Public Roads: A Journal of Highway Research, Vol. 27, No. 2

Carpenter, C.A.; Chaiken, Bernard; Cope, E.M.; Dalhouse, J.B.; Dimmick, T.B.; Duzan, H.C.; Halstead, W.J.; Hitchcock, S.T.; Hopkins, R.C.; Jackson, F.H.; Kinter, E.B.; McCallum, W.R.; Meadows, R.W.; Normann, O.K.; Pauls, J.T.; Prisk, C.W.; Raff, M.S.; Swerdlow, Max; Teller, L.W.; Timms, A.G.; Todd, T.R.; Welborn, J.Y.; Wiles, E.G.; Wintermyer, A.M.; Woolf, D.O.; Zettel, R.M. · 1952 · ROSA P / United States. Government Printing Office

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (full text — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This 1952 study by the Bureau of Public Roads investigates the effectiveness of two distinct pavement marking designs for no-passing zones on two-lane highways. The research was motivated by the need to standardize traffic control devices and evaluate a specific deviation from the national standard. While the national standard places the yellow barrier line immediately adjacent to the center line, Missouri and Iowa utilized a design placing the barrier line in the center of the driving lane. This mid-lane placement was adopted primarily as an economy measure to reduce wear from tire abrasion, particularly on narrow pavements. The study aimed to determine if this alternative design compromised safety or driver compliance compared to the national standard. The experimental design involved a comparative field study conducted on a 16.5-mile section of U.S. Route 66 in Missouri during the summer of 1949. Approximately half of the test section was marked with the national standard, and the other half with the Missouri standard. Researchers selected two single-direction no-passing zones with nearly identical physical characteristics—one for each marking type—and one two-direction zone with Missouri markings. Data collection included automatic recording of vehicle speeds and transverse placements (lateral position relative to the roadway center) at multiple points approaching and within the zones. Observations were conducted during both daylight and nighttime hours. Additionally, researchers recorded the start and finish points of passing maneuvers and interviewed approximately 1,000 drivers upon exiting the test section to assess their preferences and understanding of the markings. The results indicated that general traffic operation characteristics, such as speed, did not differ significantly between the two marking types. However, critical differences emerged in transverse placement and driver compliance. Vehicles traveling into the no-passing zone, particularly in the face of oncoming traffic or wider commercial vehicles, maintained a safer lateral distance from the center line when the national standard marking was used. The national standard consistently resulted in drivers positioning themselves farther from potential head-on collisions. Furthermore, driver compliance with the no-passing restriction was superior under the national standard; infringement on the no-passing zone area was greater where the barrier line was located in the middle of the lane. Interviews revealed no decisive driver preference for either marking type, but the behavioral data showed that the national standard provided clearer guidance, especially for drivers unfamiliar with the local Missouri design. The study concludes that the national standard marking is superior for safety and traffic control. Although the mid-lane barrier line offered maintenance advantages by reducing wear, it failed to provide adequate visual guidance for drivers, leading to poorer lateral placement and higher rates of encroachment into no-passing zones. The findings support the standardization of pavement markings to ensure that drivers can quickly and accurately interpret traffic controls, thereby reducing the hazards inherent in two-lane highway operations. The research underscores the importance of consistent marking design in maintaining traffic safety, particularly in conditions with limited sight distances.

Key finding

The national standard barrier line location consistently resulted in vehicles maintaining a greater lateral distance from the center line compared to the Missouri mid-lane standard, especially during critical overtaking scenarios involving oncoming traffic or wide vehicles.

Methodology

on_road

Sample size: 11500

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• signage environment
• rail grade crossings
• roadway lighting effects