Posts

MassDOT RRFB Approval Announcement

/in , /by

At Availed Technologies, we’re thrilled to announce that the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (Highway Division, Qualified Traffic Control) has experimentally approved our AV-400 Solar RRFB.

Learn more about the importance of this approval today:

The Impact of the AV-400 Solar RRFB

RRFBs play a crucial role in pedestrian crash countermeasures, and our AV-400 Solar RRFB is no exception.

Purpose-built from the bottom-up, the AV-400 series features both high-efficiency LED modules and an ultra-low power controller that remains dependable year after year.

It also touts:

  • A rated operating capacity exceeding 300 activations per day
  • High-intensity light output that exceeds the MUTCD requirements by up to five times
  • A sophisticated, compact solar engine design that is install-ready for all pole mount systems, making the installation process under 15 minutes
  • Zero configuration required for near-wireless connection between systems; one wire runs from the push button to the solar engine
  • Easily bolted or banded to any pole size thanks to its three-point pivoting lightbar mounting bracket and universal solar engine mount

Whether you are a Traffic Engineer responsible for designing and specifying an upcoming project, a Town Engineer seeking lower-cost, higher-powered alternatives to your municipality’s existing RRFBs, or a Traffic Technologist who knows that your city’s pedestrian countermeasures need an upgrade, consider the AV-400 Solar RRFB today.

The Benefits of Working With Availed Technologies

As established in the FHWA Countermeasure Tech Sheet, the average cost of one RRFB system is $22,250 USD– ranging from $4,500 USD to $52,000 USD each.

However, Availed Technologies makes it so you can install three-to-five RRFB systems for the same average cost of one. It’s all thanks to our RRFBs’ higher efficiency, smaller form factor, and minimized size.

That means each RRFB in our AV-400 series:

  • Offers lower material costs
  • Is easy to handle and fast to install
  • Can be pre-installed prior to being on-site and/or mounted onto existing sign posts

We are so proud that our AV-400 Solar RRFB is now included on  MassDOT Qualified Traffic Control Equipment List, under the Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons, Section 824: Flashing Beacons, Illuminated Warning Signs, and Lighted Barrier Arrows .

Guidelines and Warrant Processes for Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons

/in /by

If you are looking for in-depth info on the guidelines and warrant process for Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons, then you’re in the right place.

Here at Availed Technologies, we pride ourselves on being specialists with Solar RRFBs. In today’s article, we explore the guidelines, warrant system, and design process for when and where to use RRFBs at uncontrolled marked crosswalks. Both FHWA and TAC have developed design criteria tools to assist traffic professionals in determining which treatment or treatments should be used for a given crosswalk.

Let’s dive in:

The FHWA Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations

Let’s look first at the FHWA Field Guide for Selecting Countermeasures at Uncontrolled Pedestrian Crossing Locations.

The first step in the guide is to collect an inventory of the roadway conditions, namely the speed limit, total vehicles per day, travel lane configuration, and approximate total pedestrians per hour (PPH) crossing the roadway.  Other pedestrian safety issues are to be recorded such as noted pedestrian conflicts, excessive vehicle speed, inadequate conspicuity and visibility, drivers not yielding, and insufficient separation between pedestrians and traffic.

The roadway conditions inventory is then used with Table 1 to determine which of the following Pedestrian Crash Countermeasures should be considered for the location.  The Table has rows for the Roadway Configuration (number of lanes, median islands) and columns for the posted speed limit and AADT (Annual Average Daily Traffic).

Pedestrian Crash Countermeasures

A subset of these guidelines involves pedestrian crash countermeasures. These are listed as:

  • High-visibility crosswalk markings, parking restrictions on crosswalk approach, adequate nighttime lighting levels, and crossing warning signs
  • Raised crosswalk
  • Advance Yield Here To (Stop Here For) Pedestrians sign and yield (stop) line
  • In-Street Pedestrian Crossing sign
  • Curb extension
  • Pedestrian refuge island
  • Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB, which hold particular importance due to their effectiveness)
  • Road Diet
  • Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon (PHB)

Now that we’ve covered them, let’s turn our overview over to the Transportation Association of Canada (TAC) Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide.

TAC Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide

Similar to the FHWA Pedestrian Crash Countermeasures, the TAC Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide includes a Treatment Selection Matrix where vehicle volume, speed limit, and total number of lanes are the primary variables used to determine which of the following crossing treatment options should be considered.

These crosswalk treatment options encompass the following tools:

  • Crosswalk with side mounted signs (GM)
  • Enhanced crosswalk with side-mounted signs (GM+) which includes advance yield lines, curb extensions, raised pedestrian refuge, and in-street signs
  • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon
  • Overhead Flashing Beacon
  • Traffic Signal

In our opinion, the current third version of the TAC Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide from 2018 is somewhat outdated, in that RRFBs are now commonly used in overhead applications and should be considered instead of overhead flashing beacons. RRFBs have been demonstrated to be significantly more effective than traditional round flashing beacons.

The TAC Pedestrian Crossing Control Guide also includes a flow chart intended to be used as a preliminary decision support tool.  The tool includes Average Hourly Pedestrian Volume as a criteria, and includes a weighting system where pedestrian volume is converted to Equivalent Adult Units (EAU) to account for pedestrian age and physical ability or at-risk pedestrians.

Key Takeaways Regarding Guidelines and Warrant Processes for Uncontrolled Marked Crosswalks

According to the FHWA Countermeasure Tech Sheet, the average cost of an RRFB system is USD $22,250, with a range of $4,500 to $52,000 each.

Systems like the Availed AV-400 RRFB that are highly efficient have a much smaller form factor than previous technology, and the smaller size greatly reduces the installed cost in the following ways:

  • Has lower material costs compared to larger, less efficient systems
  • Is lightweight and easy to handle, thereby significantly reducing installation time
  • Can be easily pre-installed on the pole prior to being on site
  • Can be readily mounted onto existing sign posts. This is perhaps the greatest opportunity to minimize the installed cost, as the existing sign post footings can often be used which eliminates any expensive work involving the pole foundations. Regular sign posts are also significantly less costly than the larger poles that are necessary to support larger, less efficient solar RRFBs.

By utilizing existing sign posts, an agency can install three-to-five RRFB systems for the USD $22,250 average cost noted in the 2018 FHWA Tech Sheet.

Another factor that is implicit in the crosswalk treatment decision process is the concern with the overuse of crosswalk treatments.  The argument is that crosswalks and sign treatments should be used discriminately so that the effectiveness of these treatments is not deteriorated by overuse.  The concern for overuse of traffic signs is fundamental in the FHWA MUTCD, as noted in Section 2A.04 Excessive Use of Signs.

We here at Availed Technologies argue that the ‘Active’ nature of an RRFB makes the device largely immune to the risk of overuse.  An RRFB system that is not flashing will not contribute to any deterioration of effectiveness in the same way that prolific use of enhanced signs or pavement marking  will.  To this end, a requirement for a minimum number of pedestrians per hour arguably does not apply to RRFBs in the context of overuse.

Many agencies have developed their own decision process for prioritizing and selecting improvements for uncontrolled marked crosswalks. In many places, RRFBs have become a key tool that is used, owing to their high effectiveness, relatively low cost, and advantages of being an Active device that is not prone to overuse in the same way as passive treatments are.

Considering using RRFBs in an upcoming project?

Our expert team is here to answer all your questions. Contact us today.

 

RRFBs in the Next MUTCD

/in , /by

Update: As of November 19, 2023, the 11th Edition of the MUTCD has been issued with the inclusion of RRFBs in Chapter 4L. Read more about it here.

 

RRFBs were first introduced under an interim approval with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in 2008.  Since that time, and due to the high effectiveness of the device, the use of  RRFBs as a crosswalk enhancement has become widespread.

Today, we here at Availed Technologies are going to outline RRFBs proposed role in the next MUTCD– including the most significant proposed changes to it to enhance pedestrian safety.

Let’s jump right in:

The Absence of an Updated MUTCD

In the absence of an updated version of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD),  the RRFB has remained under an interim approval for well over a decade.  On March 4th, 2022 FHWA Issued a Status of Rulemaking for the Eleventh Edition of the MUTCD.

According to this update, The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act directs USDOT to update the MUTCD by no later than May 15, 2023.

As one would expect, RRFBs are a key feature of the recommended changes as noted in the FWHA, U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) notice of proposed amendments (NPA). These recommended changes orbit around the incorporation of provisional traffic control devices.

The Incorporation of Provisional Traffic Control Devices

The incorporation of provisional traffic control devices currently under Interim Approval, including pedestrian-actuated rectangular rapid-flashing beacons at uncontrolled marked crosswalks, green-colored pavement for bicycle lanes, red-colored pavement for transit lanes, and a new traffic signal warrant based on crash experience.

It is also noteworthy that several other key proposed changes to the MUTCD focus on pedestrians and bicyclists, mainly:

  • Improvements to safety and accessibility for pedestrians, including the location of pushbuttons at signalized crosswalks, crosswalk marking patterns, and accommodations in work zones
  • Expanded traffic control devices to improve safety and operation for bicyclists, including intersection bicycle boxes,two-stage turn boxes, bicycle traffic signal faces, and a new design for the U.S. Bicycle Route sign

The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (NCUTCD) recommended changes to the MUTCD are very similar to the Interim Approval (IA-21).  One significant addition is guidance on the use of RRFBs at intersections with two crosswalks on an uncontrolled approach.  Additional guidance is provided for the use of RRFBs with overhead-mounted signs.

The Role of RRFBs in the Future of Pedestrian Safety

Here at Availed Technologies, we have over 25 years of experience in the Solar LED industry. We understand that providing a best-in-class product demands the support of industry-leading partners, and we are very proud to be represented by some of the most trusted companies in the business.

We strongly encourage you to read more about the MUTCD proposed changes today– and, if you have any questions, to reach out to our team!