Dot 34472 DS1
Dot 34472 DS1
Dot 34472 DS1
Final Report
-Fatal Crashes
2010
A Cooperative Research Project sponsored by the
U.S. Department of Transportation Research and
Innovative Technology Administration
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the
information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation
University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange.
The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof.
Characteristics and Contributory Causes Related To Large Truck Crashes (Phase I) –
Fatal Crashes
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
June 2010
Technical Report Documentation Page
1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
25-1121-0001-111
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Mid-America Transportation Center
2200 Vine St. 262 Whittier Building
PO Box 830851
Lincoln, NE 68583-0851 14. Sponsoring Agency Code
MATC TRB RiP No. 17131
15. Supplementary Notes
16. Abstract
One-ninth of all traffic fatalities in the United States have involved large trucks in the past five years, although large trucks
contributed to only 3% of registered vehicles and 7% of vehicle miles travelled. This contrasting proportion indicates that
truck crashes in general tend to be more severe than other crashes though they constitute a smaller sector of vehicles on the
road. To study this issue, fatal crash data from the FARS was used to analyze characteristics and factors contributing to
truck-involved crashes. Driver, vehicle, and crash-related contributory causes were identified, and as an extension the
likelihood of occurrence of these contributory causes in truck-involved crashes with respect to non-truck crashes was
evaluated using the Bayesian Statistical approach. Likelihood ratios indicated that factors such as stopped or unattended
vehicles and improper following have greater probability of occurrence in truck crashes than in non-truck crashes. Also,
Multinomial Logistic Regression was used to model the type of fatal crash (truck vs. non-truck) to compare the relative
significance of various factors in truck and non-truck crashes. Factors such as cellular phone usage, failure to yield right of
way, inattentiveness, and failure to obey traffic rules also have a greater probability of resulting in fatal truck crashes.
Among several other factors, inadequate warning signs and poor shoulder conditions were also found to have greater
predominance in contributing to truck crashes than non-truck crashes. By addressing these factors through the
implementation of appropriate remedial measures the truck safety experience could be improved, which would eventually
help in improving overall safety of the transportation system.
19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price
77
ii
Table of Contents
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1.2 Number of Fatal Large Truck Crashes from 1998-2007 ....................................2
Figure 1.3 Number of Vehicle Occupants Killed in Large Truck Crashes ..........................3
Figure 4.4 Age of Truck Drivers Involved in Fatal Truck Crashes ...................................40
Figure 4.5 Proportion of Fatal Truck Crashes on Different Traffic Flowways .................41
Figure 4.6 Level of Deformation of all Vehicles Involved in Fatal Truck Crashes ..........42
Figure 4.8 Fatal Truck Crashes by Roadway Type in Truck Striking/Struck Conditions .45
Figure 4.9 Truck Crashes in Different Light Conditions under Striking/Struck Types ...46
Figure 4.10 Initial Impact Point for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes.................................47
Figure 4.11 Driver Age for Truck and Non-Truck Drivers ...............................................48
Figure 4.12 Posted Speed Limit for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes ................................49
Figure 4.13 Manner of Collision for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes ................................50
Figure 4.14 Level of Deformation for Truck and Non-Truck Crash Vehicles ..................51
Figure 4.15 Trafficway Type for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes ......................................51
Figure 4.16 Rural Urban Contrast for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes .............................52
Figure 4.17 Type of Roadway for Fatal Truck and Non-Truck Crashes ...........................53
Figure 4.18 Number of Lanes on Roadways Where Truck/ Non-Truck Crashes Occurred ..
........................................................................................................................53
v
List of Tables
Table 4.1 Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Crash-Related Factors ....55
Table 4.2 Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Vehicle-Related Factors .....
........................................................................................................................56
Table 4.3 Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Driver-Related Factors ...57
Table 4.5 Parameter Estimates and Odds Ratio of Fatal Truck Crashes in the Model ......64
Table 4.6 Model Fit Statistics of the Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis .............65
vi
List of Abbreviations
vii
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mid-American Transportation Center for funding this project
and providing all the help necessary by remaining true to their theme of “improving safety and
minimizing risk associated with increasing multi-modal freight movement on the U.S. surface
transportation system.‖ The authors would also like to thank the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) for providing the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) data,
which has been crucial to conducting this study. Special thanks also go to Steven Buckley at the
viii
Abstract
One-ninth of all traffic fatalities in the United States have involved large trucks in the
past five years, although large trucks contributed to only 3% of registered vehicles and 7% of
vehicle miles travelled. This contrasting proportion indicates that truck crashes in general tend to
be more severe than other crashes though they constitute a smaller sector of vehicles on the road.
To study this issue, fatal crash data from the FARS was used to analyze characteristics and
causes were identified, and as an extension the likelihood of occurrence of these contributory
causes in truck-involved crashes with respect to non-truck crashes was evaluated using the
Bayesian Statistical approach. Likelihood ratios indicated that factors such as stopped or
unattended vehicles and improper following have greater probability of occurrence in truck
crashes than in non-truck crashes. Also, Multinomial Logistic Regression was used to model the
type of fatal crash (truck vs. non-truck) to compare the relative significance of various factors in
truck and non-truck crashes. Factors such as cellular phone usage, failure to yield right of way,
inattentiveness, and failure to obey traffic rules also have a greater probability of resulting in
fatal truck crashes. Among several other factors, inadequate warning signs and poor shoulder
conditions were also found to have greater predominance in contributing to truck crashes than
remedial measures the truck safety experience could be improved, which would eventually help
ix
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Of the 41,059 fatalities related to motor vehicle crashes in 2007 12% or 4,808 deaths
involved large trucks, and 17% of those fatalities involving the large trucks were the occupants
of said trucks. Though large trucks contribute to only 8% of vehicles involved in fatal crashes
over the last five years their impact in terms of severity warrants major concern.
Large trucks of gross body weight greater than 10,000 pounds have different performance
characteristics than smaller vehicles. The large size of the vehicles makes it difficult for drivers
to maneuver smoothly on roadways. Drivers might face vehicle control challenges while
operating large trucks on interstate or state highways at high speeds or at intersections while
making turns. Also, the element of blind spots, as shown in figure 1.1, makes it even more
challenging for the truck driver and surrounding vehicle drivers to avoid the heavy crash risk.
When considering the past 10 years of data, it can be observed that the frequency of fatal
truck crashes varies between 4400 and 4800 crashes per year (Fig. 1.2). Each of these crashes
results in major destruction of human life and property, which in most cases is many times worse
1
than other passenger car crashes. As it is evident that the frequency of these crashes is remaining
5000
4900
4800
No. of Truck Crashes
4700
4600
4500
4400
4300
4200
4100
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
When involved in crashes trucks can rollover or jackknife at high speeds and
exponentially increase the severity of the crash as a result. Many factors such as roadway
geometry, environmental conditions, driver mental and physical conditions, and vehicle
Research has also shown (Fig. 1.3) that large trucks cause more fatalities to other non-
truck vehicle occupants than those in trucks. On average 84% of fatalities related to large truck
crashes in the country are not the occupants of trucks. This reinforces the threat large trucks
2
6000
5000
Number of Fatalities
4000 Truck
Occupants
3000 Non-Truck
Occupants
` Total
2000
1000
0
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Year
Even though the number of fatal truck crashes has generally been decreasing with some
fluctuations over the past 10 years, the amount of truck travel is increasing. Consequently,
continued attention to this issue is required in order to find ways of reducing truck crash risk.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has set a goal of a 50% reduction in
commercial truck-related fatalities by the year 2010 (1). The FMCSA wants to reduce the
number and severity of large truck- and bus- involved crashes through several inspection and
enforcement procedures. These procedures include more commercial motor vehicle and operator
inspections and compliance reviews; stronger enforcement measures against violators; expedited
Commercial Driving License (CDL) testing, recordkeeping, and sanctions. All these measures
3
can be assisted by analyzing large truck crashes. Accordingly, it is important for the safety
1.2 Objectives
Truck crashes can be mitigated by identifying the characteristics and contributory causes
involved and institute suitable countermeasures as rectification. Hence, the primary objectives of
To analyze and evaluate various crash characteristics that prevailed at the time of the
To identify various crash, vehicle, and driver related contributory causes prevalent to
To evaluate the relative significance of various contributory causes in fatal truck crashes
To model the type of fatal crash (truck vs. non-truck) in terms of crash characteristics and
other factors to compare the relative significance of these factors in truck and non-truck
crashes.
This report consists of five chapters with the background and objectives of this research
having been covered in the first. The second chapter consists of a review of prior research related
to the study area, and the third chapter presents the methodologies used in the analysis along
with descriptions of data used in the study. The fourth chapter reports the results of the
characteristic and comparative studies conducted between truck and non-truck crashes derived
by using statistical analysis, and a detailed discussion is presented. In the final chapter summary
and conclusions are presented and a discussed in further detail. By addressing these issues
4
through this report the overall truck crash rate can be reduced, which can help in improving the
5
Chapter 2 Literature Review
Fatal truck crash-related research studies have an extended history in addressing different
safety aspects using a variety of databases and surveys. Past researchers have used various
statistical modeling techniques to predict or explain the nature of truck crashes, and many
findings are listed under this area. Furthermore, different types of crashes have been examined
by these researchers, thereby narrowing down the study to identify more specific factors related
to selected states. In this chapter, a thorough discussion of past studies is presented under the
following subsections: truck crash characteristics, rates and trends, contributory factors involved,
crash types and related maneuvering difficulties, intersection-related crashes, human factors, risk
to self and risk to others, countermeasure evaluations, medication and risk of injuries, decision to
Blower conducted a study by collecting detailed data on the causes of truck crashes in the
country and developed suitable countermeasures that would be effective in reducing the number
and severity of the crashes (2). The Large Truck Crash Causation Study (LTCCS), used in this
research project, was developed by the FMCSA in cooperation with the NHTSA. The study took
three years and involved investigation teams at 24 locations around the country. Each crash was
investigated on the field and detailed analysis was conducted by experienced crash investigators.
The second study was conducted by the University of Michigan Transportation Research
Institute‘s (UMTRI) Trucks Involved in Fatal Accidents (TIFA) project (3). In contrast to the
LTCCS, a telephone survey was conducted relevant to fatal truck crashes in the country. Also,
police reports were acquired for all crashes as a part of the survey. The variables coded in each
study (2 and 3) were compared by developing an algorithm to analyze the most significant
6
factors in truck crashes and their accuracy. Though studying both sets of data and referring to the
―parent‖ FARS file, some cases could not be matched when defined as per the search protocol.
As a result, the LTCCS proved to be the most elaborate database in truck crash reporting.
Using this very database Krishnaswami et al. analyzed the causes of heavy truck
aggressiveness in two-vehicle truck/light vehicle crashes and also derived detailed models to
help propose the required truck structural countermeasures to mitigate collision severity (4). In
this study, three years of data, from 1996 to 1998, was used from the FARS, TIFA, and GES, or
General Estimates System, databases. Collision and injury models were constructed using
lumped parameter models in a two-stage manner. The first stage was a physical representation of
the collision process using collision variables as inputs; acceleration levels, total velocity change,
and the crush levels experienced by the vehicle occupants are examples of the variables used. In
the second stage, the previous outputs were used in the injury models to predict occupant injury
outcomes. From the results of the collision and injury models it was consistently shown that by
reducing peak vehicle deceleration, injury risk can be decreased. Another important observation
from the simulations was that for a particular deceleration level almost constant injury criterion
As an extension of his earlier work, Blower identified the issues that contribute most to
commercial motor vehicle crashes, fatalities, and injuries in the state of Michigan (5). This was
accomplished by conducting a detailed analysis of the available data, which included the
Michigan vehicle crash files, the trucks involved in fatal accidents file, and Motor Carrier
Management Information System Inspection and Carrier files for the period of 2001-2005. From
the analysis it was evident that angle, rear-end, and head-on crashes appeared to be the most
predominant crash patterns among commercial motor vehicles. Also it was observed that in
7
almost all cases, brake defects were associated with fatal rear-end, head-on, and angle collisions,
while lighting defects were associated with fatal rear-end crashes. Hence, it was concluded that
brake and lighting system violations were the most frequent causations. To address these issues,
Another report by the United States Government Accountability Office to the FMCSA
addressed the importance of reducing the number of commercial vehicle crashes and identifying
carriers that pose a high risk for crashes (1). Presently FMCSA decides which carriers to inspect
primarily by using an automated data-driven analysis system called SafeStat. This system uses
data on crashes, vehicle and driver violations, and other information to develop a priority list of
high-risk-posing carriers. Though this has proved to be highly useful compared to the
conventional random inspection of carriers, a recent study suggested a better and a more accurate
way of analysis. For this purpose, a number of regression methods have been developed using
crash data from the Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS) for the year 2004.
The accident, driver, vehicle, and safety management sections have been taken as independent
variables to predict crash risks. Results were compared to those obtained from the SafeStat
Daniel et al. proposed an accident prediction model which had been built for analyzing
factors affecting truck crashes on roadways with intersections (19). Truck crash data for this
project was developed by including all crashes in 1998 and 1999 in the state of New Jersey from
police accident report files. This database was used to conduct an initial analysis of truck crashes
at signalized intersections along Route 1 in New Jersey. Poisson regression and negative
binomial models were applied using LIMPID software to obtain the analysis results. Variables
8
considered in modeling the crashes were segment length, AADT, degree of curve for horizontal
curves, length of horizontal curve, crest curve grade rate, length of vertical curve, posted speed
on main road, number of interchanges within the segment, and pavement width. From the
analysis, it was concluded that signalized intersections have a significant impact on truck crash
rate. By incorporating this feature it was concluded that a better model on crash involvement can
Vap and Sun analyzed truck and passenger car interactions for the state of Missouri on its
urban and rural freeways (24). The urban data was collected from the Portable Overhead
Surveillance Trailers (POSTS) and the rural data was obtained from digital videos set up at the
desired locations. Apart from these data collectors, the MoDOT Transportation Management
System (TMS) was also used. Using this data, an analysis of trucks-at-fault crash rates versus
passenger vehicles-at-fault crash rates, or RSEC ratios, were estimated. These results showed
that on urban freeways the percentage of trucks-at-fault ratio was considerably high. By contrast,
the rural data, in general, showed that truck crashes were not disproportional to the crash rates of
passenger vehicles. Hence, it was concluded that a greater safety concern coefficient is attributed
Apart from these studies, which particularly focused on truck-involved crashes, many
more reports on general fatal crash data were reviewed (please refer to sources 8-18 for the
reports reviewed for this study) to acquire a larger idea of what these crashes have in common.
Blower explained the significance of mirror-relevant crash types which occur due to a
driver‘s restricted direct field of view in trucks (3). Mirror relevant crashes are those in which the
truck driver would have needed to use mirrors to maneuver safely. For this purpose, a study has
9
been conducted to evaluate the types of crashes which could have occurred due to insufficient
field of view for drivers. These crash types include lane change/merge, or LCM, left, LCM right,
and left and right turn with conflict vehicles approaching from rear. The observational fatal data
for this purpose was taken from the LTCCS and the TIFA study compiled by the UMTRI. Injury
and property damage data files were taken from the National Automotive Sampling System,
General Estimates System (NASS GES), which is a nationally representative sample of police-
reported crashes compiled by NHTSA. From the results it was summarized that mirror-relevant
crashes account for almost 20% of truck crash involvements and serious measures need to be
taken to minimize these by providing better facilities that provide drivers with a broader view of
their surroundings.
As mentioned briefly in the previous section, the second study was undertaken by the
UMTRI TIFA project (2). In contrast to the LTCCS, a telephone survey was conducted on fatal
truck crashes in the country. Also, police reports were acquired for all crashes as a part of the
survey. Another project was conducted with an objective to identify the issues that contributed
most to commercial motor vehicle crashes, fatalities, and injuries in the state of Michigan (5).
This was done by conducting a detailed analysis of the available data, which included the
Michigan vehicle crash files, Trucks Involved in Fatal Accidents file, and Motor Carrier
Management Information System Inspection and Carrier Files, for the period 2001-2005.
Another study analyzed the causes of heavy truck aggressiveness in two-vehicle truck/light
vehicle crashes and also derived detailed models which will help propose the required truck
structural countermeasures to mitigate collision severity (4). Three years of data from 1996 to
1998 were used from FARS, TIFA, and GES for this project.
10
Another report was submitted to Congress on the Large Truck Crash Causation Study
conducted by the FMCSA and NHTSA (19). This study has a unique database which not only
covers the descriptive data of the crashes occurring but also incorporates pre-crash factors such
as driver fatigue and distraction, vehicle condition, weather, and roadway conditions. Unlike the
FARS, which only deals with fatal crashes, and NHTSA‘s GES, which considers only
approximately 1,000 per crash—in a crash case. Coding of the events surrounding each crash is
categorized as ―critical event,‖ ―critical reason‖ for the critical event, and ―associated factors‖
present. This study involved three crash severity levels: fatal, capacitating injury and non-
incapacitating injury. The primary protocol for the truck body type is the same as in FARS. The
data has been categorized into 12 different crash types. From the analysis, it was concluded that
rear-end crash type is one of the most predominant cases observed among truck crashes. The
LTCCS database has been made electronically available to the public since 2006. However, this
data does not contain information from interviews. The full database, inclusive of interview data,
will be made available to researchers, private groups, universities and others upon request.
Blower et al. conducted yet another study by applying the NHTSA‘s definition of trucks
to the TIFA project with one exception. Trucks in the TIFA file include all of those with a Gross
Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) over 10,000 pounds, but emergency vehicles, such as
ambulances or fire trucks, are excluded. As will be seen below, exclusion of fire trucks and
ambulances accounts for only a small part of the difference between FARS and TIFA. Apart
from this exclusion, both FARS and TIFA count the same types of vehicles as trucks. The
comparison of data files is based on the 1999 data years for both FARS and TIFA. Using
NHTSA'a definition of large trucks in FARS, the 1999 FARS file identified 4,898 trucks
11
involved in fatal accidents in 1999. The TIFA file for that year has 5,233 trucks, a difference of
335 trucks or about 6.8% more trucks in the TIFA file than in FARS. The difference of 335 is the
result of 40 cases that were counted in FARS as trucks but do not qualify as trucks in the TIFA
file, and 375 cases identified as trucks in TIFA but which were classified as some other type of
Rau conducted a study about drowsy driver detection and the effects of employing a
warning system for commercial vehicle drivers (21). The research has been conducted by
NHTSA and its partners since 1996 in order to quantify the loss of alertness among commercial
vehicle drivers. Drowsiness is measured using a three minute running average of slow eyelid
closures, as assessed by the Drowsy Driver Warning System, DDWS, during nighttime driving.
It depends on the capability of the camera to detect infrared light reflected back to the source at
the camera from the driver‘s retina. By this detection system, the measures of performance at
braking, closing, lane changing, lane keeping, and speed maintenance were observed. The first
objective was to find drowsiness-level distributions and the differences between the distributions
with and without the DDWS. The second objective was to see the variations in drowsiness with a
number of independent factors like age, nights of sleep, and so forth. From the experimental
analysis, it was concluded that further understanding was needed about highway safety benefits,
fleet acceptance, operational utility, and fatigue management practices so that the fatigue crash
Garber et al. compared the safety effects of a uniform speed limit, USL, for all vehicles
as opposed to a differential speed limit, DSL, for cars and heavy trucks (22). Crash and volume
data were synthesized from 17 states to obtain the sample of interstate highways used in this
12
study. A modified empirical Bayes framework was used to evaluate crash frequency variations
with changes in speed limit. The basic methodology of the modified Bayes approach was
conducted in four steps. Initially, the number of crashes at each site within a certain state as a
function of related independent variables (in this case traffic volume and segment length) was
created. Then, the number of expected after-period crashes at each site was determined and their
summation ‗π‘ was calculated. Next, the sum of the actual crashes that did occur at each site was
computed as ‗λ‘. Afterwards, the ratio of total actual crashes to the total expected after-period
crashes was determined and checked to see if the ratio of effectiveness ‗Ѳ‘ was significantly
different from unity by using appropriate confidence intervals. From the experimental analysis, it
was concluded that the modified Bayes approach showed no consistent safety impacts
attributable to differential or uniform speed limit policies for rural interstate highways. In most
cases, it was found that the actual number of crashes for the after period was larger than the
Daniel et al. described the use of Poisson regression and negative binomial accident
prediction models for truck accidents on an urban arterial with heavy truck volumes and a large
number of signalized intersections (23). The research had a twofold objective. The first goal was
to identify the factors that impact the occurrence of truck crashes on urban arterials with
signalized intersections. This was achieved by developing an accident prediction model. The
second objective was to conclude on an approach which would account for signalized
intersections in one unified prediction model. For these objectives, a prediction model was
developed for truck crashes on a truck route in New Jersey on Route 1. A truck accident database
for the state of New Jersey from 1998-2000 was collected for the study. Two models were
developed for the selected roadway: unified, including both intersection and non-intersection
13
locations, and separate models. For both models, the goodness of fit between the expected
number of accidents and explanatory variables was evaluated based on both Pearson Rp2and
deviation RD2 values. It was concluded from the model that horizontal and vertical curvature
were critical factors in determining the safety of the roadway. A reduced model derived from the
above two models proved to be more efficient in both types of roadway segments.
driving hours-of-services, HOS, rules implemented in January 2004 (24). The rules that had been
largely unchanged for more than 65 years were revised by the FMCSA. The new HOS rules
included a number of prominent changes designed primarily to promote greater daily sleep and
to encourage more regular daily work-rest cycles. Some of the changes included a daily
minimum off-duty requirement of 10 hours, maximum hours of driving prior to going off duty as
11 hours, and also maximum tour-of-duty (beyond which driving is not permitted) as 14 hours.
Features of the old rule that did not support or promote driver alertness were considered in this
amended version. The results were the opinions expressed by a diverse group of people and there
was a conceded upon positive view of the new rules. They also enabled the drivers to regularize
System (FARS) database to compare car-car crashes with car-truck crashes (25). The research
was conducted in three stages. The first stage sought to identify driving maneuvers or actions of
cars and large trucks that have a higher chance of resulting in fatal car-truck collisions than fatal
collisions with a similar vehicle. The second stage involved discerning patterns associated with
these driving actions through a detailed examination of actual crash reports. The third stage
involved exploring ways that the risks associated with the identified driving actions can be
14
effectively communicated to motorists with special attention to the fit between study findings
and potential instructional approaches. A limitation of the study is that it did not address nonfatal
crashes, single-vehicle crashes, or crashes involving more than two vehicles; these constraints
are important to keep in mind because fatal and injury crashes are not similar in their causes or in
Khattak and Targa explored the elements of ―injury severity‖ and ―total harm‖ in cases of
truck-involved work zone crashes (26). Their characteristics were empirically compared to those
of non-truck-involved collisions. For this study, a unique dataset from the Highway Safety
Information System (HSIS) with additional variables coded from narratives in police reports was
used. Also, the year 2000 HSIS data for the state of North Carolina was used to develop the
work-zone-related crashes. Using this data, ordered probit models were estimated for the most
seriously injured occupant in the crash, and linear regression models for ―total harm‖ in the
crash were estimated. The linear model contained the variables of frequency and severity of
injuries by transforming them into numerical values. From the results, certain situations which
seemed to enhance the probability of work-zone-truck collisions were observed. The instance in
which the road was completely closed with a detour in the opposite direction seemed to be the
most predominant case for truck crashes in these areas. Also two-way undivided roads and
places where the traffic moved out of normal paths were other scenarios which seem to enhance
driving HOS rules implemented in January 2004 (27). The rules that were largely unchanged for
15
2.5 Speed Limit, Urban /Rural Contrast, Rear-End/Angle Collisions, and Roadway Parameters
Dabbour et al. analyzed radius requirements for reverse horizontal curves so as to attain
better vehicle stability for trucks travelling on freeway interchanges (28). For this purpose,
several models developed on vehicle stability were studied and finally, the most advanced
extension of these models, a computer program called vehicle dynamic models roadway analysis
and design (VDM RoAD), was used. This program had a built-in vehicle library that contained
most of the AASHTO-designed trucks. Two different alignment combinations were used; one
with the effect of introducing reverse curvature and the other with the effect of introducing
vertical alignment in the reverse curves. Geometric alignment data of the curves were the data
input for the program. By using the different optimum models suggested by the program, it was
analyzed that an increase is required in the minimum radius of horizontal curves to compensate
for both effects of reverse curvature and vertical alignment. This change was shown to reduce
Miaou and Lum illustrated ways in which the Poisson regression model can be used to
evaluate the effects of highway geometric design on truck accident involvement rates (29). The
model applied in this study can also be applied to any type of interest, such as roadway class,
vehicle configuration, and accident severity. From the model an estimate for reduction in truck
accident involvement caused by improvement in geometric design elements was also calculated.
The percentage of reduction for the model could be specified to estimate the required variations
in the geometric properties. For this analysis, the Highway Safety Information System was used
Aty and Abdelwahab presented an analysis of the effect of the geometric incompatibility
of light truck vehicles (LTV) on driver‘s visibility of other passenger cars involved in rear-end
16
crashes (30). The objective of this paper was to explore the effect of the lead vehicle‘s size on
rear-end crash configurations. Four types of rear-end crash configurations were taken: car-car,
car-truck, truck-car, and truck-truck. The GES databases were used in this analysis. Nested logit
models were calibrated to estimate the probabilities of the four crash configurations. These were
created as a function of the driver‘s age, gender, vehicle type, vehicle maneuver, light conditions,
driver‘s visibility, and speed. It was concluded from the results that the driver‘s visibility and
inattention in following a vehicle had the largest effect on being involved in a rear-end collision.
Also, the possibilities of a car-truck rear-end crash increased in cases where the lead vehicle
stopped suddenly.
Diener and Richardson studied truck-involved fatalities in Missouri, where nearly 70% of
those who die in traffic crashes are not wearing seatbelts (31). NHTSA determined a vehicle
involvement rate by dividing the number of vehicles involved in fatal rural/ urban crashes by the
vehicle miles traveled. As to laws regarding seat belts, Missouri is a secondary enforcement
state, meaning that drivers and passengers in violation of the law can only be cited when the
vehicle has been stopped by a police officer for a separate offense. In other words, a police
officer in Missouri cannot stop and cite a driver or passenger solely for not wearing a seat belt. A
survey was conducted in several districts and truck drivers were asked to respond to statements
such as ―If I were in a crash, I would want to have my seat belt on,” and the number drivers who
agreed to the questions and their level of agreement was noted and studied.
Burgess studied data from the FARS for the period 1994–2003 to compare characteristics
of fatal rural and urban crashes (32). The study found that there are approximately 42% more
fatal crashes in rural areas compared to urban areas; however, there are fewer vehicle miles
traveled in rural areas than urban areas. In addition, fatal rural crashes are more likely to involve
17
multiple fatalities, rollovers, and trucks. Fatal rural crashes more often occur on curved roadways
and have greater vehicle damage. Head-on crashes are more prevalent in rural areas than in urban
areas. Finally, the length of time for emergency medical services to arrive at the scene is longer
Majid investigated the effect of heavy commercial vehicles on the capacity and overall
situation because the mixed traffic flow on the freeways has different impacts. This lack of
homogeny poses a problem for freeway operations and safety, especially when the truck traffic
percentage is on the higher in comparison to passenger cars. For this purpose, traffic surveys
were performed at two freeway sites in Tokyo and one freeway site in Melbourne. Video data
was filmed using six cameras for six hours at each site with the capacity of tracking a vehicle for
a distance of 700m. The data was microscopically analyzed and variables like the truck‘s
position (lead or lag vehicle), relative speed time gap, and space headways were estimated.
Using this data, various mathematical models were developed and nonlinear regression
techniques were performed in order to calibrate parameters for different T values in the models.
The most optimum models were estimated using optimum response variables, such as the
Duncan et al. illustrated the impact of the variable injury severity in truck-passenger car
rear-end collisions (34). For this, two objectives were targeted. The first objective was to
understand the factors that influence the passenger vehicle occupant injury severity in car-truck
rear-end collisions on divided roads. The second objective was to illustrate the use of the ordered
probit model application on particular factors of injury severity levels. For this project, the
18
Federal Highway Administration‘s HSIS database was used along with police reports and
roadway inventory data. The state of North Carolina was chosen for this analysis as it has a large
number of truck routes. The ordered probit model proposed for the given analysis had the
dependent variable (injury severity) coded as 0, 1, 2, 3, 4. The independent variables were factors
such as speed limit, light conditions, weather conditions, age, gender and so forth. From the
model, it was found that environmental and roadway conditions contributed majorly in these
types of crashes. Also factors such as darkness, high-speed differentials, and high-speed limits
Pickrell demonstrated in his study that while the overall proportion of passenger vehicle
drivers with alcohol involvement in fatal crashes is lower in older age groups, the median blood
alcohol concentration (BAC) was generally higher for those age groups (35). However, for
motorcycle operators, age groups with the highest levels of alcohol involvement also had the
highest median BAC levels. In order to understand the relationship between alcohol involvement
in fatal crashes and the median BAC levels of the drivers involved, this study examined FARS
data at several different levels, including level of alcohol involvement, median driver/operator
age, median BAC by age group within vehicle type, and median BAC by year and vehicle type
across all age groups. Data from 2004 are presented in the main body of the report, and data from
2000-2003 are included at the end of the report as a comparison of trends. This research work
identifies differences between age groups and within vehicle types, based on the proportion of
drivers with positive BACs: those greater than or equal to 0.01. This study accomplished this
trucks, and vans—driver‘s and motorcycle operator‘s BAC levels across age groups. Passenger
vehicle drivers in the age groups 20-29 and 30-39 had the highest proportion of drivers with
19
positive BAC levels. However, motorcycle operators in the age groups 30-39 and 40-49 had the
Yan et al. conducted a study on rear-end collisions in trucks using two national crash
databases (2000-2004): the FARS and the GES (36). Overall and fatal truck-involved rear-end
collisions were both investigated in this paper. Three groups were used to classify two-vehicle
rear-end collisions in this study. Using the vehicle's striking/struck role as a basis, crash
categories were car-car (car hitting car), car-truck (car hitting truck), and truck-car (truck hitting
car). There was comparison of occurrence conditions of the three rear-end crash types so that
potential risk factors associated with the truck-involved crashes—such as driver characteristics,
results showed a significant association between overall truck-involved rear-end crashes and
factors such as gender, driver age, alcohol use, speed, day of week, interstate, weather condition,
divided/undivided highway, and lighting condition. There was also a significant association
between fatal truck-involved rear-end collisions and gender, driver age, alcohol use, day of
week, divided/undivided highway, and lighting condition. More information regarding effective
crash countermeasures and a better understanding of track-related rear-end crash risk are
Yan et al. conducted another study by considering data from FARS for the years 2000-
2004 (37). Only two-vehicle angular crashes were considered. The crashes were then divided
into truck-car and car-car categories. The at-fault parameter in these categories was considered
and the truck-truck crashes category was excluded from the analysis. The dataset was further
filtered by citing as two-vehicle crashes those in which only one driver was at fault and the other
20
was not. Multi-logistic regression modeling was used in this project. The dependent variable is y,
which describes the type of crash. Pr(y=m|x) is the probability of observing outcome m given the
severity which focused on univariate relationships between severity and an explanatory variable
of interest (e.g., helmet use) (38). The potential ambiguity and bias that univariate analyses
create in identifying the causality of severity has generated the need for multivariate analyses in
which the effects of all factors that influence accident severity are considered. This study
attempts to address this need by presenting a multinomial logit formulation of motorcycle rider
motorcycle accidents from the state of Washington, they estimated a multivariate model of
motorcycle rider severity that considers environmental factors, roadway conditions, vehicle
characteristics, and rider attributes. Their findings show that the multinomial logit formulation
used was a promising approach to evaluate the determinants of motorcycle accident severity.
Moonesinghe et al. conducted a binary response model for rollovers (jackknifes) and
stated that the probability of a rollover (jackknife), given a single-truck fatal crash has occurred,
binary response model for rollovers (jackknifes), Y is equal to 1 if there is a rollover (jackknife)
and 0 if otherwise. The statistical problem was to estimate the probability that Y=1, considered
as a function of the explanatory variables. TIFA data were analyzed using a logit model, which is
a widely used binary-response model. The explanatory variables used in the models were
21
2.8 Countermeasure Ideas
Samuel et al. conducted a study about drowsy driver detection and the effects of
employing a warning system for commercial vehicle drivers (40). The research has been
conducted since 1996 by NHTSA and its partners, in order to quantify the loss of alertness
among commercial vehicle drivers. By experimentation, it was concluded that a valid measure of
loss of alertness among drivers can be made by the percentage of eyelid closure over the pupil
over time (Perclos). The first objective was to find drowsiness level distributions and differences
between these values with and without the DDWS. The second objective was to see variations in
drowsiness with a number of independent factors like age, nights of sleep, and so forth. From the
experimental analysis, it was concluded that further understanding was needed about highway
safety benefits, fleet acceptance, operational utility, and fatigue management practices so that
Cate et al. presented the results of an evaluation of truck lane restrictions conducted using
the VISSIM microscopic traffic simulation software package as an analysis tool (41). The
objective of this application was to study truck lane restriction at a very detailed level. The
VISSIM traffic simulation model has a number of user-adjustable parameters such as lane usage,
free-flow speeds, lane changing behavior, vehicle power, weight, braking characteristics, and
traffic composition. The focus is on lane restrictions where large trucks are prohibited from using
the far-left travel lane on freeway sections with three or more lanes of travel in a single direction.
In order to make the results of the testing as realistic as possible, field traffic data was utilized to
create volumes and truck percentages representative of actual freeway operations. The
simulations were conducted in two scenarios; firstly, all vehicles were free to travel in any lane
and, secondly, trucks were restricted to the two right lanes of travel. After the simulations were
22
completed, the output files generated were used to calculate the performance statistics on factors
such as vehicle density, level of service, and average travel time. The ―aggressiveness‖ of lane
changes was seen to have increased by reducing the minimum distance and maximum speed
differential between vehicles. Another important measure that allowed for an evaluation of the
safety impact of truck lane restrictions was the frequency of lane changes. As the number of lane
changes decreased, the opportunity for collision was reduced by limiting the interaction between
the vehicles.
countermeasure to reduce congestion, enhance safety, and improve free flow of freight (42). The
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) contracted with the Center for Urban
Transportation Research (CUTR) to lead this research project. The methodology used involved
selecting sites in Florida that warranted consideration for truckways or reserved truck lanes.
Important factors such as truck crash rates, truck volumes, and percent of trucks in traffic mix
were evaluated based on FDOT data. Then, GIS models were constructed and tested in selected
roadway segments to evaluate the considered parameters. It was concluded that most of the
interstate system is suitable for consideration of exclusive truck facilities. Truck congestion in
some areas appeared to have decreased by 15% by introducing this model. Crashes were also
Reiskin studied the proposal made by Stephen Kratzke, NHTSA‘s associate administrator
for rule making, at a truck part makers meeting in Las Vegas in February 2008 (43). In view of
reducing truck-involved fatalities, NHTSA was planning to release rules on brake stopping
distance, brake hose materials, and electronic and roll-stability control. The agency wanted to use
technology for this situation, not by proposing larger drum brakes or disc brakes, but by setting a
23
distance-based standard on the trucks. In April they also published a rule mandating electronic
stability control on all vehicles with gross vehicle weight ratings of less than 10,000 pounds by
2011. That would affect Class 2 trucks. Apart from these rules, the agency was also planning to
release regulations on brake hose standards and upgraded tire standards towards the end of the
year.
Research Institute focusing on driver-specific behaviors and events, and their relationship to
future truck crash involvement (44). Driver-specific data were used by the research team to
design and test a logistic regression model. The data was collected from the MCMIS and the
Commercial Driver‘s License Information System (CDLIS). Initially, statistical tests, including
Chi-square analyses, were done to assess the significant difference between future crash rates
and drivers‘ behavior. The regression model included specific violations discovered during
roadside inspections, driver traffic conviction information and past accident involvement. These
were taken as the independent variables and, through the model, the probability of crash
occurrences were obtained as the dependent variable. The variables named intercept, reckless
driving violation, serious speeding conviction, and hours of service violation seemed to be the
topmost crucial factors in reducing the crash scenario. From the analysis, several
countermeasures were recommended, which when effectively enforced, could bring the required
results.
24
Chapter 3 Methodology
3.1 Data
Data for the study were procured from the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration‘s FARS database. FARS database documents detailed data on vehicles, drivers,
roadways, and environmental conditions recorded in police crash reports, emergency medical
service reports, hospital records, and coroners‘ reports of all fatal crashes in the United States. It
contained details of fatal crashes in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. This
database was conceived, designed, and developed by the National Center for Statistics and
Analysis (NCSA) to aid the traffic safety community in identifying traffic safety problems and
providing countermeasures for better driving standards (52). NCSA is a division of the NHTSA
that provides a wide range of analytical and statistical support to NHTSA. NCSA responds to
requests for data from various sources like state and local governments, research organizations,
private citizens, auto and insurance industries, Congress, and the media.
NHTSA has a contract with an agency in each state to obtain information on fatal
crashes. This information is compiled and put into a standard format by FARS analysts who are
state employees specially trained for this job. Fatal motor vehicle traffic crash data obtained from
various state agencies are assembled and coded on standard FARS forms. Various forms used in
assembling the information are Police Accident Reports (PARS), state vehicle registration files,
state driver licensing files, state highway department data, vital statistics, death certificates,
coroner/medical examiner reports, hospital medical records, and emergency medical service
reports. FARS was established in 1975 and data from the establishment date to the present is
available in several formats. FARS data is broadly used within NHTSA to answer many queries
on the safety of vehicles, drivers, traffic conditions, and roadways. Fatal crash reports can be
25
accessed at national and state levels by a FARS analyst acting in response to overall traffic safety
issues.
In order to make an entry into the database, a crash must involve a motor vehicle
traveling on a trafficway customarily open to the public, and must result in the death of an
occupant of a vehicle or non-motorist within 30 days of the crash. The FARS database includes
details of each and every such fatal crash reported. Each crash is characterized in terms of crash,
vehicle, roadway, and people involved with the help of more than 100 coded variables. All these
variables are reported on accident, vehicle, driver, and person forms, respectively. The accident
form contains information such as time and location, first harmful event, weather conditions
under which the crash occurred, number of vehicles, and people involved. Vehicle and driver
forms record details like vehicle type, impact points, most harmful event, and driver‘s license
status. The person form contains details about each individual involved in the crash, such as the
age and gender of the person; whether the person is the driver, passenger, or non-motorist; injury
severity; and restraint use. Individual privacy is maintained by protecting details such as name,
address and any other personal information. Overall alcohol estimates, which describe the
contribution of the alcohol factor in fatal crashes, as well as driver and non-occupant BAC
estimates, are present in the FARS alcohol file, which is an add-on to the data files when no
The FARS Encyclopedia is a web-based tool that facilitates downloading the data and
generating results through queries. It also consists of reports and fact sheets drawn from
published FARS data for the relevant year and state. The reports are classified under trends,
crashes, vehicles, and people. The ―trends‖ section covers motor vehicle crashes and fatalities
over a range of years while reports under ―crashes‖ present statistics about motor vehicle crashes
26
based on the injury severity of the person. The ―vehicles‖ section presents details about the kinds
of vehicles involved in fatal motor vehicle crashes. Reports under the people section provide data
on the kinds of people, drivers, passengers, or non-motorists, involved in motor vehicle crashes.
The FARS Query System is a web interface that allows users to perform their own custom
queries such as case listings and univariate and cross tabulations. FARS data files are available in
an archive as a public resource to download in file transfer protocol (FARS FTP). This website
enables users to process the data using their own computer systems.
From this database, truck and non-truck crashes were the two categories examined in the
comparative study. In this study, a truck crash was defined as a crash which involved at least one
truck whose gross body weight was greater than 10,000 pounds. A non-truck crash was defined as
a crash which did not involve a truck. In the FARS database, trucks were divided into different
categories depending on their GVWR. Trucks considered for this study were vehicles with the
61: a single-unit straight truck with GVWR greater than 10,000 lbs. and less than
62: a single-unit straight truck with GVWR greater than 19,500 lbs. and less than
63: a single-unit straight truck with GVWR greater than 26,000 lbs.
66: a truck/tractor with any number of trailing units and any weight
67: a medium/heavy pickup truck with GVWR greater than 10,000 lbs.
71: any unknown single-unit or combination unit medium truck with GVWR
27
72: any unknown single-unit or combination-unit heavy truck with GVWR greater
These specific body types were considered as they included trucks which had a gross body
weight greater than 10,000 pounds. All other motor vehicles, other than those body types and ones
which had a gross body weight less than 10,000 pounds, were considered as non-truck vehicles.
Files from the database were merged using unique crash, person, and vehicle
identification codes and by employing SAS computing software (53). The merged files were
checked so as to obtain a unique unduplicated crashes, people, and vehicles list to retrieve
using filtering techniques in Microsoft Excel and Access. After suitably merging and filtering
accident, person, and vehicle files, fatal truck crash data for the five-year time period from 2003
to 2007 was combined and truck and non-truck crash cases were separated to obtain consolidated
Further, the values obtained were compared at various levels to analyze trends and
patterns of specific crash parameters with respect to time or type of crash, or the extent of fault
for the drivers involved. Also, certain pairs of parameters were selected to observe differences in
driver, crash, and vehicle-related factors were extracted to compare the existence of these factors
28
3.2 Analysis Methods
crash-related factors while comparing truck and non-truck crashes in the given data set. The
computation of likelihood ratios, using Bayesian posterior probabilities, is valid and useful. It
makes good logical sense, while producing significant results from projected analysis of crash
factors.
Equation 3.1 describes the conditional probability of the occurrence of a driver, vehicle,
P(Truck / CC ) P(CC )
P(CC / Truck ) (3.1)
P(Truck )
where,
P(Truck/CC) = Probability that the crash was a truck crash, given that a
and those in which a truck crash and its contributory factor were coded
together.
the dataset.
29
P(Truck) = Overall probability that a crash was a truck crash and was estimated
Similarly, the conditional probability of a contributory cause for a given non-truck crash
is estimated, and the ratio of these probabilities generates the likelihood ratio of that contributory
The likelihood ratio of a given contributory factor being recorded in a truck crash as
compared with a non-truck crash was assessed from crash records. This likelihood ratio is the
probability of a crash being a truck crash when the contributory factor was recorded, as
compared with the probability of a crash being a non-truck crash when the same contributory
factor was identified. The larger the likelihood ratio, the greater the association between the
Multinomial logistic regression modeling, which was also used in this study, is an
efficient tool to analyze crash data (36, 37, 38, and 39). The dependent variable in this modeling
technique is denoted as y, which describes the type of crash. Pr(y=m|x) is the probability of
combination xβm.
where,
where,
In this study, the SAS LOGISTIC procedure was used to perform the multinomial logistic
regression. The dependent variable was the type of crash which took the binary form depending
on whether it was a truck crash or non-truck crash. The independent variables considered were
driver age, gender, national highway, light condition, weather condition, alcohol use, and 35
other factors. These variables included several crash, driver, vehicle, and environmental factors
using statistical modeling software SAS version 9.1. As the selection criteria of variables to be
included in the model, a 95% confidence level was used in which the probability should be less
31
than 0.05. Colinearity of individual variables was also checked before considering variables in
the model, and if such a relationship existed, one of the two correlated variables was discarded
The LOGISTIC procedure used in developing this model fits linear logistic regression
models for binary or ordinal response data by the method of maximum likelihood. The maximum
likelihood estimation is carried out with either the Fisher-scoring algorithm or the Newton-
The LOGISTIC procedure provides four variable selection methods: forward selection,
backward elimination, stepwise selection, and best subset selection. The best subset selection is
based on the likelihood score statistic. This method identifies a specified number of best models
containing one, two, three variables and so forth, until a single model containing all the
Odds-ratio estimates are displayed along with parameter estimates. You can also specify
the change in the explanatory variables for which odds-ratio estimates are desired. Confidence
intervals for the regression parameters and odds ratios can be computed based either on the
The Wald Chi-Square and Pr > ChiSq are the test statistics and p-values, respectively, for
the hypothesis test that an individual predictor's regression coefficient is zero given the rest of
the predictors are in the model. The Wald Chi-Square test statistic is the squared ratio of the
estimate to the standard error of the respective predictor. The probability that a particular Wald
Chi-Square test statistic is as extreme as, or more so, than what has been observed under the null
32
The ―Model Fit Statistics‖ in Table 4.8 contain the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC),
the Schwarz Criterion (SC), and the negative of twice the log likelihood (-2 Log L) for the
intercept-only model and the fitted model. AIC and SC can be used to compare different models,
Other goodness-of-fit parameters, which the LOGISTIC procedure provides in the output,
be concordant if the observation with the lower ordered response value has a lower
predicted mean score than the observation with the higher ordered response value.
Percent Discordant: If the observation with the lower ordered response value has a higher
predicted mean score than the observation with the higher ordered response value, then
Percent Tied: If a pair of observations with different responses is neither concordant nor
discordant, it is a tie.
Somer's D: A measure used to determine the strength and direction of relation between
pairs of variables. Its values range from -1.0 (all pairs disagree) to 1.0 (all pairs agree). It
is defined as (nc-nd)/t where nc is the number of pairs that are concordant, nd the number
of pairs that are discordant, and t is the number of total number of pairs with different
responses.
Gamma: The Goodman-Kruskal Gamma method does not penalize for ties on either
variable. Its values range from -1.0 (no association) to 1.0 (perfect association). Because
33
it does not penalize for ties, its value will generally be greater than the values for Somer's
D.
the number of possible paired observations and the number of paired observations with
different responses. It is defined to be the ratio of the difference between the number of
concordant pairs and discordant pairs to the number of possible pairs (2(nc-nd)/(N(N-1)).
C: This is another measure of rank correlation of ordinal variables. It ranges from 0 (no
34
Chapter 4 Results and Discussion
Analysis of the data showed that large trucks contribute to more fatalities in other (non-
truck) vehicles than in trucks themselves. On average 84% of fatalities occurring in large truck
crashes in the United States are not occupants of trucks. This section elaborates on the
characteristic analysis conducted on fatal truck crashes in the United States, which used five
One observation made from fatal truck crash data was the direction of impact, which is
the initial point on the truck where the other vehicle collides. As shown in figure 4.1, trucks have
blind spots in all directions, and the initial impact point helps in showing which zone is more
critical for a higher crash risk. By observing the initial point of impact on the truck, the position
of the colliding vehicle with respect to the truck was estimated. From this, the blind spot which
results in a higher crash rate was interpreted. From figure 4.1, it is seen that almost 62.5% of the
cases resulted in trucks having the initial impact on their front side. This might weaken the
argument that the poor visibility ranges on the rear side of trucks leads to a majority of rear-end
crashes in trucks. It is possible that other vehicle drivers need to be more vigilant by driving in
front of rather than by the rear of a truck. Around 15.5% of the crashes were on the left-hand side
of the truck driver. This could be a significant observation because from figure 4.1, it was
observed that the left-hand side of the truck driver has the smallest blind spot zone when
35
70%
62.50%
60%
50%
% of Crashes
40%
30%
20% 15.50%
9.40%
10% 6.50%
2.70% 3.30%
0%
Collision with Front Side Right Hand Left Hand Rear Side Unknown
Object Side of the Side of the
Driver Driver
Point of Impact for the Truck
Alcohol Involvement
The alcohol involvement of drivers is potentially one of the most important contributory
factors resulting in crashes, which could also be the case in truck crashes. Analysis showed that
of all the drunken drivers involved in fatal truck crashes, only 12.7% were truck drivers and the
remaining 87.3% were non-truck drivers with blood alcohol levels higher than the 0.08 mg/ml
limit. This eliminates the misconception that a larger percentage of truck drivers are under
influence of alcohol/drugs leading to fatal crashes. Hence, it can be deduced that in fatal truck
crashes with alcohol involvement, non-truck drivers are more likely to be under the influence of
36
Manner of Collision
The manner of collision of trucks in fatal crashes was observed from the combined
dataset for the period of 2003-2007 and the results are shown in figure 4.2. Angle crashes have
the highest proportion with 34.2%, followed by 23.7% of cases in which the vehicles collided
with a fixed object like a tree, guardrail, or other object. Head-on and rear-end crashes also form
40%
34.2%
35%
30%
% of Fatal Crashes
23.7%
25%
20.4%
20%
16.8%
15%
10%
5% 2.0% 2.3%
0.4%
0%
Single Rear End Head On Angle Sidesweep Sidesweep Unknown
Vehicle same opposite
Crash Direction Direction
Manner of Collision
Speed Limit
Trucks are more difficult to maneuver smoothly as compared to smaller vehicles, and at
higher speeds they have a higher risk of losing control. This can also be one of the factors
contributing to a higher risk of crashes involving trucks. The speed limit of the roadway where
37
the truck is traversing before succumbing to a fatal crash can approximately show the speed of
the truck. As seen in figure 4.3, the percentage of fatal crashes increases with increase in speed
limit up to 60 mph. The range of 51-60 mph has the highest number (an average of 5,280 crashes
per year) of fatal truck crashes in the past five years. The sudden drop in the number of crashes
from 51-60 mph to 61-70 mph may be because of the smaller number of roadways with the latter
speed range.
45%
39.5%
40%
35%
29.9%
30%
% of Crashes
25%
20%
14.6%
15%
10% 8.2%
5% 3.4% 2.7%
1.3%
0.1% 0.2%
0%
No Speed 1-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 Unknown
Limits Posted Speed Range (mph)
especially for trucks which travel on a commercial basis for longer and more strenuous hours. In
a study by Crum and Morrow, they explain that truck driver fatigue plays a major role in the
38
occurrence of a crash. They investigated and established a driver fatigue model to test various
carrier scheduling practices with other driver parameters (45). Another study was done by
Williams et al., to scale the amount of responsibility in drivers by age and gender for all motor
vehicle crashes (46). Here, they compared the number of drivers at fault in different age groups
and gender. From their analysis, they proved that the element of ―responsibility‖ declined with
age until about age 63, at which point it then increased as a function of age.
From Figure 4.4 it is evident that the number of drivers involved in fatal truck crashes is
higher in the age range of 41-50 years than in other groups. With the highest percentage, 29%,
being in this range the graph has an overall normal distribution. Until the range of 41-50 years,
the percentage of fatal truck crashes has an increasing curve and after that range the percentage
39
35%
30% 29.0%
27.3%
% involved in Fatal Crashes
25%
19.5%
20%
15.3%
15%
10%
6.6%
5%
0.8% 0.9% 0.1% 0.6%
0%
11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 Unknown
Truck Driver Age Group (yrs)
Types of Trafficways
Truck maneuverability may become more challenging depending on the type of roadway.
Depending on roadway characteristics, even actions like lane changing and lane merging can
sometimes become critical factors contributing to a crash. Also, the presence of physical dividers
is likely to affect the number of fatal crashes because they have the potential to reduce the
A majority of almost 55.2 % of fatal truck crashes, as shown in figure 4.5, have occurred
on two-way trafficways with no physical division. This shows that this kind of roadway has a
greater potential for fatal crash occurrences. Traffic flowing in opposite directions with no
physical division in between can be one high-risk situation in which the smallest of human errors
40
can result in highly severe crash scenarios. Roadways of this type should be improved by
providing the necessary divisions so as to minimize the frequency of fatal truck crashes.
The number of lanes on two-way trafficways with 55.2 % of crashes was analyzed, and it
has been observed that almost 77.3% of those crashes occurred on two-lane two-way roadways.
The difficulty in controlling the large size of the vehicle in narrow or smaller roadways can be
the reason for this high frequency. Two-lane roadways are often congested and cannot be easily
traversed. This situation as well as the two-way trafficway without any physical division can set
One way
Trafficway Unknown
Divided Highway (0.68%) (1.23%)
Without Traffic
Barrier
(12.68%)
Two-Way
Undivided Trafficway with
Highway Without no Physical
Traffic Barrier Division
(30.21%) (55.20%)
41
Level of Deformation on Urban and Rural Roadways
As seen in figure 4.6, the level of deformation of the vehicles involved in fatal truck
crashes is severely disabling in most cases, which is consistent in both urban and rural roadways.
As large trucks are heavy in weight and volume and since a majority of fatal truck crashes occur
at high speed levels (as was observed in Fig. 4.3), it is evident that consequences of such
conditions result in severe damages to the collided vehicles. However, the percent of severely
disabled vehicles is proportionally smaller in urban areas when compared to rural areas. The
availability of greater space for maneuvering on urban roads along with lower speeds, a
reduction due to the higher traffic volumes, could probably be the reasons for this observation.
80%
73.7%
70%
61.0%
60%
None
50%
% of Crashes
Other (Minor)
40% Functional (Moderate)
Disabling (Severe)
30% Unknown
18.4%
20% 15.0%
12.8%
8.4%
10% 5.5%
1.9% 1.0% 2.3%
0%
Rural Roadways Urban Roadways
Type of Roadway
Figure 4.6. Level of Deformation of all Vehicles Involved in Fatal Truck Crashes
42
Truck Driver At-Fault Factors
Various types of truck driver-related factors have contributed to fatal crashes as shown in
figure 4.7. Around 28.1% of truck drivers have contributed to fatal truck crashes due to non-
compliance with traffic regulations. Improper driving is another factor, which in 24.6% of cases
has contributed to fatal truck crashes. Categories of improper driving include factors such as
running off the road, erratic lane change, following improperly, failure to keep in lane properly,
and so forth. Also, as the figure shows, 15.8% of truck drivers involved in fatal truck crashes had
Mental Condition
Improper Driving (15.8%)
(24.6%)
Possible Distractions,
(8.2%)
Vision Obscured
Miscellaneous
Conditions (3.2%)
Factors (5.7%) Environmental
Conditions (4.8%)
43
4.2 Truck Striking/Struck Comparison
In this section fatal truck crashes are divided into two categories: truck striking and truck
struck. In the former, the truck strikes another vehicle first in the crash and in the latter the truck
is struck first by another vehicle thus resulting in a crash. The analysis was done by comparing
these two impact categories with one another. A similar framework was adapted to the current
data set, as shown in figure 4.8, to observe the crashes on different types of roadways over the
It was observed that the truck striking and truck struck categories have a high number of
crashes on state highways as compared with other crashes which have a high number of crashes
on interstates rather than other types of roadways. A truck striking another vehicle results in a
higher number of crashes than a truck being struck on both interstates and state highways. It is
pertinent to note that this comparison has equal proportions in the case of U.S. highways.
44
40
37.8%
35
28.9% 29.3%
30 26.9% 25.8% 26.4%
25.3 25.4
% of Crashes
25 Interstate
19.1% U.S.Highway
20 18.5% 17.1 18.1%
State Highway
15 Other roads
10
0
Truck Striking Truck Struck Other Crashes
Type of Crash
Figure 4.8. Fatal Truck Crashes by Roadway Type in Truck Striking/Struck Conditions
When truck striking and truck struck were studied under different light conditions, it was
observed that the proportion of cases where trucks are struck was smaller under daylight
conditions than cases where the truck strikes other vehicles, as shown in figure 4.9. In constrast,
the percentage of trucks being struck is higher in dark or dark but lighted conditions when
45
80
67.1% 71.7%
70
61.0%
60
% of Crashes
50 Daylight
40 34.7% Dark/Dark Lightened
29.2%
30 24.6% Dawn/Dusk
20
10 4.3% 3.4%
3.7%
0
Truck Striking Truck Struck Other Crashes
Type of Crash
Figure 4.9. Truck Crashes in Different Light Conditions under Striking/Struck Types
Fatal crash data for the period of 2003-2007 was divided into crashes which involved
trucks and those which did not involve trucks, or non-truck crashes. Different characteristic
factors such as initial point of impact, driver age, posted speed limits, manner of collision, level
of deformation, the rural/urban split, types of traffic flowways, and roadway categories were
compared between truck and non-truck crashes. Percentages in each sub-category were
calculated by taking the total number of truck or non-truck crashes as the base value.
It can be seen from figure 4.10 that the initial impact point for vehicles in both truck and
non-truck fatal crashes was mostly on the front side. Although all other categories had lower
proportions in truck and non-truck crashes, the left-hand side of the driver as the impact point
46
70%
62.2% 62.7%
60%
Trucks
50%
% of Crashes
Non-Truck
40% Vehicles
30%
20% 16.2%
9.3% 9.5%10.8%
10% 5.7% 6.6% 6.6%
2.5% 3.0% 4.9%
0%
No Collision Front Side Right Hand Left Hand Side Rear Side Unknown
with the Truck Side of the of the Driver
Driver
Point of Impact for the Truck
Figure 4.10. Initial Impact Point for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes
the age group 41-50 years, whereas the non-truck drivers were mostly in the 21-30 years age
group. Figure 4.11 shows that starting from the age group of 31-40 truck drivers had a larger
When the overall trend lines in both truck and non-truck drivers were observed, there was
a difference in the pattern. Truck drivers had almost a normal distribution with the line, peaking
at the age range of 41-50 years, whereas non-truck drivers had the trend line skewed towards the
younger population with the peak at the 21-30 years. This showed that younger drivers have a
larger proportion of involvement in non-truck crashes and middle-aged drivers have a larger
47
35%
30% 29.0%
27.3%
24.4%
25%
Truck Drivers
% of Crashes
19.5%
20%
Non-Truck
15.5% 15.3% 15.9% Drivers
15.2%
15%
10.8%
10%
6.6% 6.6%
5.2%
5% 2.9% 2.1%
0.8% 0.9% 0.6%
0.1%
0%
11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 81-90 Unknown
Driver Age Group (yrs)
Distribution of truck and non-truck crashes in different speed limit ranges is shown in
figure 4.12. In both truck and non-truck crashes, the maximum number of crashes are in the 51-
60 mph range. In the speed-limit range of 21-50 mph, non-trucks had more fatal crashes than
trucks, whereas between 51-70 mph trucks seemed to have more fatal crashes than non-trucks.
This shows that in lower speeds non-trucks have a higher proportion of fatal crashes, and in
48
45%
39.5%
40%
35% 33.3%
Truck Crashes
29.9%
30%
Non-Truck
% of Crashes
25% Crashes
19.1%
20% 18.1%
14.6% 14.5%
15%
10.1%
10% 8.2%
5% 3.4%
2.7% 2.7%
1.3% 1.3%
0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.5%
0%
No Speed 1-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61-70 71-80 Unknown
Limits
Posted Speed Range (mph)
Figure 4.12. Posted Speed Limit for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes
crashes but most of the fatal truck crashes were angle crashes. Also proportionately, there were
more rear-end, head-on and angle crashes involving trucks than non-trucks.
49
70%
61.6%
60%
Truck Crashes
50%
Non-Truck
Crashes
% of Crashes
40%
34.2%
30%
23.7%
20.4% 20.3%
20% 16.8%
9.9%
10%
5.4%
2.0% 2.3%
1.2% 1.1% 0.4%0.5%
0%
Single Rear End Head On Angle Sidesweep Sidesweep Unknown
Vehicle Same Opposite
Crash Direction Direction
Manner of Collision
Both truck and non-truck fatal crashes most commonly resulted in disabling vehicle
deformations as shown in figure 4.14. However, fatal non-truck crashes had a higher percentage,
78.4%, of severe and/or disabling vehicle deformations than fatal truck crashes. Also, it was
observed from figure 4.15 that more than half of the crashes in trucks and non-trucks occurred on
two-way trafficways with no physical division. Fatal non-truck crashes had a higher percentage,
69.9%, of occurrence on two-way trafficways with no physical division than fatal truck crashes.
Other types of traffic flowways, such as divided highways with or without traffic barriers, were
50
90%
78.4%
80%
69.3% Truck
70% Crashes
60% Non-Truck
Crashes
% of Crashes
50%
40%
30%
20% 16.2%
9.9% 12.0%
10% 5.7%
3.2% 2.5%
1.5% 1.5%
0%
None Other (Minor) Functional Disabling Unknown
(Moderate) (Severe)
Level of Deformation
Figure 4.14. Level of Deformation for Truck and Non-Truck Crash Vehicles
80%
69.9%
70%
Truck Crashes
60% 55.2%
Non-Truck Crashes
% of Crashes
50%
40%
30.2%
30%
20% 18.3%
12.7%
10% 8.6%
0.7% 0.9% 1.2% 2.4%
0%
Two-Way Divided Divided One way Unknown
Trafficway with Highway Highway Trafficway
no Physical Without Traffic Without Traffic
Division Barrier Barrier
Type of Trafficflow Way
51
Arterial roadways in both urban and rural sectors had a higher predominance of fatal
truck crashes, whereas collector and local roads had a higher predominance of non-truck crashes,
40%
35%
35%
Truck Crashes
30% Non-Truck Crashes
25%
25%
22%
% of Crashes
20% 18%
15%
15% 13%
12% 11%
10% 9% 9%
10%
6%
5% 4% 4% 3%
2%
0%
Rural Rural Rural Rural Urban Urban Urban Urban
Principal Minor Collector Local Principal Minor Collector Local
Arterial Arterial Road Arterial Arterial Road
Rural/ Urban
Figure 4.16. Rural Urban Contrast for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes
Different types of roadways on which truck and non-truck crashes occurred are shown in
figure 4.17. Trucks had a larger proportion of fatal crashes on interstates and highways, whereas
other county and municipality roads had a higher proportion of fatal non-truck crashes. A larger
presence of trucks on these major arterials and roadways might be one of the causes for this high
52
35%
30.3%
30% 28.1% Truck Crashes
25.1%
24.2% Non-Truck
25%
21.3% Crashes
% of Crashes
20%
15.1%
15% 14.5%
10.8%
9.1%
10%
6.8%
5.1% 4.7%
5%
1.5% 2.6%
0%
Interstate U.S. State County Township Municipality Other
Highway Highway Road
Type of Roadway
Figure 4.17. Type of Roadway for Fatal Truck and Non-Truck Crashes
80%
72.0% 75.5%
70%
60%
Truck Crashes
50%
% of Crashes
Non-Truck Crashes
40%
30%
20%
13.5%
12.0%
8.9%
10% 6.9%
1.3% 1.3% 1.5% 1.3% 2.1%1.7% 0.9%1.3%
0%
1 2 3 4 5 6 or more Unknown
Number of Lanes
Figure 4.18. Number of Lanes on Roadways Where Truck/ Non-Truck Crashes Occurred
53
In addition, factors such as alcohol involvement and cellular usage were also analyzed. Of
all fatal truck crashes which had some alcohol involvement, it was seen that in 87% of cases non-
truck drivers were the ones involved in alcohol consumption and truck drivers were under the
influence of alcohol in only 12% of cases. Also, cellular usage was among the top 10 driver-
4.4 Bayesian Statistical Analysis: Contributory Causes for Truck and Non-Truck Crashes
The following section shows the likelihood of contributory factors occurring in fatal truck
crashes when compared to fatal non-truck crashes. If the probability of the factor is greater than
one it indicates the factor was more predominant in fatal truck crashes than fatal non-truck crashes.
Factors in the tables that follow belong to categories of driver-related, vehicle-related, or crash-
related issues. The likelihood ratios are recorded in descending order of predominance in each
category. Each crash might have more than one contributory factor leading to the event since
FARS records up to four driver-related, three crash-related, and two vehicle-related factors per
crash. Hence, the sum of the number of crashes in truck and non-truck categories will not be equal
the FARS database. Crash data for the period of 2003-2007 was considered for this analysis.
Recent previous crash nearby/ vehicle set in motion by a non-driver, work area conditions, poor
shoulder conditions, and inadequate warning signs are the topmost factors which are more likely to
contribute to truck crashes than to non-truck crashes. Providing sufficient signs in work zones and
all other areas, as well as improving shoulder conditions might help reduce fatal truck crashes.
54
Table 4.1. Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Crash-Related Factors
Conditional
Conditional
Number Number of Probability of
Probability of This Likelihood
Crash-Related Factor(CF) of Truck Non-Truck This CF Given a
CF Given a Fatal Ratio
Crashes Crashes Fatal Truck
Non-Truck Crash
Crash
Recent Previous Crash
Nearby/ Vehicle Set in 416 1025 0.01901 0.00602 3.15
Motion by a Non-Driver
Motor Vehicle Struck by
558 1496 0.02550 0.00879 2.90
Falling Cargo
Construction/ Work Area
122 342 0.00557 0.00201 2.77
Condition
Inadequate Warning of
15 57 0.00069 0.00033 2.04
Exits, etc.
Aggressive Driving or
Road Rage of Non- 102 391 0.00466 0.00230 2.02
Contact Vehicle Driver
Poor Shoulder Condition 22 158 0.00101 0.00093 1.08
Within Designated
6 51 0.00027 0.00030 0.91
School Zone
Vehicle-related contributory factors between fatal trucks and non-truck crashes are listed
in Table 4.2. As most of the utility vehicles are trucks rather than other motor vehicles, this
cannot be considered a contributory cause, but defective brake systems, having the second
highest likelihood ratio, seems to be more predominant in truck crashes rather than other vehicle
crashes. Defective lights, mirrors, and engines also appear to have more likelihood of
contributing to crashes because of the severe wear and tear trucks undergo as a result of long
miles traveled. These factors, recorded as vehicle-related factors, are subjective with respect to
police officers present at crash sites. As officers are not professional vehicle inspectors, these
55
Table 4.2. Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Vehicle-Related Factors
Conditional Conditional
Number of Number of Probability of Probability of
Likelihood
Vehicle-Related Factor (VF) Truck Non-Truck This VF Given This VF Given
Ratio
Crashes Crashes a Fatal Truck a Fatal Non-
Crash Truck Crash
Vehicle Identified as
Utility/Emergency/Other 188 80 0.00859 0.00047 18.27
Working Vehicle
Defect in Brake System 445 421 0.02033 0.00247 8.22
Defects in
89 260 0.00407 0.00153 2.66
Lights/Horn/Mirror/Wiper
Defects in
Steering/Suspension/Engine/ 77 263 0.00352 0.00155 2.27
Exhaust System
Other Vehicle
Defects(Wheels/Doors/Safety 124 499 0.00567 0.00293 1.93
Belts/Air Bags)
Defective Tires 358 2501 0.01636 0.01470 1.11
Identified Vehicle
65 581 0.00297 0.00341 0.87
Registration as Handicapped
Identified as a Hit-and-Run
306 7727 0.01398 0.04540 0.30
Vehicle
Vehicle Went Airborne
57 1489 0.00260 0.00875 0.29
During Crash
Vehicle Set in Motion by
Another Vehicle/Non- 9 316 0.00041 0.00186 0.22
Motorist
FARS records 94 different driver-related factors which include mental, psychological, vision
obscured, environmental, and other miscellaneous factors. Of these 94 factors, only those which
reasonably reflect the truck driver contributing to the occurrence of the crash were included here. As
shown in Table 4.3, the conditional probability of each driver‘s contributory factor in truck and non-
truck crashes and their likelihood ratios were estimated. Factors having a considerable number of
frequencies were selected, and results were listed in descending order of their likelihood ratios.
56
Table 4.3. Conditional Probabilities and Likelihood Ratios for Driver-Related Factors
Conditional Conditional
Non- Probability of Probability of
Truck Likelihood
Driver-Related Factor(DF) Truck This DF Given a This DF Given a
Crashes Ratio
Crashes Fatal Truck Fatal Non-Truck
Crash Crash
Stopped or Unattended Vehicle 501 1019 0.02289 0.00599 3.82
Following Improperly 903 1902 0.04126 0.01118 3.69
Starting or Backing Improperly 147 349 0.00672 0.00205 3.27
Overloading or Improper Loading of
111 309 0.00507 0.00182 2.79
the Vehicle
Making Improper Exit or Entry 76 287 0.00347 0.00169 2.05
Erratic Lane Change 525 2129 0.02399 0.01251 1.91
Cellular Telephone in Use in Driving 765 3488 0.03496 0.02049 1.70
Signal Inattention/Unfamiliar
128 643 0.00585 0.00378 1.54
Roadway
Passing with Insufficient Distance or
Inadequate Visibility or Failing to 283 1700 0.01293 0.00999 1.29
Yield to Overtaking Vehicle
Driving on Wrong Side of the Road 557 3379 0.02545 0.01985 1.28
Failure to Yield Right of Way 2968 18801 0.13562 0.11047 1.22
Failure to Obey Traffic Rules 1688 10899 0.07713 0.06404 1.20
Drowsy ,Sleepy, Fatigued 683 4499 0.03121 0.02644 1.18
Tire Blow Out or Flat Tire 134 887 0.00612 0.00521 1.17
Inattentive(Talking, Eating) 2569 17407 0.11739 0.10228 1.14
Driving/Passing in Prohibited or
83 701 0.00379 0.00412 0.92
Wrong Direction
Passing Where Prohibited by Posted
104 900 0.00475 0.00529 0.89
Signs
Failing to Dim Lights or Have
39 338 0.00178 0.00199 0.89
Lights When Required
Other Non-Moving Traffic Violation 745 6690 0.03404 0.03931 0.86
Operating without Required
285 2648 0.01302 0.01556 0.83
Equipment
Failure to Keep in Proper Lane 5921 61914 0.27056 0.36379 0.74
Making Improper Turns 664 7085 0.03034 0.04163 0.72
Non-Traffic Violation Charged-
286 3540 0.01307 0.02080 0.62
Manslaughter or Homicide, etc.
Reckless Driving 1040 13141 0.04752 0.07721 0.61
Driving Over the Posted Speed Limit 4070 54837 0.18598 0.32221 0.57
Driver Inexperienced or Impaired
328 4683 0.01499 0.02752 0.54
Health or Physical Condition
Illegal Driving on Road Shoulder 54 912 0.00247 0.00536 0.46
Over Correcting 657 11656 0.03002 0.06849 0.43
Running Off the Road 587 11815 0.02682 0.06942 0.38
Other Drugs (Cocaine, etc.) 1520 33954 0.06946 0.19951 0.34
Hit-and-Run Vehicle Driver 264 6807 0.01206 0.04000 0.30
57
Stopped or unattended vehicles, improper following, and starting and backing the vehicle
improperly are factors with the highest likelihood ratios of contributing to fatal truck crashes more
often than fatal non-truck crashes. Erratic lane change, cellular phone usage, and signal inattention
are also factors significantly contributing to fatal crashes. Truck drivers appear to be more fatigued,
drowsy, and inattentive when compared to other vehicle drivers, having a likelihood ratio of greater
than one.
The multinomial logistic regression technique was used on a subset of the FARS data in
this study to elaborately analyze factors which have a higher rate of occurrence in fatal truck
crashes than in non-truck crashes. The subset data consists of only single-vehicle fatal crashes
that occurred in the United States from 2003-2007. The dependent variable for this model is
There were 35 independent variables which included several crash, driver, vehicle, and
environmental factors using statistical modeling software SAS version 9.1 (53). As the selection
criteria of variables to be included in the model, a 95% confidence level was used in which the
probability should be less than 0.05. Colinearity of individual variables was also checked before
considering variables in the model and if such relationship existed one of the two correlated
The independent variables considered in this model are shown in Table 4.4. Additionally,
the odds-ratio values are presented along with parameter estimates in Table 4.5. One can also
specify the change in the explanatory variables for which odds-ratio estimates are desired.
Confidence intervals for the regression parameters and odds ratios can be computed based either
on the profile likelihood function or on the asymptotic normality of the parameter estimators.
58
Table 4.4. Description of the Variables Used in the Model
59
Table 4.4. Description of the Variables Used in the Model (cont.)
60
From the output parameters shown in Table 4.5, those response variables which are
significant in the model are identified by setting the alpha level at 0.05 value. For all variables
which have a p-value greater than 0.05, the model fails to reject the null hypothesis which says
that the coefficient of that variable is zero. Hence, all such variables become insignificant in the
model. Therefore, the variables of month, day, sp_jur, harm_ev, no_lanes, alignment, pave_typ,
and drugs become insignificant in the model as they have a p-value greater than the assumed
cutoff value. All 27 other response variables remain in the model as they have a p-value less than
0.05 and hence the null hypothesis is rejected and it is concluded that the regression coefficient
for all these variables has not been found to be statistically different from zero in estimating the
model.
From the sign of the significant variables in the model when the coefficient estimates are
observed the kind of proportionality the response variables have with the type of crash can be
discerned. While analyzing this aspect, it should be noted that the analysis is done with respect to
the occurrence of a fatal single-vehicle truck crash. All variables with regard to their estimate
value and point estimate (odds ratio) are explained in the following categories.
The negative coefficient for the response variable route would explain that there are a
larger proportion of fatal single-vehicle truck crashes on interstates than on local roads as
compared to non-truck crashes. Similarly, the coefficient of road_fnc explains that fatal truck
The variable traf_flo was also found to be significant in the model. As the indicator that
the estimate value is positive, it shows that truck crashes have 1.98 times greater odds of
occurring on roadways which are not physically divided when compared to non-truck crashes.
61
Also, the profile variable has a positive estimate value. This shows that the type of crash has a
direct relationship with the roadway profile at the crash. Truck crashes tend to have 1.26 times
greater odds of occurring on level roadway profiles than when compared to non-truck crashes.
Similarly, when the surface condition at the crash site was analyzed it had a negative estimate
value in the model. This implies that non-truck crashes have 0.76 times lesser odds of occurring
In the case of the manner of collision, the estimate suggests that fatal single-vehicle truck
crashes have 1.24 times higher odds of resulting in angle crashes than rear-end or head-on
collisions. Furthermore, they have 1.21 times greater odds of occurrence at speed limits greater
than 60 than on roadways with lower speed limits. Similarly, the variable hour shows that truck
crashes have 0.461 times lesser odds of occurring in morning and dawn hours of the day than in
non-truck crashes. The variable fatals in the model which shows the number of fatalities in the
crashes was found to have a negative estimate value in the model. This implies that fatal truck
crashes have 0.647 times lesser odds of resulting in more than one fatality in a crash when
Further, it was observed that truck crashes have 2.096 times higher odds of resulting in
rollover crashes and 1.035 times higher odds of having a travelling speed above 60 mph than
non-truck crashes. Also, it was seen that truck crashes have 1.45 times higher odds of having a
rear side initial impact point in a single vehicle crashes and 1.601 times higher odds of suffering
functional deformation of the vehicle than when compared with non-truck crashes.
62
4.5.3 Environmental Characteristics
The light condition variable explains that truck crashes have 0.44 times lower odds of
occurrence in dark conditions, and in the case of weather variables they have 1.22 times higher
The age variable has a positive coefficient which shows that truck drivers are mostly in
the middle and older population, whereas non-truck drivers tend to be mostly in the younger
population. Truck drivers have 1.906 times higher odds of being middle or older aged than being
younger aged. From the alcohol involvement variable, it can also be derived that truck drivers
have 0.88 times lesser odds of involvement in fatal crashes when compared to non-truck drivers.
The variable representing the gender of the driver had a negative estimate value in the
model. This shows that truck drivers are 0.076 less likely to be female than in non-truck crashes.
Also, when the ejection variable was observed it showed that truck drivers had 0.596 times lesser
odds of ejecting out of the vehicle during the crash than when compared to non-truck drivers in
fatal crashes.
When the overall crash-related factor, cf1, is observed the positive coefficient shows that
truck crashes tend to have some significant factor which has been identified in the police report.
Moreover, the vehicle-related factor shows there are 1.42 times higher odds of a truck having a
63
Table 4.5. Parameter Estimates and Odds Ratio of Fatal Truck Crashes in the Model
64
* – Significant at 0.05 level
The ―Model Fit Statistics‖ in Table 4.6 contain the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC),
the Schwarz Criterion (SC), and the negative of twice the log likelihood (-2 Log L) for the
intercept-only model and the fitted model. AIC and SC can be used to compare different models
The AIC value of 34,527 is the smallest value obtained in the repeated trials performed in
this dataset, which shows that this model is the optimum result. The SC and the -2 Log L values
were also observed to be the least therefore reinforcing the above statement.
Table 4.6. Model Fit Statistics of the Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis
The three independence tests of likelihood ratio, overall score, and Wald‘s Chi-Square
have a p-value less than .0001 as shown in Table 4.7, therefore showing that results are very
significant.
65
Table 4.7. Tests of Independence for the Multinomial Logistic Regression Analysis
Table 4.8 shows other goodness-of-fit parameters values obtained from the LOGISTIC
Percent Concordant: This has a value of 85.1% which shows a high rate of concordance
between the pairs of observations with differences observed, and the observation with the
lower ordered response value has a lower predicted mean score than the observation with
Percent Discordant: If the observation with the lower ordered response value has a higher
predicted mean score than the observation with the higher ordered response value, then
Percent Tied: If a pair of observations with different responses is neither concordant nor
discordant, it is a tie.
Somer's D: This is used to determine the strength and direction of relation between pairs
of variables. Its values range from -1.0 (all pairs disagree) to 1.0 (all pairs agree). The
value of 0.71 is closer to 1 which therefore shows that all pairs of variables agree to a
large extent.
66
The Goodman-Kruskal Gamma: This has a value of 0.717 which also signifies the perfect
association of the variables in the model. This method does not penalize for ties on either
variable. Its values range from -1.0 (no association) to 1.0 (perfect association).
Tau-a: This has the value of 0.05, which is a modification of Somer's D to account for the
difference between the number of possible paired observations and the number of paired
c: Another measure of rank correlation of ordinal variables, c has a value of 0.855 which
reinforces the perfect association between the data variables and the observed variables.
Hence, multinomial logistic regression provides useful goodness of fit measures which
help analyze the significance of various parameters with truck crashes in comparison with non-
truck crashes.
67
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Summary
5.1 Conclusions
This study explored the characteristics of trucks involved in fatal crashes and evaluated the
fatality risk posed for them in relation to select driver, vehicle, environmental, and roadway-related
variables. Fatal crash data obtained from NHTSA was used for this analysis.
Several significant characteristics of fatal truck crashes have been observed from this
analysis. Fatal crash frequency was observed to be greater with the initial impact point for the
vehicle in the front side of the truck than anywhere else. All fatal truck crash cases which had
alcohol involvement indicated that in 87% of cases, non-truck drivers were the ones under this
influence. Trucks seemed to have a majority of fatal crashes at higher posted speed levels, which
might also be due to a larger presence of trucks at higher speed ranges. Fatigue, drowsiness, and
inattention were observed to be more predominant in truck drivers than in other motor vehicle
drivers. The majority of fatal truck crashes occurred on two-way two-lane traffic flowways with
no physical divisions. Such roadways could be altered by providing necessary changes in the
roadway design. Improper driving and non-compliance to traffic regulations were observed to be
the main driver-related contributory factors in cases of fatal truck crashes. In comparing the
overlapping effect of two fatal crash characteristics, truck striking and truck being struck, there
seemed to be similar proportions on all roadway types. This proportion remained consistent even
From the likelihood ratios, stopped or unattended vehicles or improper following had
greater probabilities of occurrence in fatal truck crashes than in non-truck crashes. Recent or
previous crash nearby and/or vehicle set in motion by a non-driver, work area conditions, poor
shoulder conditions, and inadequate warning signs are the topmost factors which have more
likelihood in fatal truck crashes than non-truck crashes. Other factors like cellular usage, failure
68
to yield right of way, inattentiveness, and failure to obey traffic rules are more likely to
contribute to fatal truck crashes. Additionally, truck drivers appear to be more fatigued, drowsy,
and inattentive when compared to other vehicle drivers with a likelihood ratio of greater than
one.
fatal crashes, several conclusions were ascertained. For example, it was concluded that single-
vehicle fatal truck crashes are more frequent on rural roads than on urban roads. The manner of
collision coefficient estimate suggests that fatal single-vehicle truck crashes have 1.24 times
higher odds of resulting in angle crashes than rear-end or head-on collisions. Also, they have
1.21 times greater odds of occurrence at speed limits greater than 60 than on roadways with
lower speed limits. The light condition variable explains that truck crashes have 0.44 times
lower odds of occurrence in dark lighting conditions and in the case of the weather variable they
have 1.22 times higher odds of occurrence in conditions with no adverse weather. Finally, the
overall 85.1% concordance value of the model has shown the level to which it fits the given data,
The results provide a deep understanding of the various factors which have greater
association with truck crashes when compared to non-truck crashes. By addressing these issues
the overall truck crash rate can be reduced, which can help in improving overall safety of the
transportation system.
69
References
1. ―Motor Carrier Safety: A Statistical Approach Will Better Identify Commercial Carriers
that Pose High Crash Risks than Does the Current Federal Approach.‖ Publication
2. Blower, D. ―Comparison of Certain Variables in the Large Truck Crash Causation Study
with Variables Coded in a Review of the Trucks Involved in Fatal Accidents Case
3. Blower, D. ―Truck Mirrors, Field of View, and Serious Truck Crashes.‖ Publication
6. Daniel, J., C., Tsai, and S. Chien. Factors Influencing Truck Crashes on Roadways with
Academics, 2002.
70
7. Vap, D., and S. Carlos. ―Investigating Large Truck-Passenger Vehicle Interaction.‖
Driver Gender and the Role of Average Annual Mileage.‖ Accident Analysis and
10. Mehta, Y., and C. Gabler. ―Analysis of Fatal Accidents in New Jersey.‖ Publication
11. Alam, B. M., and L. K. Spainhour. Behavioral Aspects of Younger At-Fault Drivers in
12. Haworth, N., K. Grieg., and A. Neilson. A Comparison of Risk Taking in Moped and
13. Williams, A. F., and V. I. Shabanova. ―Responsibility of Drivers, by Age and Gender, for
14. Williams, A. F., and V. I. Shabanova. ―Analysis of the Fatal Crash Involvements of
71
15. Pickrell, T. M., and M. Starnes. ―An Analysis of Motorcycle Helmet Use in Fatal
Crashes.‖ NHTSA Technical Report. DOT HS 811 011. National Highway Traffic
17. ―Geo-Demographic Analysis of Fatal Motorcycle Crashes.‖ Report No. HS 809 197.
18. Lerner, N., M. Freedman., P. Zador., M. Cluad., B. Simons., and D. Duncan. ―Passenger
Age and Gender Effects on Adult Driver Fatal Crash Rate.‖ Proceedings of the
19. ―Report to Congress on the Large Truck Crash Causation Study.‘ Publication MC-R/MC-
20. Blower, D., and A. Matteson. Large Trucks in FARS and in TIFA. Center for National
2002.
21. Rau, P. S. ―Drowsy Driver Detection and Warning System for Commercial Vehicle
Drivers: Field Operational Test Design, Data Analysis, and Progress.‖ National
72
Highway Traffic Safety Administration. U.S. Department of Transportation, May
22. Garber, N. J., J. S. Miller., X. Sun., and B. Yuan. ―Safety Impacts of Differential Speed
Limits for Trucks and Passenger Cars on Rural Interstate Highways: A Modified
19-29.
23. Daniel, J., and S. I. Chien. ―Truck Safety Factors on Urban Arterials.‖ Journal of
24. Dick, V., J. Hendrix., and R. R. Knipling. ―New Hours-of-Service Rules: Trucking
25. Kostyniuk, L. P., F. M. Streff., and J. Zakrajsek. Identifying Unsafe Driver Actions that
Lead to Fatal Car-Truck Crashes. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, April 2002.
26. Khattak, A. J., and F. Targa. Injury Severity and Total Harm in Truck-Involved Work
27. Daniel, J., R. Rajbhandari., and S. Chien. In Evaluation of Crashes on the National
2002.
73
28. Dabbour, E., S. M. Easa., and A. O. Abd El Halim. ―Radius Requirements for Reverse
29. Miaou, S., and H. Lum. ―Statistical Evaluation of the Effects of Highway Geometric
30. Abdel-Aty, M., and H. Abdelwahab. ―Modeling Rear-End Collisions Including the Role
of Driver‘s Visibility and Light Truck Vehicles Using a Nested Logit Structure.‖
31. Diener, J., and L. Richardson. ―Seat Belt Use among Rural and Urban Pickup Truck
32. Burgess, M. ―Contrasting Rural and Urban Fatal Crashes 1994–2003.‖ Report No. DOT-
Transportation, 2005.
33. Majid, S. Measuring and Modelling the Dynamics of Heavy Commercial Vehicles and
34. Duncan, C. S., A. J. Khattak., and F. M. Council. ―Applying the Ordered Probit Model to
74
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 1635 (2004):
35. Pickrell, T. M. ―Driver Alcohol Involvement in Fatal Crashes by Age Group and Vehicle
36. Yan, X., E. Radwan., and K. Mannila. ―Analysis of Truck-Involved Rear-End Crashes
(2009): 39-52.
37. Yan, X., E. Radwan., and K. Mannila. ―Investigation of Truck Involved Angle Crashes
(2009): 49-59.
38. Venkataraman, S., and F. Mannering. “An Exploratory Multinomial Logit Analysis of
(1994): 183-194.
39. Allison, D.P. Logistic Regression Using SAS System. North Carolina: John Wiley &
40. Samuel, P., R. W. Poole., and J. H. Veras. ―Toll Truckways: A New Path towards Safer
and More Efficient Freight Transportation.‖ Policy Study No. 294, June 2002.
www.rppi.org/ps294.html.
75
41. Cate, M. A., and T. Urbanik II. ―Another View of Truck Lane Restrictions.‖
(2004): 19-24.
42. Reich, S. L., J. L. Davis., A. J. Ferraro., and Martin Catala. ―Exclusive Facilities for
Trucks in Florida: An Investigation of the Potential for Reserved Truck Lanes and
44. Murray, D., S. Turrentine., B. Lantz., and S. Keppler. ―Predicting Truck Crash
45. Crum, M. R., and P. C. Morrow. ―The Influence of Carrier Scheduling Practices on Truck
46. Williams, A. F., and V. I. Shabanova. ―Responsibility of Drivers, by Age and Gender, for
47. Golob, T. F., and A. C. Regan. Truck-Involved Crashes and Traffic Levels on Urban
76
48. Gabler, H. C. ―The Risk of Fatality in Motorcycle Crashes with Roadside Barriers.‖
Tessmer. ―An Analysis of Fatal Large Truck Crashes.‖ Report No. DOT HS 809.
50. Zador, P. L., S. A. Krawchuk., and R. B. Voas. ―Relative Risk of Fatal and Crash
Records, Office of Research and Traffic Records, Washington, DC, April 2000.
Chicago, 2006.
52. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Fatality Analysis Reporting System.
53. SAS Institute Inc., SAS Online Doc 9.1.3., SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, 2004.
77