Sign Retroreflectivity
Requirements in the MUTCD
Eric Green, PE, GISP
University of Kentucky
Kentucky Transportation Center
Final Rule
• Published on Dec 21, 2007
– Vol 72, No. 245
• Revision #2 of the 2003
Edition of the MUTCD
• Effective Jan 22, 2008
2
MUTCD Changes
• Portions of the MUTCD revised:
• Introduction
– Compliance dates
• Part 1
– 1A.11 - relation to other publications
• Chapter 2A
– 2A.09 - minimum sign retroreflectivity
– 2A.22 - sign maintenance
• Minor editorial changes to cross-references
– 2A, 2B, and 6F
3
Compliance Dates
• January 2012 – All agencies have to establish a
sign maintenance program that can regularly
address the new minimum sign retroreflectivity
requirements
• January 2015 – By this date, all agencies must
comply with the new retroreflectivity requirements
for most of their traffic signs they have installed,
including all red or white “regulatory” signs (such
as STOP signs and Speed limit signs), yellow
“warning” signs, and green/white “guide” signs.
• January 2018 – By this date, all agencies must
comply with the new retroreflectivity requirements
for overhead guide signs and all street name signs.
4
Why is retroreflectivity
important?
Liability
Reasons for Highest Amounts Claimed
6
Night Travel and Crashes
7
What signs need replaced?
Can we decide to replace signs
based on daytime inspections?
8
Retroreflectivity
• What is it?
– A sign’s ability to reflect light back to the driver
• Why use it?
– Increases sign visibility at night
– Important since nighttime fatal crashes occur
approximately three times as often as daytime
fatal crashes
– Older driving population is increasing
• Why maintain it?
– Retroreflectivity degrades over time and
maintaining signs will save lives
– Public agencies are responsible for maintaining
highways and streets and required to use
retroreflective materials
9
Nighttime Driving
Daytime
Many cues available
Nighttime
Few cues remain
Driver task relatively easy
Task more difficult
Retroreflectivity provides nighttime guidance
10
Reflection
11
Retroreflective Elements
• Glass spheres and microsized prisms are
the current technologies used to make
sign materials retroreflective
• The light is returned to the source in a
cone shaped pattern
12
Sign Sheeting Materials
Engineering Grade
Hi-Intensity
Beaded
Microprismatic
13
Yellow - ASTM Specification (new matl, 0.2, -4.0)
400
350
300
cd/lx/m2
250
200
III
150
II
100
Required Minimum Maintained Levels
Prismatic
EG
Super EG High Inten Average
I
50
0
ASTM Type
Generalized Life of Yellow Sheeting
New Sheeting Retroreflectivity Spec Value
(no data)
Required Minimum Maintained Levels
Years
EXAMPLE of Sign Costs
Sheeting
Cost to
Replace*
Engineering
Grade
$160
Super EG
$164
High
Intensity
$168
Prismatic
$192
*Generalized numbers based on information from sign test
racks for substrate, labor and sheeting
16
EXAMPLE of Life Cycle Costs
Sheeting
Cost to
Replace*
Useful Life
Cost Per
Year
Engineering
Grade
$160
0
N/A
Super EG
$164
12
$13.7
High
Intensity
$168
12
$14
Prismatic
$192
16
$12
Even more savings when you factor in potential cost of traffic
hazard!
*Generalized numbers based on information from sign test racks for
substrate, labor and sheeting
17
Sign Maintenance Methods
“…One or more of the following assessment or
management methods should be used…”
Assessment Methods
• Visual Inspection
• Measured Sign
Retroreflectivity
Management Methods
• Expected Sign Life
• Blanket
Replacement
• Control Signs
Other Methods
18
Assessment Methods
• Visual Inspection Method
– Comparison Panel Procedure
– Calibrated Sign Procedure
– Consistent Parameter Procedure
• Measure Sign Retroreflectivity
19
Visual Inspection Method
Comparison Panel Procedure
20
Comparison Panels
• Comparison panels
must have a
retroreflectivity level at
least that designated
in the MUTCD
These panels have retroreflectivity
levels at the levels in the MUTCD
minimum retroreflectivity table
21
Source of Comparison
Panels
• With a retroreflectometer, an agency
can find in-service signs near the
minimum levels. These signs can be
removed from service and cut into
smaller pieces.
• An agency can also look through their
scrap yard.
• Avery-Dennison has a comparison
panel kit for sale
22
Assessment Methods
• Visual Inspection Method
– Comparison Panel Procedure
– Calibrated Sign Procedure
– Consistent Parameter Procedure
• Measured Sign Retroreflectivity
23
Visual Inspection Method
Calibrated Signs Procedure
24
Calibrated Signs Overview
• Before leaving the maintenance yard, the inspectors
visually inspects a set of representative signs in an
effort to calibrate their eyes before starting the nighttime
inspections
• Typical viewing distance
• Use low beams and make sure lights are calibrated
prior to departure
• The inspection occurs at highway speeds
• During the visual inspection, look for signs less bright
than the calibration signs
• Mark these signs for replacement
• May include a route that allows inspector to review
calibration signs during inspection
25
Source of Calibration Signs
• With a retroreflectometer, an agency
can find in-service signs near the
minimum levels. These signs can be
removed from service and stored until
nighttime sign inspections commence.
• An agency can also look through their
scrap yard for representative signs.
• Avery-Dennison sells calibration signs
26
Assessment Methods
• Visual Inspection Method
– Comparison Panel Procedure
– Calibrated Sign Procedure
– Consistent Parameter Procedure
• Measured Sign Retroreflectivity
27
Visual Nighttime Inspection Method
Consistent Parameter Procedure
28
Consistent Parameter
Overview
• With this method, a SUV or truck has to be
used with specific headlamps and the
inspector needs to be at least 60 years old.
• The inspection occurs at highway speeds.
• No calibration signs or comparison panels
are needed.
• This method simulates the conditions of the
research which FHWA used as a
foundation for the minimum retroreflectivity
levels.
29
Assessment Methods
• Visual Inspection Method
– Comparison Panel Procedure
– Calibrated Sign Procedure
– Consistent Parameter Procedure
• Measured Sign Retroreflectivity
30
How to use a Retroreflectometer
31
Methods of Inspection
• Measured Sign Retroreflectivity
Method
– Sign retroreflectivity is measured using a
retroreflectometer
– Signs with retroreflectivity below the
minimum levels should be replaced
– This requires you to measure all of your
signs on a specific interval (once every
year or every other year)
32
Advantages / Disadvantages
• Advantages:
– Provides the most direct means of monitoring
the maintained retroreflectivity levels
– Removes subjectivity
• Disadvantages:
– Cost of instruments (approx $12,000 to
$15,000)
– Measuring all signs in a jurisdiction can be time
consuming
– Using retroreflectivity as the only indicator of
whether or not a sign should be replaced may
end up neglecting other attributes of the sign's
overall appearance.
33
New MUTCD Table 2A.3
Minimum Maintained Retroreflectivity Levels
Sheeting Type (ASTM D4956-04)
Beaded Sheeting
Prismatic Sheeting
Color
Additional Criteria
I
II
III
W*; G ≥ 25
III, IV, VI, VII, VIII,
IX, X
W*; G ≥ 7
W*; G ≥ 15
W ≥ 250; G ≥ 25
W*; G ≥ 7
W ≥ 120; G ≥ 15
Ground-mounted
Overhead
White on Green
Y*; O*
Y ≥ 50; O ≥ 50
(2)
Black on Yellow
or
Black on Orange
Y*; O*
Y ≥ 75; O ≥ 75
(3)
White on Red
W ≥ 35; R ≥ 7
(4)
Black on White
W ≥ 50
—
1 The minimum maintained retroreflectivity levels shown in this table are in units of cd/lx/m2 measured at an observation
angle of 0.2 ° and an entrance angle of -4.0 °.
2 For text and fine symbol signs measuring at least 1200 mm (48 inches) and for all sizes of bold symbol signs
3 For text and fine symbol signs measuring less than 1200 mm (48 inches)
4 Minimum Sign Contrast Ratio ≥ 3:1 (white retroreflectivity ÷ red retroreflectivity)
* This sheeting type should not be used for this color for this application.
34
Table 2A.3 Warning Signs
Bold Symbol Signs
•W3-1 – Stop Ahead
•W1-1, -2 – Turn and Curve
•W3-2 – Yield Ahead
•W11-3 – Deer Crossing
•W1-3, -4 – Reverse Turn
•W3-3 – Signal Ahead
•W11-4 – Cattle Crossing
and Curve
•W4-1 – Merge
•W11-5 – Farm Equipment
•W1-5 – Winding Road
•W4-2 – Lane Ends
•W11-6 – Snowmobile
•W1-6, -7 – Large Arrow
•W4-3 – Added Lane
Crossing
•W1-8 – Chevron
•W4-6 – Entering Roadway
•W11-7 – Equestrian
•W1-10 – Intersection in
Added Lane
Crossing
Curve
•W6-1, -2 – Divided Highway
•W11-8 – Fire Station
•W1-15 – 270 Degree Loop
Begins and Ends
•W11-10 – Truck Crossing
•W2-1 – Cross Road
•W6-3 – Two-Way Traffic
•W12-1 – Double Arrow
•W2-2, -3 – Side Road
•W10-1, -2, -3, -4, -11, -12 – •W16-5p, -6p, -7p – Pointing
•W2-4, -5 – T and Y
Highway-Railroad Advance
Arrow Plaques
Intersection
Warning
•W20-7a – Flagger
•W2-6 – Circular Intersection
•W11-2 – Pedestrian
•W21-1a – Worker
Crossing
Fine Symbol Signs – Symbol signs not listed as Bold Symbol Signs.
35
Table 2A.3 Special Cases
W3-1 – Stop Ahead: Red retroreflectivity ≥ 7
W3-2 – Yield Ahead: Red retroreflectivity ≥ 7; White retroreflectivity ≥ 35
W3-3 – Signal Ahead: Red retroreflectivity ≥ 7; Green retroreflectivity ≥ 7
W3-5 – Speed Reduction: White retroreflectivity ≥ 50
For non-diamond shaped signs such W14-3 (No Passing Zone), W4-4p (Cross
Traffic Does Not Stop), or W13-1, -2, -3, -5 (Speed Advisory Plaques), use
largest sign dimension to determine proper minimum retroreflectivity level.
36
Management Methods
• Expected Sign Life
• Blanket Replacement
• Control Signs
37
Methods of Inspection
• Expected Sign Life Method
– Date is labeled or recorded when a sign
is installed
– Age of the sign is compared to the
expected sign life
– Expected sign life is based on the
knowledge of how old signs are in the
geographic area compared to minimum
levels
– When signs reach their life expectancy,
the signs are replaced
38
Methods of Inspection
• Blanket Replacement Method
– All signs in an area/corridor or of a given
type are replaced at specified intervals
– Eliminates the need to assess
retroreflectivity or track the life of
individual signs
– This method is based on the expected
sign life
39
Blanket Replacement
Example
40
Methods of Inspection
• Control Signs Method
– Replacement of signs in the field is based on the
performance of a sample set of signs
– Control signs might be a small sample located in
a maintenance yard or a selection of signs in the
field
– Control signs are monitored to determine the end
of retroreflective life
– All signs represented by a specific set of control
signs should be replaced before the
retroreflectivity levels of the control signs reach
the minimum retroreflectivity levels
41
Suggestions
•
•
•
•
•
•
Electronic, GPS-based inventory
Backup inventory
Redundant test decks
Track inspections, history, events
Combine methods
Quality control
42
Collect Inventory of Signs
• Collect data using GPS
receiver connected to a
laptop running sign
inventory software
• During inventory, mark
signs that are in need
of repair: damaged,
installed improperly,
wrong sign, improper
placement, etc.
(screenshot from www.signprox.net)
43
Conduct Daytime Inspection
• Inventory
assembly’s location
(GPS and milepoint)
• Collect sign
arrangement
• Indicate any
damage (no need to
assess retro if it
must be replaced)
(screenshot from www.signprox.net)
44
Track Inspections
(for assessment)
45
Generate Report
46
MUTCD Proposal
• On August 31, a Notice of Proposed Amendments
was published in the Federal Register, proposing
to revise most of the target compliance dates for
upgrading existing traffic control devices in the field
that do not meet the current MUTCD standards.
The deadline for comments to the docket is
October 31, 2011. The Federal Register notice,
which provides detailed discussion of the FHWA's
proposal, can be viewed online
• After reading the Federal Register notice, to submit
a comment to the docket, please go to
www.regulations.gov.
47
Proposed Changes
http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/knowledge/09mutcdproposedrev/compliance_dates/
48
Proposed Changes
• Just because the compliance dates are proposed
to be eliminated, doesn't mean you don't need to
maintain your signs
• You must still have a defendable plan in the event
of lawsuit
• You need to have a plan in place to maintain
regulatory and warning signs 2 years from the
effective date which will be some time after the
comment period closed (October 31st, 2011)
• There is no compliance date for this, but be sure
your plan is defendable.
49
Proposed Changes
• It is proposed to remove the
compliance dates for all signs and
only require a plan to maintain
regulatory and warning signs
• This does not mean that other signs
(guide signs for example) are not
required
• New signs must meet retro-reflectivity
levels.
50
If Compliance Dates are
Eliminated…
• Unless a particular device is no longer
serviceable, non-compliant devices on
existing highways and bikeways shall
be brought into compliance with the
current edition of the National MUTCD
as part of the systematic upgrading of
substandard traffic control devices
(and installation of new required traffic
control devices)
• Page I-3, paragraph 22
51
Resources
• Methods for Maintaining Traffic Sign
Retro-reflectivity, 2007
– FHWA-HRT-08-026
– http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/
night_visib/policy_guide/fhwahrt08026/
• FHWA www.fhwa.dot.gov/retro
• ATSSA www.retroreflectivity.net
• www.minimumreflectivity.org
52
Portions of this presentation provided by:
• Traffic Management through Signal, Signs
and Markings and Risk Management/Tort
Liability
– Ken Agent, Kentucky Transportation Center, The
University of Kentucky
• Conducting Sign Retroreflectivity
Inspections
– Dr. Paul Carlson and Dr. Gene Hawkins, Texas
Transportation Institute,
The Texas A&M University System
• Sign Retroreflectivity Course
– Eric Green and Martha Horseman, Kentucky
Transportation Center, The University of
Kentucky
53
Contact
Eric Green
Transportation Research Engineer
Traffic and Safety Program
859-257-2680
egreen@engr.uky.edu
Technology Transfer Program
www.kyt2.com
Martha Horseman
T2 Interim Program Manager
Technology Transfer Program
859-257-4531
mhorseman@engr.uky.edu
54
Minimum Pavement Marking
Retro-reflectivity
• New MUTCD Section 3A-03
– FHWA proposed first-ever standards for maintaining
minimum levels of reflectivity of pavement markings
– Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, April
22, 2010
– 120 day public comment period ended August 20, 2010
• From final rule effective date, agencies would
have:
– 4 years to establish & implement a PM maintenance
method
– 6 years to replace PM that fail to meet the new regulations
55
Minimum Pavement Marking
Retro-reflectivity
• Table 3A-1 Minimum Maintained
Retro-reflectivity Levels for
Longitudinal Pavement Markings
56
Minimum Pavement Marking
Retro-reflectivity
• MUTCD Section 3A-03 includes subtle but
important distinctions that categorize PM into 3
general types:
– Not required to be retro-reflective - PM where ambient
illumination assures adequate visibility, or only needed in
the daytime
– Required to be retro-reflective, but not subject to
minimum levels – Some examples of exceptions include
crosswalk markings, other transverse markings, words,
symbols, arrows, etc.
– Subject to minimum retro-reflectivity levels – WHITE
and YELLOW longitudinal PM that are required by the
MUTCD – center lines, edge lines, lane lines, and
channelizing lines.
57
Requirements of Center Line
Pavement Markings
MUTCD Section 3B-01
• Standard
– Center Line Markings shall be placed on all paved urban
arterials & collectors w/traveled way of 20ft or more, and
an ADT of 6,000 or greater
• Guidance
– Center Line Markings should be placed on paved urban
arterials & collectors w/traveled way of 20ft or more, and
an ADT of 4,000 or greater
– Center Line Markings should also be placed on all rural
arterials & collectors w/traveled way of 20ft or more, and
an ADT of 3,000 or greater.
58
Pavement Markings Retroreflectivity Resources
• Federal Register: Maintaining Minimum Retroreflectivity of Longitudinal Pavement Markings
Docket # FHWA–2009–0139
• Summary of MUTCD Pavement Marking Retroreflectivity Standard FHWA-SA-10-015
• Preliminary Economic Impacts of Implementing
Minimum Levels of Pavement Marking Retroreflectivity FHWA-SA-08-010
• Updates to Research on Recommended Minimum
Levels for Pavement Marking Retro-reflectivity to
Meet Driver Night Visibility Needs FHWA-HRT-07059
59