Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 56


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 55
55 Monitoring individual driver fuel economy and provid- measure. Carrier exposure data include vehicle mileage, hours ing feedback to drivers; of driving, times of driving (i.e., times-of-day and days-of- Using onboard tire pressure monitoring systems and week), geographic locations, freight lanes (corridors), types other vehicle condition monitors as they become more of runs, vehicle types, and many other "denominator" metrics. available in vehicles; and Much of crash-risk analysis consists of simple calculations Generally, developing carrier efficiencies and disciplined of rates based on event (crash, incident, violation) numerators operational practices that will support safety but will not and exposure denominators. For example, a common rate cal- create pressures on drivers or others to push delivery culated by carriers is crashes (e.g., police- or DOT-reported) schedules or other activities to unsafe speeds. per mile. Calculation of relative crash risks for different cate- gories of exposure is a more powerful risk analysis tool because In addition to the established practices, this project has it identifies higher- and lower-risk exposures within a com- reported research, survey, and interview findings suggesting pany's operations. Relative crash risk is determined by the the potential value of the following for some carriers: following formula: Charging detention fees to customers for excessive load- ( Factor % in Crashes ) Relative Crash Risk = ing and unloading delays; ( Factor % in Normal Driving ) When operationally feasible and within HOS constraints, scheduling trips to include the evening hours between A simple example would be a carrier's analysis of its 6:00 p.m. and 2:00 a.m. if daytime traffic and associated crashes on different freight lanes or corridors (e.g., I-40, I-70, inefficiencies and risks are concerns; and I-80). If the carrier collected and classified both its crash Using team drivers when feasible; and mileage data by freight lane, then it could determine rel- Using EOBRs for a variety of efficiency and safety man- ative crash risks on those lanes. For large carriers, such analy- agement benefits; ses might provide statistically reliable guidance for reducing risk exposure. Some carriers interviewed for the case studies Equipping large trucks with automated transmissions to conduct extensive risk analyses, but the practice appears to lessen driver workload and increase attention to driving; be limited to large and progressive carriers. Carriers might Developing better and more detailed exposure statistics to benefit from more guidance and tools for collecting better use as denominators in safety evaluations. These might internal exposure data and using that data in risk analysis. include vehicle-miles traveled, hours of driving (from HOS logs), trips, ton-miles, and revenue. Disaggregation In an Australian study, Wright et al. (2005) identified the of exposure by company depot, vehicle configuration, same need for quantitative safety and productivity analyses location and region, time-of-day, day-of-week, and other within fleets. The authors conducted in-depth surveys and classifications would permit better safety assessments and interviews with managers at 12 motor carriers. All companies shifting of operations toward lower risk conditions; and provided qualitative assessments of their safety programs and Joining or forming a consortium of similar carriers who associated costs and benefits. Only a few companies, however, meet regularly to share information about improving were able to provide even a limited amount of quantitative safety and reducing losses. In such consortia, carriers data, suggesting that rigorous safety program evaluation was can share techniques and procedures for improved oper- lacking among Australian motor carriers. ational efficiency and safety. Two operational issues presented on project surveys gen- erated the widest variations in opinion. Research gaps were RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT NEEDS also seen in these areas. The first was day versus night driving. There would be many operational safety applications from In 2008, 9,006,738 large trucks traveled 227.5 billion miles in better data and knowledge on CMV crash risks as a function the United States. The average per-vehicle annual mileage for of time of day. No one has determined whether night driving CTs was 64,764 miles. In addition, 843,308 buses traveled is generally more or less dangerous for CMVs than daytime 7.1 billion miles. Given all of these miles traveled and the asso- driving. Yet, the answer is relevant to millions of truck dis- ciated exposure to risk, there would appear to be abundant patch decisions made annually. Many assume that night opportunities for quantitative analyses of commercial vehicle driving is less safe than day driving because of the greatly travel patterns and other operations to identify efficiencies elevated driver fatigue risk associated with the early morn- with safety benefits. Much of this research would elaborate on ing circadian valley, and because light-vehicle serious crash the findings reviewed previously and provide more compelling rates spike during the overnight hours owing to alcohol arguments for various carrier or industry operational changes. impairment and reckless driving. Yet, truck crash rates vary Other research would help to resolve specific unanswered strongly with traffic density, and traffic densities are lowest questions about carrier operations and safety. at night. Large-truck naturalistic driving data suggest that night driving is less dangerous because there are fewer traffic Most transportation safety statistics are more meaningful interactions. The time-of-day distributions of truck crashes in and heuristic if they are derived in part from some exposure the LTCCS and national crash databases suggest the same

OCR for page 55
56 (as reviewed in the section "Efficient Scheduling" in chapter Many of the same evaluation criteria for in-vehicle safety two). However, both the safety-manager and other-expert technologies (e.g., collision warning systems) also apply to surveys found majorities of respondents believing day driving products and services intended to make operations more effi- to be safer. Systematic study could answer this question. Two cient. These decision factors are critical for making, using, potential approaches are time-of-day studies of crashes per and buying technologies in the CMV industry. They include: unit of exposure for limited-access roadways (e.g., toll roads) and large-carrierbased studies in which both crashes and Return on Investment for the Purchaser: Sustains com- exposure are closely tracked company wide. Both types of mercial success of technologies purchased and used by studies could be enhanced by the use of additional numerators carriers; (e.g., tabulations of total crash harm in addition to crash Initial Cost: Affects early deployment, because a high counts) and control for roadway type. initial-purchase cost makes it difficult for a carrier to raise the needed capital to buy technologies; Demonstrated Effectiveness to Improve Safety, Secu- The second issue generating extremes of opinion was that rity, and Efficiency of Operations: Represents the major of truck size and safety. The question whether HPVs are to be benefits that offset the costs of technologies; used more widely on the U.S. road system is both controver- System Reliability and Maintainability: Provides the sial and difficult to answer objectively. Although the issue has results and usability of technologies for carriers and been discussed here in the context of operational efficiency manufacturers (original equipment manufacturers and and safety, HPVs are also problematic with regard to vehicle vendors); stability, pavement wear, and bridge weight capacity. Nev- Driver Acceptance: Ensures that drivers are receptive ertheless, studies could compare freight movement produc- to technologies that are user-friendly and effective in tivity (e.g., freight ton-miles and comparable freight volume improving safety and security; metrics) with crash harm for different truck configurations, Market Image: Involves using state-of-the-art technolo- including STs, CTs, and HPVs. Different truck configurations gies to improve a carrier's image by designating a com- may also be assessed with regard to fuel consumption and pany as progressive and concerned about the safety and emissions per unit of freight movement. security of their drivers and loads; Market Demand: Depends on awareness of the tech- This project has presented evidence linking traffic conges- nology, along with acceptance and belief in its value, tion to crash risk, and also evidence of the safety benefits of which is particularly important to manufacturers intro- transport route optimization and navigation aids. Navigation ducing a new product; aid vendors are beginning to equip systems with real-time In-Cab Technology Interface Integration: Minimizes updates based on ambient traffic conditions. Real-time routing cost, distraction, and human errors while using the tech- updating is a relatively new application that will see continued nology; and development and more widespread use in the coming years. Liability: Influences carriers, drivers, and manufacturers, particularly relating to the data stored by certain tech- Systems providing such real-time updates and adjustments pri- nologies and their use. marily use global position systemequipped cell phone trans- missions as a source of data on traffic movements. The Several of the operational practices in this report were principal challenge is in analyzing such massive data in real addressed under the Motor Carrier Efficiency Study (MCES). time to produce reliable adjustments in routing guidance. The MCES Inefficiencies Report pointed out that a common thread running through many inefficiencies is delay resulting The Intelligent Transportation Society of America has in large part from parties (e.g., customers) or forces (e.g., published a white paper entitled, "Smart Mobility for a 21st weather and traffic) external to carriers. The inefficiencies Century America: Strategies for Maximizing Technology to may be mitigated, however, by improving the quality, accu- Minimize Congestion, Reduce Emissions, and Increase Effi- racy, and timeliness of data available to transport operators. ciency." The publication relates to motor vehicle and other Thus, a research and development opportunity is to determine modal transportation in general, rather than specifically to data needs, collection methods, analysis routines, and means CMV transport. Nonetheless, its five broad innovation strate- of transmission to provide timely, operations-critical infor- gies apply also to CMV transport and to topics addressed in mation to carriers and to drivers. this report. The innovations include: Phase II of the MCES, in planning at this writing, will pilot test technological interventions to provide carriers with oper- Making transportation systems more efficient; ational information in areas such as the following, addressed Providing more travel options; in this report: Providing travelers with better, more accurate, and more connected information; Reducing time waiting to be loaded or unloaded, or to Making pricing and payments more convenient and effi- access the facilities where these activities are done; cient; and Reducing empty trips, particularly when interchanging Reducing trips and traffic. loads between intermodal facilities;

OCR for page 55
57 Reducing delays associated with congestion--particu- primarily on successful, safer-than-average carriers. That is larly congestion associated with traffic incidents; and primarily because these carriers are active in national CMV Reducing fuel consumption, likely by providing motor transport organizations and conferences. They are more likely carriers with means to better control truck speeds. to be known to researchers and much more likely to be willing to participate in safety management studies. Studies of motor Except in the area of preventive maintenance, this project carriers with a wider range of safety performance records did not specifically address carriers' use of databases, spread- would strongly test safety management conclusions drawn in sheets, and other software for safety and operational manage- this and other studies based mainly on safety-conscious motor ment. This would be a detailed project in itself. Nevertheless, carriers and their officials. Such studies could be structured as this is an area in which management efficiency is likely to case-control or parametric comparisons between carrier prac- have clear safety benefits. These safety benefits may be simi- tices and their safety performance criterion measures. lar to the benefits of maintenance management efficiency, except on a broader scale. Databases can enhance safety man- Another research method applicable to validating risk- agement applications such as the following (most from Safe avoidance strategies is the intensive carrier case study. In Road Systems 2010): 2009, Murray et al. conducted and published a 4-year occu- Creating custom driver scorecards; pational road safety case study of Wolseley, the world's Tracking CSA 2010 compliance by driver; largest heating and plumbing distributor, based in the United Managing DOT inspections; Kingdom and operating in 28 countries. The comprehensive Monitoring crash, incident, and violation statistics; case study classified dozens of Wolseley safety interventions Scheduling drug tests; within an expanded Haddon Matrix and chronicled their Tracking HOS compliance; implementation and safety outcomes over a 4-year period. Tracking OBSM data; The company reduced its crash rate by more than 40% over Tracking route experience; and the period. It also reduced employee injuries, traffic and reg- Monitoring driver license status and certifications. ulatory violations, and financial losses. Although this holis- tic research approach does not isolate the effects of single This report, previous CTBSSP reports, and other frequently interventions, it does "tell a complete story," which other cited studies of carrier safety management have been based companies may choose to emulate.