Accident Investigation and Analysis

A C C ID E N T B L A C K -S P O T IN V E S T IG A T IO N

S IT E
R E M E D IA L
A C C ID E N T S S IT E S T U D Y
M EA SU R ES

O F F IC E
ID E N T IF Y
R EPO RTS E V A L U A T IO N
A N D SELEC T
Accident Investigation and Prevention
Presentation covers following topics:
– Introduction
– Basic Strategies for Accident Reduction
– Significance of Accident Data
– Accident Investigation and Identification of Potential
Sites for Treatment
– Problem Diagnosis
– Selection of Countermeasures
– Monitoring and Evaluation
Basic Strategies for Accident Reduction
Overview
•Potential for accident reduction using low-cost
countermeasures is very high
– 4 basic strategies are :
• Single Sites / Blackspots programmes
• Route action plans
• Area-wide schemes
• Mass action plans
•Black spots are easier to identify, and treatments
are likely to be the most effective and straight forward
to implement
Basic Strategies for Accident Reduction
– Single Sites / Blackspots
Treatment of a specific site or short
length of road
– Route Action
Application of remedies along a route
with high accident rate 23 crashes 10 crashes

– Mass Action Schemes 7 crashes

5 crashes

16 crashes
Application of remedies at a location
9 crashes
with common accident problem
– Area Wide Schemes 23
crashes

Investigation of accidents throughout

an entire area
Sealed shoulders

Red arrows phase at

signals
Guard fences at bridges
 Identifying Accident Blackspots
– Accidents tend to cluster together at locations termed
‘blackspots’
– Accurate location data essential to identify patterns
– Annual accident numbers fluctuate at any site, so use a
minimum of 3 years data
– Analyse junctions and links separately but include 20 m of
each junction arm as a part of junction
 Blackspot Vs Area-wise
• Blackspot Treatments • Area-Wide Improvements
– Focuses on reduction – Emphasizes ‘roadway
of accidents consistency’
– Focuses on a substantial
– Focuses on small
portion of the highway
segments of a highway
– Can be used in both short-
system
term projects and long-
– Used for a relatively term undertakings
short period of time
 Significance of Accident Data

– Existence In-depth
of reliable database-
multidisciplinary
Prerequisite to improve safety causative
– Police Force-Best source for basic
Depth of
accident parameters detail
– Use of computers improves data analysis, Intermediate
data retrieval
– Factors contributing to the accidents Base
essential for understanding the causes of
accidents and for subsequent
countermeasure development
 Accident Data
– All Indian States collect accident
data but quality / accuracy varies
enormously
– All State police departments
produce annual reports of statistics
but little data-led analysis of causes
or remedial action is undertaken
– Can be used to identify road users at Police Recording the
accidents and data entry into
risk and accident blackspots computer
 Accident Types
– Crashes Involving a Parked Vehicle
– Side-swipe Collisions
– Head-on Collisions
– Run-off Road type Crashes
– Pedestrian Crashes
– Railway Level Crossing Crashes
– Right-angle Collisions
– Right-turn Collisions with oncoming Vehicles
– Right or Left-turn Rear-end Collisions
– Straight Ahead Rear-end Collisions
– Hit Fixed Object Crashes
 Possible Contributing Factors
Road Signs and Lighting Parked vehicles
Width Markings type on-street parking
Divided/undivided which signs height off-street parking
Number of lanes legibility intensity and access
Cross fall conspicuity obstruction visibility
Gradient comprehensibly Roadside clearway hours
Shoulder credibility poles, posts, etc. parking controls
Verge lane, center horizontal railings loading facilities
Median and and edge lines rocks, trees, other bus stops
openings other markings hazards taxi rank
Footpath pavement safety barriers, physical
Kerbs, pram markers fences obstruction
ramps post-mounted side slopes
Drainage delineators culverts
combination of hazard markers bridge abutments,
factors chevron alignment Railings
Markers
 Possible Contributing Factors (contd.)
Road surface Traffic signals Speed Visibility
Type Primary safe speed on intersection
roughness /secondary speed limit approach
friction /tertiary vehicle speeds of side road
service access intensity late braking of traffic control
Road geometry location Environment devices
Curve turn control land uses of pedestrians
Gradient pedestrian school children of parked
Super elevation display heavy vehicles vehicles
Crest detector type ambient noise of bus stops
sag at foot of hill controller type ingress/egress over crests
Intersection part of linked problems subliminal
Type system delineation
number of legs cycle times and Evidence of
channelisation green splits problems
turn lanes Pedestrians & broken glass
Cyclists debris
turning radius numbers and skid marks
types crossing damaged road
facilities furniture
pedestrian
barriers
pedestrian
refuges
 Accident Investigation
Objective
To identify sites, black spots or black
stretches where common patterns of
accident can be prevented or, at least, their
severity reduced by the introduction of
improvements
13
Accident Investigation & Identification
of Potential Sites for Treatment

– Step 1: Investigation to Identify and Prioritize sites

– Step 2: Preliminary accident analysis

– Step 3: Preliminary Site Visit

– Step 4: Ranking Sites for in-depth Investigation

 Accident Investigation & Identification
of Potential Sites for Treatment
Step 1: Investigation to Identify and Prioritize sites
– Use a minimum of 3 year accident data to smooth out any large
random fluctuations.
– Compare all sites using agreed criterion for initial ranking.
– A point system may be used to weigh accidents (say 10 for fatal,
6 for serious injury, 3 for slight injury, 1 for damage only)
– Prefers cost of accidents by crash type
– Severity ratio (fatal/serious and total injury) are also used.
 Identification of Accident Black-
spots through Statistical Analysis
 Statistical methods
• Number of accidents/Quantum of accidents
method
• Accident-prone index method
• Weighted severity index method
• Rate of accidents method
 Road Accident Data – Coimbatore Bypass
(3 years data)
Section Number of accidents (from June'03 to May'06)
Start km End km June'03 to May'04 June'04 to May'05 June'05 to May'06
Property Property Property
    Fatal Major Minor damage Total Fatal Major Minor damage Total Fatal Major Minor damage Total
0 1   1   1 2     2 4 6 1   2 6 9
1 2 2     1 3   1   3 4 1   1   2
2 3         0         0 1 1 2 2 6
3 4         0         0       1 1
4 5     3   3 1 1 1   3 1 2 2   5
5 6     1 2 3     2   2   2 2   4
6 7         0       1 1   1 1 2 4
7 8   1   1 2       2 2 2     5 7
8 9 1     1 2     2   2 1 1   1 3
9 10         0     3 1 4   3 1 1 5
10 11       1 1     2   2   1 2 1 4
11 12     1   1         0   1     1
12 13         0         0     1   1
13 14 1       1         0   2 1 3 6
14 15         0         0 2 3 3 1 9
15 16         0         0   2 1 1 4
16 17     2   2         0   1   3 4
17 18   1 1 2 4       1 1   1 2 3 6
18 19         0 1       1     2 2 4
19 20     1   1         0   1 1 3 5
20 21   1 1   2     4 2 6   1 5 10 16
21 22         0         0   1 3 1 5
22 23         0         0   2     2
23 24   3   1 4     1 2 3     2 2 4
24 25   1     1       1 1   1 4 1 6
25 26       2 2     1 1 2 2 2 3 6 13
26 27   2     2       1 1   3 3 1 7
27 28 1       1   2 4 1 7   2 2 2 6
  Total 5 10 10 12 37 2 4 22 20 48 11 34 46 58 149
 Number of accidents/Quantum of accidents method
• black spots identified from the total number of accidents
• system average used as the cut-off
Rank Section
Number of accidents
  Start km End km in 3 years
1 20 21 24
2 0 1 17
3 25 26 17
4 27 28 14
5 4 5 11
6 7 8 11
7 17 18 11
8 23 24 11
9 26 27 10
10 1 2 9
11 5 6 9
12 9 10 9 Above system
13 14 15 9 average
14 24 25 8
15 8 9 7
16 10 11 7
17 13 14 7
18 2 3 6
19 16 17 6
20 19 20 6
21 6 7 5
22 18 19 5
23 21 22 5
24 15 16 4
25 11 12 2
26 22 23 2
27 3 4 1
28 12 13 1
 Accident-prone index Method
• Consistency
– Frequency of occurrence of accidents in a quarter of year is
assigned weightages
• Tendency
– Trend in accidents taking place in any part of road, irrespective
of whether it is increasing continuously or irregularly or is it
inconsistent
• Level
– The magnitude of accidents in quantitative terms. More the
number of accidents the higher the accident proneness
• Fatality
– The total number of accidents at one part of the road,
expressed in twenty five point scale
 Accident-prone index Method contd…
Sl. No. Accident components Weightages
1 Consistency
i)3 or more accidents in every 1 year 25
ii)3 or more accidents in every 2 years 20
iii)3 or more accidents in 1 year only 10
iv)No accidents in 1 year 0
2 Tendency
i)3 or more times increase in 1 year 25
ii)1 or more times increase in 1 year 20
iii)No increase 10
iv)No accidents in 1 year 0
3 Level
i)Number of accidents in 1 year more than 16 25
ii)Number of accidents in 1 year more than 8 20
iii)Number of accidents in 1 year below 8 10
iv)No accidents in 1 year 0
4 Fatality
i)Number of fatal accidents more than 3 25
ii)Number of fatal accidents more than 2 20
iii)Number of fatal accidents more than 1 10
iv)No fatal accidents 0
 Accident-prone index Method contd…
Section Rating
API
Rank Start km End km Consistency Tendency Level Fatality  
1 0 1 20 25 25 10 80
2 25 26 10 25 25 20 80
3 1 2 20 10 20 25 75
4 4 5 25 10 20 20 75
5 7 8 10 25 20 20 75
6 14 15 10 25 20 20 75
7 27 28 20 25 20 10 75
8 20 21 20 25 25 0 70
9 2 3 10 25 10 10 55
10 13 14 10 25 10 10 55
11 18 19 10 25 10 10 55
12 23 24 25 10 20 0 55
Above
13 24 25 10 25 20 0 55 system
14 26 27 10 25 20 0 55 average
15 5 6 20 10 20 0 50
16 8 9 10 10 10 20 50
17 9 10 20 10 20 0 50
18 10 11 20 20 10 0 50
19 17 18 20 10 20 0 50
20 6 7 10 25 10 0 45
21 12 13 10 25 10 0 45
22 15 16 10 25 10 0 45
23 19 20 10 25 10 0 45
24 21 22 10 25 10 0 45
25 22 23 10 25 10 0 45
26 3 4 10 20 10 0 40
27 16 17 10 20 10 0 40
28 11 12 10 10 10 0 30
 Weighted Severity Index Method

• Accidents into four groups

– Fatal
– Serious injury
– Minor injury
– Property damage
• Weightages assigned based on accident cost

Sl. No. Accident Category Cost (Rs. Crores) % of total cost Weightages
assigned
1 Fatal 107.2 45.2 45
2 Major injury 72.03 30.4 30
3 Minor injury 2.31 1.0 1
4 Property damage 54.9 23.2 23
 Weighted Severity Index Method contd…
• Weighted severity index computed as:
3
WST j    Wi Ai
i 1

WST j 
WSI j   K
PCU j 
WST j   weighted severity total for jth stretch in terms of unit length
Ai  no. of accidents of i th type
WSI j   weighted severity index for j th stretch in terms of unit length
Wi  weightage for i th type of accident
PCU j   volume of traffic in PCU on j th stretch
K  a constant factor 10,000

• Accident prone locations of

– first order : WSI > (mean + 2 standard deviation)

– second order : (mean + 2 sd) > WSI > (mean + 1.5 sd)

– third order : (mean + 2 sd) > WSI > (mean + 1.5 sd)
 Weighted Severity Index Method contd…
Sample calculation 332 / (15202×365×3) ×10,000 = 0.20

1×45 + 1×30 + 4×1 + 11×23 = 332

Section Number of accidents Weightages, Wi WST PCU WSI

Property Property
Start km End km Fatal Major Minor damage Fatal Major Minor damage
0 1 1 1 4 11 45 30 1 23 332 15202 0.20
1 2 3 1 1 4 45 30 1 23 258 15202 0.15
2 3 1 1 2 2 45 30 1 23 123 15202 0.07
3 4 0 0 0 1 45 30 1 23 23 15202 0.01
4 5 2 3 6 0 45 30 1 23 186 15202 0.11
5 6 0 2 5 2 45 30 1 23 111 15202 0.07
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Ranking
Section
Rank Start km End km WSI Order
1 25 26 0.32 I
2 20 21 0.31 I
3 7 8 0.23 III
4 27 28 0.22 III
 Rate of Accidents Method
• Accident per million vehicle-km calculated
• Cut-off of 1.5 times the system average accident rate
used to identify accident prone locations
Sample calculation
17/ (15202×365×3) × 1000,000 = 1.02

Section PCU Acc/MVkm

Number of
accidents in 3
Start km End km years
0 1 17 15202 1.02
1 2 9 15202 0.54
2 3 6 15202 0.36
3 4 1 15202 0.06
4 5 11 15202 0.66
5 6 9 15202 0.54
-- -- -- -- --
-- -- -- -- --
Rate of Accidents Method contd…
Section
Rank Start km End km Acc/MVkm
0 20 21 2.15
1 25 26 1.53
2 27 28 1.26
3 0 1 1.02
4 23 24 0.99 Above
5 26 27 0.90 system
6 7 8 0.84 average
7 17 18 0.84
8 24 25 0.72
9 9 10 0.68
10 14 15 0.68
11 4 5 0.66
12 1 2 0.54
13 5 6 0.54
14 8 9 0.53
15 10 11 0.53
16 13 14 0.53
17 16 17 0.46
18 19 20 0.46
19 21 22 0.45
20 18 19 0.38
21 2 3 0.36
22 15 16 0.30
23 6 7 0.30
24 22 23 0.18
25 11 12 0.15
26 12 13 0.08
27 3 4 0.06
Comparison of Ranking by the Different Methods
Section Ranking
Number of Weighted Rate of
Accidents Accident Prone Severity Index Accidents
Start km End km Method Index Method Method Method
0 1 2 1 5 3
1 2 10 3 9 12
2 3 18 9 18 21
3 4 27 26 27 27
4 5 5 4 13 11
5 6 11 15 20 13
6 7 21 20 23 23
7 8 6 5 3 6
8 9 15 16 12 14
9 10 12 17 14 9
10 11 16 18 22 15
11 12 25 28 26 25
12 13 28 21 28 26
13 14 17 10 11 16
14 15 13 6 8 10
15 16 24 22 21 22
16 17 19 27 16 17
17 18 7 19 10 7
18 19 22 11 19 20
19 20 20 23 17 18
20 21 1 8 2 0
21 22 23 24 25 19
22 23 26 25 24 24
23 24 8 12 6 4
24 25 14 13 15 8
25 26 3 2 1 1
26 27 9 14 7 5
27 28 4 7 4 2
Accident Investigation & Identification
of Potential Sites for Treatment
Steps 2 & 3: Preliminary Accident Analysis and Site Visits

– Statistical analysis to ascertain that the action site has statistically

more accidents than expected
– Statistical Techniques that could be used include mean, s.d,
Poisson test & Chi-Square Test
– Familiarization of the site at different times of the day visualising
the recorded accidents to identify the contributory factors(e.g.
Sight Lines, Pavement Condition)
– Establish nature of problems(s) causing poor safety record
 Crash Data Summary

Police Accident
Report Form
30
Accident-types

31
Construct a Collision Diagram

32
 Fill in a Crash Factor Matrix
NUMBER OF ACCIDENTS DIRECTION OF LIGHT
TYPES OF ROAD USERS SURFACE TYPE OF DAY
(Dominant ones first)

DIRECTION (To)

Code & Key Direction

EACH YEAR OTHER VEHICLE CONDITION

combination of DCA
TOTAL for this
Insert years in consecutive order
DCA CODE

Car or similar

Van, Lt Truck
Accident-type

Most common
Motorcycle

Pedal cycle

Pedestrian

Weekday
To North

To South

day (if any)

Saturday
Daylight
To West
To East

Sunday
Truck

Dawn
KEY

Dusk

Dark
Wet
Dry
Bus

TOTALS
Fill in one line per DCA Code/Key Direction combination. Insert numbers of crashes in each cell, except: insert numbers of involved vehicles/pedestrians in ‘Types of Road Users’.
33
 Use Other Summary Presentations
18

16 CRASH DISTRIBUTIONS
Year, Month, Day & Time M o ve m e n t C ate g o rie s
14

12 A J B
D 3% 3% 3%
10 6%

8 K
1 0%
6

0
June
April
1994

October
1996

1998

August

Tuesday
December
February

Thursday

Saturday

0000-0300

0600-0900

1800-2100
1200-1500

undefined
F
1 6%
Crash Frequency Histogram
H
1 9%
40
35
P o ike Ro ad, M o vem ent C atego ries
Numbe r of Crashe s

30
25
20
15
10
5
Maybe!
0
001-003 101-109 202-207 301-304 706-708
DCA Code Column Sub-groups (se e Figure 1)

34
 Look for Common Factors
And repeated patterns

Draw it together into a preliminary report

– to use during on-site inspection

35
Examine the Surrounding Area

36
Photo: Gordon Lee
37
Photo: Qld Police38
Examine the surrounding area
Photo: Qld Police39
 Examine the surrounding area
Photo: Gordon Lee 40
41
Accident Investigation & Identification
of Potential Sites for Treatment
Step 4: Ranking Sites for in-depth Investigations
– Rank sites into two groups: “easy” or “hard” to treat
– Easy site: where effective remedial measures can be readily
identified and are of low-cost.
– Hard site: which do not provide a clear indicator of
appropriate treatment or are costly.
– Rank Sites
• Type of action site (blackspots, route, mass action, area wide)
• Number, severity and type of accidents
• Road lengths, location and time period
 Problem Diagnosis

Step 5: Collection of further Data from accident forms/ site

studies.

Step 6: Analysis of the Data –More Detective Work

Step 7: Human Factors-Further Site Visit

 Problem Diagnosis
Steps 5 & 6: Collection and Analysis of Further Data – More
Detective Work
– To diagnose the problem it will be necessary to further
analyse the crash data along with the additional information
through site visits and linking results of the accident
(e.g. car left the road and hit the tree) to road environment factors (e.g. sharp
curve, poor delineation, inadequate skid resistance)
 Problem Diagnosis
Step 7: Studies Appropriate for Particular Accident Problems
Studies
Predominant Classified
Accident Type
Manoeuvre Approach Traffic Skid Additional
Flow
Speeds Conflicts Resistance
JUNCTIONS
Right Observance of control devices,
angle/sideswi
pe -overshoot
   Sight line distance, Phase timing if
signalized
Right Sight line distance, Super
elevation, Origin-Destination if
angle/sideswi
pe -early start
   staggered, Phase timing if
signalized
Skidding/loss
of control   Surface drainage

Surface luminance, Signing and

Darkness    Delineator inventory
Pedestrian: Crossing flows,
Pedestrians   Crossing times, Safety gaps &
Kerb delays
Sight line (other vehicles
2-wheelers    blocking)
Gap/headways, Phase timing if
Rear-end     signalized
 Problem Diagnosis
Step 7: Studies Appropriate for Particular Accident Problems(contd.)
Studies
Predominant
Accident Classified Approach Traffic Skid
Type Manoeuvre Speeds Conflicts Resistance Additional
Flow
NON-JUNCTIONS
Skidding/loss
of control   Drainage
Surface luminance
Darkness  Delineator inventory
Pedestrian flows crossing &
along Frequency & position
Pedestrians   of crossing/standing center
road.
2-wheelers  Road width
Super-elevation Speed at
Bend    apex
Freq. & position of
Overtaking   overtaking Passing sight
distance
Rear-end     Gap/headways
Single vehicle
run off road   Road inventory
 Selection of Countermeasures
Step 8: Select and Check Package of Potential Countermeasures

Step 9: Rank Sites for Treatment

 Selection of Countermeasures
Step 8: Select and Check Package of Potential Countermeasure
– Objectives of a countermeasure scheme dependant upon the type
of accident reduction strategy (single site/ blackspot, mass action,
route, area-wide)
– Objectives can be in terms of accident reduction, a net financial
benefit such as First Year Rate of Return (FYRR) expressed as a % of
the scheme cost, or fixed maximum costs for the countermeasures
– Each countermeasure proposal should ensure :
• Measures will decrease the type of accident they are aimed at
• Different types of accidents will not increase as a result of the measures
• No detrimental effects upon traffic movement, the surrounding network or the
environment
 Criteria for Countermeasure Selection
Criterion Description
Technical Can the countermeasure provide an answer to safety problems, which
Feasibility have been diagnosed, and does it have technical basis for success?
Economic Is the countermeasure likely to be cost effective and will it provide
Feasibility benefits to exceed its costs?
Affordability Can it be accommodated within the program budget, if not, should it be
deferred or should a cheaper, perhaps interim situation be adopted?

Acceptability Does the countermeasure clearly target the identified problem and will it
be readily understandable by the community?
Practicability Is there likely to be problem of non-compliance, or can the measure work
without unreasonable enforcement effects?
Political Is the countermeasure likely to attract political support and will it be
Institutional supported be the organization responsible for its installation and on-going
Acceptability management?

Legal Is the countermeasure a legal device, or will users be breaking any law by
Conformity using it in the way it is intended.
Compatibility Is the countermeasure compatible and consistent with other strategies,
either in the same locality or which have been applied in similar situations
elsewhere?
 Selection of Countermeasures
Step 8: Select and Check Package of Potential Countermeasures
– After Accident Investigation and diagnosis stages often several alternative
solutions are available. A balance of competing interests needed in
developing best solution
– Each countermeasure proposal should ensure :
• Measures will decrease the type of accident they are aimed at
• Different types of accidents will not increase as a result of the
measures
• No detrimental effects upon traffic movement, the surrounding
network or the environment
 Selection of Countermeasures
Step 9: Rank Sites for Treatment

• Prioritizing Treatments and Sites

– Alternative measures proposed for a site should be ranked on an
economic basis in order to obtain best value for money
– Relative Effectiveness of each of the countermeasures should be
calculated based on cost-benefit analysis (if accurate data available
on benefits)
– If not implement the lowest cost scheme
– Adopt realtive effectiveness of countermeasures from literature
where local information not available
– Effect of the scheme on the surrounding network should be
calculated
 Monitoring and Evaluation

Step 10: Monitoring

Step 11: Evaluation
Step 12: Cost-Benefit Analysis
 Monitoring and Evaluation
Step 10 : Monitoring
– Monitor and record countermeasures through changes in
behaviour, undesirable effects and accidents both at the site
and in other areas. Use control site to establish underlying
trends
– Establish the effectiveness of the countermeasures through
evaluation by statistical tests
– Account for ‘regression to the mean’, ‘accident migration’
and ‘risk compensation’
 Monitoring and Evaluation
Step 11 & 12 : Evaluation and Cost-Benefit Analysis
– Calculate Economic Viability using FYRR (First Year Rate of
Return)
%FYRR=(Annual Accident Savings * 100) / Scheme Cost
– Alternative method is calculation of NPV (Net Present Value)
NPV = PVB - PVC
– IRR (Internal Rate of Return)
Rate at which the NPV of the project is zero
THANKS