Recent emphasis on alternatives to automobile transportation has brought to light deficiencies in basic research performed in bicycle traffic science. Because of limited opportunities to fund such research, it is prudent to use past research to develop design guidelines and provide a basis for planning future research efforts. Mainly toward the latter end, a comprehensive review of published basic research in bicycle traffic science (with relevance to U.S. traffic) is presented, and suggestions are made for research priorities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
WattsG. R.Bicycle Safety Devices—Effects on Vehicle Passing Distances. Supplementary Report. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Great Britain, 1979.
2.
WattsG. R.Pedal Cycle Spacers—A Study Involving School Children. Supplementary Report. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Great Britain, 1983.
3.
WattsG. R.Evaluation of Pedal Cycle Spacers. Supplementary Report. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Great Britain, 1984.
4.
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. AASHTO, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1991.
5.
Sign Up for the Bike: Design Manual for a Cycle-Friendly Infrastructure. Centre for Research and Contract Standardization in Civil and Traffic Engineering, The Netherlands, 1993.
6.
WangJ., and WeiH.Traffic Segregation on Spatial and Temporal Bases: The Experience of Bicycle Traffic Operations in China. In Transportation Research Record 1396, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 11–17.
7.
SmithD.Safety and Locational Criteria for Bicycle Facilities. Report FHWA-RD-75-112. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1976.
8.
OpielaK., KhasnabisS., and DattaT.Determination of the Characteristics of Bicycle Traffic at Urban Intersections. In Transportation Research Record 743, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1980, pp. 30–37.
9.
ForesterJ.Bicycle Transportation. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1983.
10.
TaylorD.Analysis of Traffic Signal Clearance Interval Requirements for Bicycle-Automobile Mixed Traffic. In Transportation Research Record 1405, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 13–20.
11.
PeinW.Bicyclist Performance on a Multiuse Trail. In Transportation Research Record 1578, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 127–131.
12.
TaylorD.Contributions to Bicycle-Automobile Mixed-Traffic Science: Behavioral Models and Engineering Applications. Ph.D. dissertation. The University of Texas, Austin, 1998.
13.
RiceR., and RolandD.An Evaluation of the Performance and Handling Qualities of Bicycles. Report prepared by Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, Inc., Cornell University, for the National Commission on Product Safety, Washington, D.C., 1970.
14.
WhittF. R., and WilsonD. G.Bicycling Science. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1990.
15.
CrossK. D., and FischerG.A Study of Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Accidents: Identification of Problem Types and Countermeasure Approaches. Report DOT HS-803-315. U.S. Department of Transportation, 1977.
16.
Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Accident Summary. Oregon Department of Transportation, 1990.
17.
HunterW., PeinW., and StuttsJ.Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Crash Types: The Early 1990s. In Transportation Research Record 1502, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 65–74.
18.
KimK., and LiL., Modeling Fault Among Bicyclists and Drivers Involved in Collisions in Hawaii, 1986–1991. In Transportation Research Record 1538, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1996, pp. 75–80.
19.
ThomR., and ClaytonA.Low-Cost Opportunities for Making Cities Bicycle-Friendly Based on a Case Study Analysis of Cyclist Behavior and Accidents. In Transportation Research Record 1372, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1992, pp. 90–101.
20.
DewarR.Bicycle Riding Practices: Implications for Safety Campaigns. Journal of Safety Research, Vol. 10, No. 1, 1978, pp. 35–42.
21.
WilkinsonW. C., ClarkeA., EppersonB., and KnoblauchB.The Effects of Bicycle Accommodations on Bicycle/Motor Vehicle Safety and Traffic Operations. Report FHWA-RD-92-069. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1994.
22.
JillaR.Effects of Bicycle Lanes on Traffic Flow. Joint Highway Research Project JHRP-74-10. Purdue University School of Civil Engineering, West Lafayette, Ind., 1974.
23.
KrollB., and RameyM.Effects of Bike Lanes on Driver and Bicyclist Behavior. Transportation Engineering Journal, March1977, pp. 243–256.
24.
NicholsonF. J.Attitudes of a Sample of Cyclists to Using Single-Track Roads. Supplementary Report. Transport and Road Research Laboratory, Great Britain, 1978.
25.
McHenryS., and WallaceM.Evaluation of Wide Curb Lanes as Shared Lane Bicycle Facilities. Report FHWA/MD-85/06. Maryland Department of Transportation, 1985.
26.
WhiteF. J., and DaffM.On-Road Observations of Wide Kerbside Lanes for Cyclists. Proc., 15th Australian Road Research Board Conference, Aug. 1990.
27.
HarkeyD., and StewartR.Bicycle and Motor Vehicle Operations on Wide Curb Lanes, Bicycle Lanes and Paved Shoulders. Proc., Traffic Congestion & Traffic Safety in the 21st Century, American Society of Civil Engineers, Chicago, Ill., 1997.
28.
HarkeyD., and StewartR.Evaluation of Shared-Use Facilities for Bicycles and Motor Vehicles. In Transportation Research Record 1578, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 111–118.
29.
LoopS., and LaytonR.Effect of Bicycle Lane Usage on Vehicles in the Adjacent Lane. In Transportation Research Record 629, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1977, pp. 51–56.
30.
WilkinsonW. C., ClarkeA., EppersonB., and KnoblauchB.Selecting Roadway Design Treatments to Accommodate Bicycles. Report FHWA-RD-92-073. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1994.
31.
BotmaH., and PapendrechtH.Traffic Operation of Bicycle Traffic. In Transportation Research Record 1320, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 65–72.
32.
FerraraT. C., and LamT. N.Analysis of Bicycle Delays at Intersections and Crossings by Computer Simulation. In Transportation Research Record 706, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1979, pp. 36–44.
33.
NavinF.Bicycle Traffic Flow Characteristics: Experimental Results and Comparisons. ITE Journal, March1994, pp. 31–36.
34.
LiuX., ShenL. D., and RenF.Operational Analysis of Bicycle Interchanges in Beijing, China. In Transportation Research Record 1396, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 18–21.
35.
LebacqueJ. P., LesortJ. B., and GiorgiF.Introducing Buses into First-Order Macroscopic Traffic Flow Models. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
36.
KhanS. I., and MainiP., Modeling Heterogeneous Traffic Flow. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
37.
MillerA.Nine Estimators of Gap Acceptance Parameters. Proc., 5th International Symposium on the Theory of Traffic Flow and Transportation (NewellG. F., ed.). American Elsevier, New York, 1971, pp. 215–235.
38.
WheelerA. H., and MorganJ. M.Albert Gate and Albion Gate Cycle Schemes in London. Traffic Engineering and Control, Vol. 28, No. 12, 1987, pp. 628–635.
39.
WachtelA., ForesterJ., and PelzD.Signal Clearance Timing for Bicyclists. ITE Journal, March1995, pp. 38–45.
40.
HallD.Bicycle Detection Through the Use of Inductance Loop Detectors at Vehicular Actuated Traffic Signals. Master’s thesis. The University of Texas, Austin, 1985.
41.
Traffic Signal Bicycle Detection Study: Final Report. City of San Diego, Calif., 1985.
42.
MooreR., and WillisC.Automatic Vehicle Classification: Part B—Recent Developments. IEE International Conference on Road Traffic Data Collection, London, England, 1984, pp. 22–26.
43.
JukkalaP., YlinenJ., and RaisanenA.Use of a Millimeter Wave Radiometer for Detecting Pedestrian and Bicycle Traffic. Proc., 17th European Microwave Conference, Rome, Italy, 1987, pp. 585–589.
44.
GuizhuW., and BingL.Automatic Detecting System for Traffic Flow of Bicycles Based on Pattern Recognition and Classification. Proc., IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Part 5 (of 5), Orlando, Fla., 1997, pp. 4360–4363.
45.
Special Report 209: Highway Capacity Manual, 3rd ed.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998.
46.
BotmaH.Method to Determine Level of Service for Bicycle Paths and Pedestrian-Bicycle Paths. In Transportation Research Record 1502, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 38–44.
47.
VirklerM., and BalasubramanianR.Flow Characteristics on Shared Hiking-Biking-Jogging Trails. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
48.
AllenD. P., RouphailN. M., HummerJ. E., and MilazzoJ. S.Operational Analysis of Uninterrupted Bicycle Facilities. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
49.
SortonA., and WalshT.Bicycle Stress Level as a Tool To Evaluate Urban and Suburban Bicycle Compatibility. In Transportation Research Record 1438, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1994, pp. 17–24.
50.
DavisW.Bicycle Test Route Evaluation for Urban Road Conditions. Transportation Congress, Vol. 2, American Society of Civil Engineers, San Diego, Calif., 1995.
51.
LandisB.Bicycle System Performance Measures. ITE Journal, Feb.1996, pp. 18–26.
52.
KhanA. M., and BacchusA.Bicycle Use of Highway Shoulders. In Transportation Research Record 1502, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 8–21.
53.
PutnamH., and RossA.Planning Tools To Evaluate and Analyze the Bicycle Compatibility of Urban Street Networks. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
54.
HughesR., and HarkeyD.Cyclists' Perception of Risk in a Virtual Environment: Effects of Lane Conditions, Traffic Speed and Traffic Volume. Proc., Traffic Congestion & Traffic Safety in the 21st Century, American Society of Civil Engineers, Chicago, Ill., 1997.
55.
HarkeyD. L., ReinfurtD., and KnuimanM.Development of Bicycle Compatibility Index. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
56.
AllenP., HummerJ. E., RouphailN. M., and MilazzoJ. S.Effect of Bicycles on Capacity of Signalized Intersections. Presented at 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1998.
57.
SharplesR.Modeling Cyclists in SATURN. Traffic Engineering and Control, Vol. 34, No. 10, 1993, pp. 472–475.
58.
FerraraT. C., and LamT. N.Simplified Method of Simulating Bicycle Delays at an Intersection. Proc., Summer Computer Simulation Conference, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, AFIPS Press, Montvale, N.J., 1979, pp. 920–927.
59.
VecellioR.Signalized Intersection Simulation Model for Vehicular, Pedestrian, and Bicycle Traffic. Proc., Annual Modeling and Simulation Conference, Pittsburgh, Pa., 1979.
60.
Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1988.
61.
Review of Planning Guidelines and Design Standards for Bicycle Facilities. Institute of Transportation Engineers, Washington, D.C., 1995.
62.
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities. AASHTO, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1998.
63.
SortonA.Program of Instruction for the Bicycle Planning and Facility Workshop. The Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, Evanston, Ill., 1993.
64.
Current Planning Guidelines and Design Standards Being Used By State and Local Agencies for Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities, Case Study No. 24. National Bicycling and Walking Study. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1992.
65.
GårderP. Rumble Strips or Not Along Wide Shoulders Designated for Bicycle Traffic? In Transportation Research Record 1502, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 1–7.
66.
ArdekaniS. A., GovindS., MattinglyS. P., DemersA., MahmassaniH. S., and TaylorD.Detection and Mitigation of Roadway Hazards for Bicyclists. CTR Research Report 1394-2F. Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas, 1995.
67.
Recommendations for Installing Shoulder Rumble Strips to Safely Accommodate Bicycles (Draft). FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1998.
