EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 270 (2019) MATEC Web Conf., 270 (2019) 03004 References
Open Access
Issue
MATEC Web Conf.
Volume 270, 2019
The 2nd Conference for Civil Engineering Research Networks (ConCERN-2 2018)
Article Number 03004
Number of page(s) 6
Section Transportation Engineering and Planning
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201927003004
Published online 22 February 2019
  1. J. Ambros, Traffic Conflict Technique As A Complementary Method Of Road Safety Management, in XI International Symposium "Road Accident Prevention 2012" (2012). [Google Scholar]
  2. A. Laureshyn and A. Várhelyi, The Swedish Traffic Conflict Technique Observer’s Manual, Lund University, Lund (2018). [Google Scholar]
  3. G. Gettman, L. Pu, T. Sayed, and S. Shelby, Surrogate Safety Assessment Model and Validation: Final Report, U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration (2008). [Google Scholar]
  4. S. R. Perkins and J. I. Harris, Criteria for Traffic Conflict Characteristics Signalized Intersections, General Motor Corporation, Michigan (1967). [Google Scholar]
  5. A. Asmussen, International Calibration Study of Traffic Conflict Techniques, Springer (1984). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. M.R. Parker and C.V. Zegeer, Traffic Conflict Techniques for Safety and Operations Observer Manual, U.S Departement of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Virginia (1989). [Google Scholar]
  7. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Highway Safety The Traffic Conflict Technique, The Institution of Highways and Transportation, London (1987). [Google Scholar]
  8. S. Cafiso, A. G. Garcia, R. Cavarra, R., and M. A. R. Rojas, Before and After Study of Crosswalk Using a Pedestrian Risk Index, 16th June 2011. [Online].Available:http://www.amonline.trb.org/12k96v/12k96v. [Google Scholar]
  9. C. Pin, T. Sayed, and M. H. Zaki, Assessing Safety Improvements to Pedestrian Crossings Using Automated Conflict Analysis, Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2514, 58-67, (2015). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  10. FHWA, Open Source Surrogate Safety Assessment Model, 2017 Enhancement and Update: SSAM v3.0, Publication No. FHWA-HRT-17-027 (2016). [Google Scholar]
  11. R. Fan, H. Yu, P. Liu, and W. Wang, Using VISSIM Simulation Model and Surrogate Safety Assessment Model for Estimating Field Measured Traffic Conflicts at Freeway Merge Areas, IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 7, 68-77 (2013). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  12. L. Vasconcelos, L. Neto, L. M. Seco and A. B. Silva, Validation of the Surrogate Safety Assessment Model for Assessment of Intersection Safety, Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2432, 1-9 (2014). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. M. Essa, and T. Sayed, Transferability of Calibrated Microsimulation Model Parameters for Safety Assessment Using Simulated Conflicts, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 84,41-53 (2015). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  14. G. M. Lawalata and H. R. Agah, Traffic Conflict Analysis As A Road Safety Diagnostic Tool For Urban Road Facilities, International Journal of Technology, 2,112-121 (2011). [Google Scholar]
  15. N. S. Kusumastutie, Penerapan The Swedish Traffic Conflict Technique pada Audit Keselamatan Jalan di Proliman Peteng Sukoharjo, Jurnal Keselamatan Transportasi Jalan, 2, 2, 40-48 (2014). [Google Scholar]
  16. P. J. Romadhona and S. Ramdhani, Pengaruh Kecepatan Kendaraan Terhadap Keselamatan Pengguna Kendaraan Bermotor pada Simpang Tak Bersinyal, Rekayasa Sipil, 1, 31-40 (2017). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  17. M. L. Siregar, TCT (Swedish Traffic Conflict Techniques) Method for Safety Based Evaluation of The Provision of With Flow Bus Lane on Fast Lane, Jurnal Teknologi, 1, 1, XV, 17-25 (2001). [Google Scholar]
  18. M. L. Siregar, H. R. Agah, and F. Hidayatullah, Near-Miss Accident Analysis For Traffic Safety Improvement At A ‘Channelized’ Junction With U-Turn, Int. J. of Safety and Security Eng., 8, 1, 31-38 (2018). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  19. N. S. Kusumastutie and S. Malkhamah, Analisis Keselamatan Penyeberang Menggunakan Pedestrian Risk Index (PRI) Studi Kasus pada Siswa Penyeberang di SMPN 4 Sukoharjo, in The 17th FSTPT International Symposium, Jember, (2014). [Google Scholar]
  20. N. S. Kusumastutie and S. Malkhamah, Pengaruh Perilaku Menyeberang Terhadap Keterlibatan Dalam Konflik Lalu Lintas," Jurnal Keselamatan Transportasi Jalan, 1, 23-32 (2013). [Google Scholar]
  21. N. Tanan, Penanganan Konflik Lalu Lintas di Persimpangan Gatot Subroto-Gedung Empat Cimahi, Jurnal Jalan dan Jembatan, 25, 3, 291-313 (2008). [Google Scholar]
  22. A. M. Mulyadi and S. Amalia, Influence Of Red Motorcycle Box To The Traffic Conflict And Traffic Flow At The Ahmad Yani-Laswi Signalized Intersection," in 16th Road Safety on Four Continent Conference, Beijing, China (2013). [Google Scholar]
  23. S. Malkhamah, M. Tight, and F. Montgomery, The Development of an Automatic Method of Safety Monitoring at Pelican Crossing, Accident Analysis and Prevention, 37, 938-946 (2005). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. F. Suwarto and K. H. Basuki, The Application of Traffic Conflict Technique as a Road Safety Evaluation Method: a Case Study of Hasselt Intersection, Applied Mechanics and Material, 845, 394-403, (2016). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  25. E. N. Barmpounakis, E. I. Vlahogianni, and J. C. Golias, Unmanned Aerial Aircraft Systems For Transportation Engineering: Current Practice Dan Future Challenges, International Journal of Transportation Science and Technology, 5, 111-122, (2016). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  26. B. Coifman, M. McCord, R. G. Mishalani, and M. Iswalt, Y. Ji, Roadway Traffic Monitoring From An Unmanned Aerial Vehicle, IEE Proceedings- Intelligent Transport Systems, 153, 1, 11-20, (2006). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  27. G. Salvo, L. Caruso, and A. Scordo, Urban Traffic Analysis Through An UAV, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 111, 1083 - 1091, ( 2014 ). [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  28. M. Lovita, Yosritzal, and Purnawan, (2017) Pemanfaatan Drone Pada Penelitian Keselamatan Lalu Lintas di Persimpangan, in Prosiding 4th Andalas Civil Engineering (ACE) Conference, Padang, Indonesia, 527-532 (2017). [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.