|Table of Contents|

[1] Li Ye, Xing Lu, Wang Wei, Dong Changyin, et al. Evaluating impacts of different car-following typeson rear-end crashes at freeway weaving section [J]. Journal of Southeast University (English Edition), 2017, 33 (3): 335-340. [doi:10.3969/j.issn.1003-7985.2017.03.013]

Evaluating impacts of different car-following typeson rear-end crashes at freeway weaving section()

Journal of Southeast University (English Edition)[ISSN:1003-7985/CN:32-1325/N]

2017 3
Research Field:
Traffic and Transportation Engineering
Publishing date:


Evaluating impacts of different car-following typeson rear-end crashes at freeway weaving section
Li Ye Xing Lu Wang Wei Dong Changyin
School of Transportation, Southeast University, Nanjing 210096, China
freeway safety logistic regression time to collision risk
The impacts of four different car-following types on rear-end crash risks at a freeway weaving section were evaluated using trajectory data, in which Type 1 represents car following car, Type 2 represents car following truck, Type 3 represents truck following car and Type 4 represents truck following truck. The time to collision(TTC)was introduced as the surrogate safety measure to determine the rear-end crash risks. Then, the trajectory data at a freeway weaving section was used for the case-controlled analysis. Three logistic regression models were developed with different TTC thresholds to quantify the impacts of different car-following types. The explanatory factors were also analyzed to investigate possible reasons for the results of logistic regressions. Results show that the rear-end crash risk of Type 3 is 3.167 times higher than that of Type 1 when the TTC threshold is 2 s. However, the odds ratios of Type 2 and Type 4 are both smaller than 1, which indicates a safer condition. The analysis of explanatory factors also shows that Type 3 has the largest speed differences and the smallest net gaps. This is consistent with vehicle operation features at a weaving section and is also the reason for the larger rear-end crash risks. The results of this study reflect the mechanism of rear-end crash risks of different car-following types at the freeway weaving section.


[1] Li Z, Li Y, Liu P, et al. Development of a variable speed limit strategy to reduce secondary collision risks during inclement weathers [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2014, 72: 134-145. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2014.06.018.
[2] Li Y, Wang H, Wang W, et al. Evaluation of the impacts of cooperative adaptive cruise control on reducing rear-end collision risks on freeways [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2017, 98: 87-95. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2016.09.015.
[3] Skabardonis A, Mauch M. Evaluation of methodologies for analyzing freeway ramp weaving [J]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2015, 2483: 130-139.
[4] Li Y, Wang H, Wang W, et al. Reducing the risk of rear-end collisions with infrastructure-to-vehicle(I2V)integration of variable speed limit control and adaptive cruise control system [J]. Traffic Injury Prevention, 2016, 17(6): 597-603. DOI:10.1080/15389588.2015.1121384.
[5] Kusuma A, Liu R, Choudhury C, et al. Lane-changing characteristics at weaving section [C/OL]//Transportation Research Board 94th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, USA, 2015. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303617349_Lane-changing_characteristics_at_weaving_section.
[6] Wan X, Jin P J, Yang F, et al. Merging preparation behavior of drivers: How they choose and approach their merge positions at a congested weaving area[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2016, 142(9): 05016005. DOI:10.1061/(asce)te.1943-5436.0000864.
[7] He H, Menendez M. Distribution and impacts of lane changes at a freeway weaving section: An empirical study [C]//Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, USA, 2016: 01595109.
[8] Abdel-Aty M, Abdelwahab H. Configuration analysis of two-vehicle rear-end crashes[J]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2003, 1840: 140-147. DOI:10.3141/1840-16.
[9] Pande A, Abdel-Aty M. Comprehensive analysis of the relationship between real-time traffic surveillancedata and rear-end crashes on freeways[J]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2006, 1953: 31-40. DOI:10.3141/1953-04.
[10] Wang X, Abdel-Aty M. Temporal and spatial analyses of rear-end crashes at signalized intersections [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2006, 38(6): 1137-1150. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2006.04.022.
[11] Kim J K, Wang Y, Ulfarsson G F. Modeling the probability of freeway rear-end crash occurrence[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2007, 133(1): 11-19. DOI:10.1061/(asce)0733-947x(2007)133:1(11).
[12] Iliadi A, Farah H, Schepers P, et al. A crash prediction model for weaving sections in the Netherlands [C]//Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting. Washington, DC, USA, 2016: 486-487.
[13] Weng J, Meng Q, Yan X. Analysis of work zone rear-end crash risk for different vehicle-following patterns[J]. Accid Anal Prev, 2014, 72: 449-457. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2014.08.003.
[14] Oh C, Kim T. Estimation of rear-end crash potential using vehicle trajectory data [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2010, 42(6): 1888-1893. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2010.05.009.
[15] Meng Q, Weng J. Evaluation of rear-end crash risk at work zone using work zone traffic data [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2011, 43(4): 1291-1300. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2011.01.011.
[16] Aghabayk K, Sarvi M, Young W. Attribute selection for modelling driver’s car-following behaviour in heterogeneous congested traffic conditions [J]. Transportmetrica A: Transport Science, 2014, 10(5): 457-468. DOI:10.1080/23249935.2013.787558.
[17] Weng J, Xue S, Yang Y, et al. In-depth analysis of drivers’ merging behavior and rear-end crash risks in work zone merging areas [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2015, 77: 51-61. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2015.02.002.
[18] Council F, Harkey D, Nabors D, et al. Examination of fault, unsafe driving acts, and total harm in car-truck collisions[J]. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2003, 1830: 63-71. DOI:10.3141/1830-09.
[19] Yan X, Radwan E, Mannila K K. Analysis of truck-involved rear-end crashes using multinomial logistic regression [J]. Advances in Transportation Studies, 2009, 2009(17): 39-52.
[20] Romo A, Hernandez S, Cheu R L. Identifying precrash factors for cars and trucks on interstate highways: Mixed logit model approach[J]. Journal of Transportation Engineering, 2014, 140(3): 04013016. DOI:10.1061/(asce)te.1943-5436.0000621.
[21] Vogel K. A comparison of headway and time to collision as safety indicators [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2003, 35(3): 427-433. DOI:10.1016/s0001-4575(02)00022-2.
[22] Kiefer R J, LeBlanc D J, Flannagan C A, et al. Developing an inverse time-to-collision crash alert timing approach based on drivers’ last-second braking and steering judgments [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2005, 37(2): 295-303. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2004.09.003.
[23] Meng Q, Qu X. Estimation of rear-end vehicle crash frequencies in urban road tunnels [J]. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 2012, 48: 254-263. DOI:10.1016/j.aap.2012.01.025.
[24] Hayward J C. Near-miss determination through use of a scale of danger [J/OL]. Highway Research Record, 1972. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/hrr/1972/384/384-004.pdf
[25] Federal Highway Administration. Next generation simulation(NGSIM)[EB/OL].(2002)[2016-09-15]. https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/trafficanalysistools/ngsim.htm.


Biographies: Li Ye(1992—), male, graduate; Wang Wei(corresponding author), male, doctor, professor, wangwei@seu.edu.cn.
Foundation item: The National Natural Science Foundation of China(No. 51638004, 51338003, 51478113).
Citation: Li Ye, Xing Lu, Wang Wei, et al. Evaluating impacts of different car-following types on rear-end crashes at freeway weaving section[J].Journal of Southeast University(English Edition), 2017, 33(3):335-340.DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-7985.2017.03.013.
Last Update: 2017-09-20