Utility Pole Safety and Hazard Evaluation Approaches (2020) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 38-44
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 38... ...
38 After individual poles (or a series of poles) along a corridor are identified as high risk based on either utility pole crashes or on pole placement in high-risk locations, the next questions relate to the treatments that may be justified.
|
From page 39... ...
Countermeasure Cost-Effectiveness 39 countermeasure options under various traffic and roadway conditions. More updated calculations of the expected benefit-cost ratios for individual countermeasures can be computed as described in the FHWA's Selection of Cost-Effective Countermeasures for Utility Pole Accidents -- User's Manual (Zegeer and Cynecki 1986)
|
From page 40... ...
40 Utility Pole Safety and Hazard Evaluation Approaches pole spacing may require the use of larger and stronger poles to carry the heavier loads placed on each individual pole. Of course, when struck by motor vehicles, such larger and sturdier poles might result in more severe crash outcomes.
|
From page 41... ...
Countermeasure Cost-Effectiveness 41 states (as shown in the results of the STA survey)
|
From page 42... ...
42 Utility Pole Safety and Hazard Evaluation Approaches multiple-use poles (M) , and breakaway poles (steel-reinforced safety poles)
|
From page 43... ...
Countermeasure Cost-Effectiveness 43 cell corresponding to this set of conditions shows several cost-effective countermeasures, including relocation of poles to 10 feet from the road (assuming that adequate right-of-way exists and that an R is circled) , breakaway poles (B)
|
From page 44... ...
44 Utility Pole Safety and Hazard Evaluation Approaches rural telephone poles instead of larger poles carrying electric lines. Traffic volume categories are lower in Table 9 than in Table 8; i.e., the ADT categories in Table 9 range from 1,000 to 20,000 vehicles per day, compared to an ADT of 1,000 to 60,000 vehicles in Table 8, reflecting lower vehicle volumes for rural roads versus urban roads.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.