Lane marking should be provided.

● Unwanted things
should be removed
from the footh path Essential
area
● Foothpath should be
maintained properly
9.
● Road should be
Chainage:5400 sufficient
m ● Carriage width can be
increased at curve area
● Temporary road divider kept on foot based on land
path availability.
● No Footh path
● Road width not sufficient
.

10.
Chainage:6000 ● Warning sign such as
m No-Overtaking Zone is
recommended.

● Street lightening should

be there

● Trimming of trees
should be done

● No Warning sign such as No- ● Traffic warning sign

16
 Overtaking Zone
● No Street lightening
● Trimming of trees not done
● Geometric design not proper
● No chevron signs for safe night
driving.
● No Lane marking
boards should be Essential
provided such as speed
limit, surve ahead.
● Geometrics of the
curve should be
improved in order to
provide adequate sight
distance.
● Chevron signs can be
provided for safe night
driving.

● Lane marking should

be provided.

11.
Chainage:6600
m

● Geometric deign of
curve could be
Highly Desirable
improved

● Geometric design of curve not ● Warning sign such as

correct
● No Warning sign such as No-
Overtaking Zone
● No parabolic mirror at the curve
● No Curve indication sign
No-Overtaking Zone is
recommended.
● Parabolic mirrors
could be provided at
curve
● Curve ahead sign
should be there

12.
Chainage:7200
m ● Roads maintainance
coud be done to
improve road condition
● Sight distance at curve
could be improved Essential
● Proper maintenance
should be done to
provide comfort for all
road users.
● Big holes on the road ● Lane marking should
● Sight distance not adequate at be provided.
17
 curve.
● Proper maintenance should be done
to provide comfort for all road users.
● No Lane marking provided.

13.
Chainage:7400 ● T-Junction at the
m location should be
improved by providing
sufficient clear sight
distance and space for
diverging to and
Highly Desirable
merging maneuvers
from minor road to the
major road.

● T-Junction not maintained properly ● Traffic light should be

● No Traffic Light at junction provided at the junction

18
 6. REFERENCE

1. Tummala, B.K., and Chukkapalli, J.C., 2018, Road safety Audit: a case study on NH-65,

International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(2.1), 69-74.

2. IRC:SP-88-2010, Indian Road Congress

3. IRC: 35-2015 :- Code of Practice for Road Markings

4. IRC: 67-2012 :- Code of Practice for Road Signs

5. IRC: 93-1985 :- Guidelines on Design and Installation of Road Traffic Signals

19