ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
MINISTERIO
DEL INTERIOR
ES4-Mare Nostrum:
The Working Book
Josefa Valcárcel, 28 - 28027 Madrid
w w w . d g t . es
MINISTERIO
DEL INTERIOR
Subdirección General
de Gestión de Tráfico
y Movilidad
ES4-Mare Nostrum:
The Working Book
MINISTERIO
DEL INTERIOR
Subdirección General
de Gestión de Tráfico
y Movilidad
THIS BOOK FOLLOWS THE WORK DONE BY THE MARE NOSTRUM VMS PROJECT UNDER THE TEMPO PROGRAMME (2002-2006). THE
PRESENT VERSION OF THE WORKING BOOK COMES UP FROM THE CO-OPERATION AGREEMENT BEGAN IN 2007 UNDER EASYWAY’S
EUROPEAN STUDY 4-MARE NOSTRUM BETWEEN • BRISA • DARS • DIRECCIÓN GENERAL DE TRÁFICO • HIGHWAYS AGENCY • INSTITUTO
DE TRÁFICO Y SEGURIDAD VIAL DE LA UNIVERSITAT DE VALÈNCIA • SINA • RIJKSWATERSTAAT • SERVEI CATALÀ DE TRÀNSIT • SETRA •
TRANSPORT SCOTLAND • VÄGVERKET
IT IS THE FRUIT OF THE IMPETUS GIVEN BY THE EUROPEAN UNION TO IMPLEMENTING ACTIVITIES RELATED TO ITS WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK
OF THE EASYWAY PROGRAMME 2007-2013
2nd Edition: February 2009 version 1.0
© ES4-Mare Nostrum
NIPO: 128-09-095-0
Legal Catalogue: M-20608-2009
ISBN: 978-84-8475-027-7
Edited: Dirección General de Tráfico
Proposed and developed by: María Teresa Blanch Micó, Antonio Lucas Alba and Carla Messina
Design: Vibra Diseño S.L.
All rights reserved. No part of this book covered by the copyrights may be totally or partially reproduced or copied in any form or by any means.
Printed in Spain
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Contents
Preface.......................................................................... 7
Introduction.................................................................. • Background..................................................... • The Working Book within the harmonisation
endeavour....................................................... • The Working Book, first gear within ES4.......... Existing VMS signing for changing road/traffic
conditions within the ES4 TERN area.......................... • WP1. Congestion............................................. • WP2. Rerouting............................................... • WP3. Unplanned events................................... • WP4. Road works............................................ • WP5. Dynamic traffic management.................. • WP6. Weather information............................... 11
11
14
17
21
25
53
61
73
83
95
Overview of existing VMS signing within
ES4-Mare Nostrum....................................................... 105
• Framing the road/traffic situation
that should be harmonised.............................. 107
• On innovation and design strategies................ 108
• Notes on structure and alphanumeric
characters....................................................... 109
• New ideas: on alternative coding schemas
using VMS....................................................... 112
Concluding remarks..................................................... 115
References.................................................................... 119
5
6
Figures
Tables
Figure 1:........................................................................................... 8
“One visual sign and eight oral/verbal signs within
ES4-Mare Nostrum”
Figure 2:........................................................................................... 13
“Evolution of road signs harmonisation in Europe (1909-2009)”
Figure 3:........................................................................................... 15
“Consequence oriented vs. Cause oriented pictograms”
Figure 4:........................................................................................... 17
“The three main components on the VMS harmonisation process
within ES4”
Figure 5:........................................................................................... 106
“Examples of pictogram heterogeneity on the Working Book”
Figure 6:.......................................................................................... 108
“Traditional ways of road sign innovation via derivation [15]”
Figure 7:........................................................................................... 109
“Polluting car [14], rain [15], car breakdown, HOV lane [10]
and Dutch bridge (WP6.1)”
Figure 8:........................................................................................... 111
“Different travel times formulations observed on the Working Book”
Figure 9:........................................................................................... 112
“Different examples of alphanumeric potential uses on VMS”
Figure 10:......................................................................................... 113
“Topologically oriented design on VMS (Slovenia)”
Figure 11:......................................................................................... 115
“A sample of pictographic and alphanumeric solutions with
potential wide applicability”
Table 1:............................................................................................. 18
“The Working Book: comparing 2006 and 2009 versions”
Table 2:............................................................................................. 22
“Road/Traffic events compiled on the ES4-Mare Nostrum Working Book”
Table 3:............................................................................................. 110
“Different rerouting strategies identified on the Working Book”
Table 4:............................................................................................. 116
“Coming road/Traffic events on the ES4-Mare Nostrum Working
Book (3rd Edition)”
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Preface
The society in which we live is increasingly influenced by ICT (Information
and Communication Technology). Information and communication are to be
tools of economic development and means towards a different society, a
better one, according to the ICT potential. People may think or dream about
sophisticated and futuristic scenarios against a background of technologies,
and effortful learning of techniques and procedures. Information and
communication could link people’s reciprocal thoughts and actions in a
fluent and enriching manner. However, the ICT potential does not only lie
in the possibility of providing complex social context to get to the future,
but also on making today’s complexity much easier to manage. Concerning
people, the capacity for them to adapt by learning has always been the
key process. Now this is aided and empowered by ICT, both for making
the unknown available and for making easy what is complex and hard to
understand today. Computers are the main example and referent. They allow
us to make more and more complex things and, at the same time, computer
users find them increasingly easier to run: from MS-2 to Windows-like to
today touch screens. Europeans share history, culture, politics, economy and to some extent
currency. We now want to be able to say that moving through the entire
Trans-European Road Network (TERN) is reasonably safe and efficient in
the whole of Europe, reducing social sorrow and also minimising important
economic costs. That involves taking complex things, transportation at the
European level, and making this easy. This, to some extent, involves easing
the communication to road users. “Make things easy to see” to road users
is probably a main concern for those trying to improve mobility and road
safety. “Make things easy to see” to all road users is a main concern for
those trying to improve mobility and road safety in Europe.
Fortunately this is not a new or recent vision in Europe, not at all. We may go
back more than 300 years and stop, for example, in the ambitious thoughts
expressed by the great Czech teacher, scientist, educator and writer Jan
Amos Comenius (1592-1670), considered the father of modern education,
and aiming no less than “to teach all things to all men and from all points
of view” [1]. In 1658, Comenius published his Orbis Sensualium Pictus
(The Visible World in Pictures), the first picture book intended for children
7
education [2]. The book covered many topics, illustrated by woodcuts that
were described by text underneath. It was intended to teach and learn Latin
making the most of existing knowledge on vernacular languages (Czech,
German, Polish, etc.), the ones actually used by people. A particular emphasis
of education reformers then was on the inadequate use of memory, based on
mechanical verbal repetition. Learning and memory should keep a different
relationship, and educators sought for ‘memory subsidies’, able to ease
the learning processes: pictures, symbols, words from different languages,
different ways for increasing and improving artificial memory so students’
minds would not be unnecessarily overloaded.
Comenius proposal (to use pictures for teaching purposes, to expose knowledge
to everybody’s eyes) is perfectly reflected on his Orbis Sensualis Pictus,
described by him as “our little encyclopaedia of sensitive things”. Among
other influences, the book’s foundations lie in a pedagogical movement then
called realism, intending to put students more in touch with the surrounding
things and beings on nature. The book shows up to 152 chapters, and contents
are organised around thematic pictures that act as core generators (e.g., ‘The
Earth’, ‘Metals’, ‘Ravenous birds’, ‘Engines’, and so on). Text comes below in
several columns one for each referent language (Czech, German, English,
Latin, etc.) normally two or three at a time, shown in parallel. The teacher
was to help students link the visual sign and the oral sign, as it comes on
each language [3].
German Semiotician Martin Krampen [4] has pointed to a more recent milestone
on the development of education through signs in the name of Austrian
graphic designer and inventor of pictography Dr. Otto Neurath (1882-1945).
Krampen points to the coincidence of the preparation of the 1926 International
Convention on road signs, which definitely turned to a preference for iconic
road signs, and the work done by Neurath in Vienna at the time. Neurath can
be credited with the first attempt to design a pictorial sign system in the 1920s,
the ‘Vienna Method of Pictorial Statistics’. This method “represented statistical
information by using silhouettes of figures in which one figure always stood for
a particular quantity that could be multiplied by repetition. Thus the individual
picture became a pictograph. For the pictograph to be able to perform its task,
all the unimportant features of the individual object to be represented had to
be omitted to express the essence of the object clearly.” [4, p. 70]. Later on
Neurath will publish ISOTYPE (International System Of TYpographic Picture
Education) taking 850 basic English words as the referent for constructing a
basic international graphic language. As Neurath so simply and rightly stated,
“Words make division, pictures make connection.” [5]1.
BOUCHON-CODA-FILE-CONGESTÄO-CONGESTION-ZASTOJ-CONGETIÓN-STOCKNING
FIGURE 1. One visual sign and eight oral/verbal signs within ES4-Mare Nostrum
(1) We feel indebted to Peter Simlinger, Director of the International Institute for Information Design (IIID, Vienna), who so kindly made us aware of this valuable reference.
8
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Figure 1 gives an idea of an issue, not in the Orbis Pictus… but within
the Working Book! In fact, the pages within the Working Book incredibly
resemble to Orbis Pictus formally and in structure. How about it? Compared
to Comenius work, the Working Book is but a small technical gadget, but it
follows the same principle and projects the same goal: it intends to develop
a common, shared understanding by making the most of objects (pictures,
pictograms) that represent reality. It happens that ES4-Mare Nostrum
partners share basically the same reality although not the way we name it. By
sharing the way we depict reality and by agreeing on the standard pictures
and messages that represent it we gain an immediate understanding of
our (road) reality.
A fundamental principle in Comenius thought referred to the development
of personal autonomy. Comenius’ Orbis Pictus and Neurath’s International
Picture Language intend to facilitate a personal understanding of things by
reference to reality. Brought to our scale and to our days, harmonised VMS
seek the same. We want a free, efficient and safe mobility for people in Europe
regardless of the number of languages they can read. Messages are displayed
on real time in a variety of circumstances. We obviously cannot expect road
users to read a book when they have a few seconds to read and react on the
road. But we don’t have to worry about it; the book is already on the road,
either on the VMS (or displayed on board) and specifically related to real time
traffic issues. And here is where ICT are really making easy what otherwise
could be quite complex. Aiming for better education, peace and cooperation
of nations, probably both Comenius and Neurath would be quite amused and
happy about it.
Alberto Arbaiza
Dirección General de Tráfico
Rafael Conte
Servei Català de Trànsit
Christope Desnouailles
SETRA
Jonathan Moran
Transport Scotland
Hans Remejin
Rijkswaterstaat
Pedro Dias Sequeira
BRISA
Gunilla Thyni
Vägverket
Gilberto Tognoni
SINA
Paul Whitehead
Highways Agency
Ulrich Zorin
DARS
9
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Introduction
Background
“Enlargements of the sign repertory are a result of sudden changes in the
environment caused by sudden advances in technology.” [4] This simple
statement made by German semiotician Martin Krampen describes the
modern foundation of road signs: new mobility needs triggered by new
technical possibilities. Back in the 1900s, danger warning signs were
basically the only immediately available resource to overcome the sudden
and sharp changes on road usability introduced by new motor vehicles. It is
easy to understand that for the road network the difference between 16km/h
(horse drawn carriages) and 80km/h (soon available to most motorcars)
is enormous. Motorisation turned a road network into a dangerous road
network in a few years and road signs were the most pragmatic and
feasible approach to that problem. Motorised nations engaged in a process
of identification of road or traffic situations that could be managed via road
signs. Improving vehicles and road infrastructure to the point of making some
road signs not so badly wanted would take considerably longer [6].
Motorisation was obviously not a local or national, temporary fashion; it
was a global, worldwide process. Early in the 20th century that fact was
particularly evident in Europe, where many small and middle-sized nations
share borders and get involved in commercial exchanges. So a process of
institutionalisation and standardisation of road signs soon begun, adopting
the form of international conventions of road signs. The first one was held in
Paris (1909), where the first four danger warning signs were adopted, and
many other followed. The 1931 Convention, held in Geneva still under the
League of Nations, and the 1949 Geneva Protocol Convention on Road Traffic
Signs, managed by the emerging United Nations, were particularly important
ones showing a consolidated formal repertoire of signing functions and the
corresponding shapes, colours, and signing contents. Through this time the
idea of relying on pictures, not words, to communicate road information
was also a well established design trend. Both Conventions are important
predecessors of the Convention on Road Signs and Signals, held in Vienna
and signed by 35 nations on November 8, 1968 [7].
Let us return to Krampen’s quotation as it points to road signs founding
11
elements but also to road signs core problems: innovation and standardisation.
Back in the 1970s a technological revolution –‘the third telematic wave’ [8]was bringing an additional parameter into play: the enlargement of road sign
visualization devices. In two decades, we have passed from fixed-posted to
fixed-variable and to mobile, in-car displays; from painted to bulb to LED
surfaces; from restricted displays to full matrix. And this time changes in
technology (telematics, road informatics) do not increase risk (as was the
case of speed brought by motorcars) but play a supporting role to the road
environment, to aid mobility and safety when nearly 1,000 million cars travel
the world. Contrary to the original context for road signing, now we need road
information as a constitutive element of the road transport: not as a temporary
resource that waits for better roads to come, or as a second order element,
but as a tool that forms the substance of transport management.
Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS) create a rich context, collecting data,
processing, distributing and displaying information to road users in order to
improve their making of decisions concerning mobility. And the ITS context
clearly rockets signing possibilities and demands. By increasing flexibility
so much (what, when, how and where road information can be displayed)
many new possibilities arise. Provided that the necessary technological
and infrastructural resources come into play, old signing parameters simply
fade away. Think about space (distance, length or both): road users may
get information quite far away, very near or even within certain events
(e.g., congestion, road works). Think about time (travel times) or about
time-space (e.g., ‘road works will be set up here tomorrow’). Think about
road/traffic events: posted signs were linked with road conditions (e.g.,
dangerous bends, intersections, narrow bridges, etc.), but modern signs
(VMS, in-car) may refer to practically all traffic circumstances: visibility,
congestion, re-routing, ghost drivers, grip or capacity issues, speed control,
12
polluted areas, black spots or sections, and so on, giving way to tactical or
strategic management [9]. Think about the core signing functions: regulatory,
danger warning, informative messages can now be displayed at any time
according to road, traffic and enforcement parameters, and so on.
The problem, as we know, is that no so many informative elements (i.e., road
signs) are actually available. Our study of the 1968 Convention [7] shows
it as the very end of a process of 60 years devoted to the identification of
structural parameters of the road that needed to be assured (e.g., regulated)
or informed about (warning, directional signs). Road signs were generated
correspondingly (functions, shapes, colours and contents of signs, position)
in order to cope with the identified (structural, topological) needs. Posted
signs correspond to needs evaluated after a fixed picture of the road network
-like a good picture taken from above.
A new vision of road transport and traffic was developing in the 1980s
(key words are high speed, real time traffic information, variable) while the
international road signs catalogue was still mainly looking at the 1950s. And
the lack of answers at the global level was corresponded with innovation at
the national level. This context (with VMS) brings us back to a time, before the
1909-1968 age of Conventions, when road signs could be different in one
village or another, one province or another, differ in European countries, and
so on. In the early 1990s, new information technologies made the lacking road
signing dimensions of the 1968 Convention catalogue evident. Particularly
in Europe, encouraged by industrial dispositions and management needs
alike, national road administrations were faster in generating and adopting
new road signs than UNECE’s WP.1 standardising them. The result was a
Europe-wide lack of road signs harmonisation within the new and expanding
domain of temporary, variable road signing on real time.
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
The situation and implications concerning road signs described
in the paragraphs above have been recognised and fought
long ago, particularly in Europe. Well known acronyms such
as COST, VAMOS, MELYSSA, EAVES, FIVE, TROPIC, to name
a few [7], have all contributed to bring this situation to a
more reasonable context (Fig. 2). It is increasingly clear, that
otherwise rich and interesting language differences in Europe
should not be a barrier to a safe and efficient road transport
within the TERN (Trans-European Road Network). Since the
middle 1990s, MIP programmes of telematic implementation
have developed a network of Euro-regional projects (ARTS,
SERTI, CORVETTE, CENTRICO and so on) dealing with many
issues, also road signs.
1977-1985: project COST30
.UMBEROF
CARSINTHE
WORLD
FRAMEWORK PROGRAMS AND OTHERS
s6-3hWHITEBOOKvPROJECT6!-/3
s3%42!6-3"OOK
sPROJECT-%,933!PROJECT%!6%3
sPROJECT4%,4%.
sPROJECT42/0)#
sPROJECT)-02/6%2
sPROJECT3/-3).3!&%49
&)6%
#OLOURINVERSION
#ROSSESANDARROWS
#ONGESTIONPICTOGRAM
6IENNA#ONVENTION
-ARE.OSTRUM6-3
%UROPEAN3TUDY
x
1968, Vienna Convention
-ARE.OSTRUM6-3
3MALL'ROUPON6-3
x
2%
1995
2006
Perhaps an interesting trend to frame this effort in Europe is the
s)NTERNATIONAL#ONFERENCEFORTHE2EPLACEMENTOFTHE'ENEVA0ROTOCOL
s0ROJECTFORA7ORLDWIDE#ONVENTION
one that goes from applied science (Framework Programmes)
s0ROTOCOLON2OAD4RAFFIC3IGNSAND3IGNALS
to scientific implementation (Euro-regional Projects). Project
s0ROJECT
s#ONVENTIONONTHE3TANDARDISATIONOF2OAD3IGNS
SOMS/IN-SAFETY (Substituting/Optimising (variable) Message
s)NTERNATIONAL#ONVENTION
s&IRSTINTERNATIONALCONVENTION
Signs for the Trans-European Road Network) has operated that
way between 2005 and 2007. Also MIP-2 MARE NOSTRUM VMS
FIGURE 2. Evolution of road signs harmonisation in Europe (1909-2009).
(2003-2006) has adopted empirical procedures in order to solve
old problems: sign innovation and standardisation. The result of
This process and this way of working found a place within the new EASYWAY
both projects went into UNECE’s WP.1 Small Group on VMS (2003-2008) a
program, fostering a more complex structure where Euro-regions and
group made by functionaries from France, Netherlands and Spain (all coming
European Studies are meant to cross-fertilise. Continuing with the spirit of
from Mare Nostrum VMS) and Germany. The work of the Small Group on VMS
the Mare Nostrum VMS Long Distance Corridor (2003-2006), the European
crystallised into a document aiming to update the 1968 Convention concerning
Study 4 –Mare Nostrum (ES4) keeps and expands such compromises
VMS. This document passed to the Consolidated Resolution on Road Signs and
concerning innovation and standardisation of VMS. As we shall see in this
Signals (RE.2) stage in November 2008 [10] and now is available and waiting
second edition of the so-called Working Book, there is a lot to do.
for the next amendment of the 1968 Convention.
13
Let us be optimistic, however, as old inertia concerning road signs and new
technologies are warming up steadily. A mixed technical, scientific, and
institutional procedure is going on at the European level in all concerning
road signing. It is badly needed as the fixed picture of the road network
doesn’t go anymore. The potential of new signing technologies in use, and
also the ones being developed right now, calls for a faster and pro-active
approach to such matters. Road signs are becoming variable and mobile,
nearly ubiquitous. Road and traffic management are increasingly dynamic
in nature. At the beach we may play football when the tide is low, and
maybe fish when the tide is high. Also the road network goes on assuming
changing patterns continuously all across Europe: professional and personal
trips, commuters and congestions, professional and holiday flows, migration
trends, weather [11]. People, after all, always made a living by moving.
The WORKING BOOK within the harmonisation
endeavour
Nearly three years separate the first and the second edition of the ES4-Mare
Nostrum Working Book. Both texts differ yet have a lot in common. We will
first analyse differences and similarities considering the role of the Working
Book within the harmonisation task, and then analyse differences between
both editions more specifically.
The Working Book backstage
The original idea of the Mare Nostrum VMS project was articulating a Long
Distance Corridor for public and private operators dealing with similar VMS (one
pictogram and three lines of text with 12-20 characters per line) and facing similar
road/traffic problems. Our previous experience within the European VMS Platform
was somehow frustrating: relevant issues and ideas were put forward there, but
there were also too many members with quite different VMS devices, signing
criteria and management priorities. Although interesting and relevant information
was shared, no way towards common VMS harmonisation was envisaged at that
level. By simplifying partnership, goals, road infrastructures and VMS types (a
smaller beginning) several drawbacks were in principle controlled within Mare
Nostrum VMS. France, Italy and Spain, all southern European countries, shared
some basic parameters, and a Long Distance Corridor from Seville to Trieste
was assumed in 2003 as a specific goal.
The Working Book (WB) was the first output of the Mare Nostrum VMS project
(2003-2006), its early (fuzzy) versions going back to April 2004. Building the
WB involved a double task. One task was obvious and explicit. We imagined
14
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
the Corridor Seville-Trieste, but the potential road/traffic situations to deal
with were too many. In order to optimise time, only the ones concerning all
of us would be tackled. Harmonisation at that point was tried as a direct
step. Each member would indicate the information used for each case, then
defined quite generally, around basic ‘variations’ on the road (visibility, wind,
grip, etc.). Then we would reach consensus on what informative elements
(pictograms, legends, numbers, and alphanumeric characters) could be
used by all partners. It must be said that this way was not working at the
beginning because partners were just bringing in the messages they used
at home. There was a misswing task the group had to undertake.
That task was then being implicitly articulated. It was the need to decide
about which fundamental principles of design the group should follow. This is
the essence of harmonisation, because design principles involve the referent
of the process: the public. Who do we harmonise for? After the Netherlands
joined in 2004, four countries formed the Mare Nostrum VMS project. Partners,
all versed on VMS domestic affairs, strongly felt (and still do!), the strain
between working for the national public and the European public. European
considerations (27 countries, more than 20 official languages) make clear the
need to wear the European hat. Domestic responsibilities and practicalities
(type of VMS, display possibilities, reliance on some pictograms) made difficult
even temporary taking off the national hat.
Building upon FIVE, also upon the 1968 Convention philosophy, the group
reaffirmed not only the need to rely on pictograms, but also the need to
choose pictograms that explain a lot and don’t need text to follow them.
In so doing, we extended one of the FIVE recommendations and made it a
general principle for pictogram selection: specific, consequence oriented
pictograms need less text than cause oriented or generic ones. In addition,
consequences tell drivers more than causes in terms of the specific driving
actions concerning their mobility and safety. Clearly, these concepts form
a continuum (Figure 3) where not only signs, also signing functions mix.
Regulatory signs are all highly specific and consequence oriented, then
danger warning signs, then informative (normally optional, according to
personal goals on trip). This seems to have been implicitly understood by
road sign designers through time, at least under the 1968 Convention:
regulatory signs need little complementary information, if any.
The task of setting up and agreeing on the right design principles was of
fundamental importance and still is. We had to assume the philosophy of
the 1968 Convention to choose the right principles for VMS design. We may,
from now on, be confident on the smooth acceptance of such principles
now forming part of the WP.1 Consolidated Resolution on Road Signs and
Signals (R.E.2; January 2008, p.20-21) [10]:
Available instruments (guidelines)
were useful yet not enough. It was
clear that the group supported FIVE
[12] in principle, although several
drawbacks were identified [13].
FIGURE 3. Consequence oriented vs. Cause oriented pictograms
15
“5.3.2 Rules for message content and message structure for VMS
5.3.2.1 Traffic related VMS messages
1. When using VMS with pictograms the main information is given by
the pictogram. The use of specific pictograms instead of generic ones
(e.g., the pictogram A, 24 representing “congestion” instead of general
danger A, 32) is preferred, when they exist.
2. Make use of graphical elements as much as possible when using
text (e.g., pictograms, symbols).
3. Use regulatory messages without any text, if possible.
4. Danger warning messages (using the red triangle) should only be
used when the dangerous spot or stretch of road is nearby the VMS (for
instance, no more than 2 km). When using words in danger warning
messages, place the information about the nature of the danger first
and then brief complementary advice can be given under.
5. When a VMS is used to inform about a situation at some distance
(for instance, 2 km or more) or in the future (e.g. expected road works),
additional information (e.g. distance, or respectively an indication
of date and time) is necessary. The recommended structure of the
message is the following: first give the information concerning the
nature of the event on the first line, then distance and/or time indication
on the second line. A third line can be used for additional information
(e.g. advice, cause).
6. Avoid alternating messages.
7. Avoid redundancy, except for the purpose of making drivers familiar
with new pictograms.
8. Use only well-known and international abbreviations (e.g., ‘Km’ for
kilometre, ‘Min’ for minutes, etc.).
9. Minimise the number of words and symbols (e.g. maximum
seven).
16
5.3.2.2 Non-traffic related VMS messages
10. A VMS should be blank when no traffic related messages have to
be displayed. An exception could be the display of dots or the time to
indicate that the VMS is working.
11. Commercial/advertising messages are not permitted.”
Although this is generally accepted, it still questioned here and there, when
dealing with the specific elements of the specific road/traffic situation. Then
instead of denying its value it must be re-enacted and alternative solutions
found, perhaps empirical ones. The drawbacks for harmonisation are not
present at the broad level of principles, but on making such principles rule the
specific road/traffic event we harmonise. After years of national innovation, in
spite of having signed or ratified the 1968 Convention, differences between
partners are evident. That means that such rules are so broad or not followed,
and more defined principles of design, and rules able to put some order on
VMS displays in accordance with the European public are needed.
But let us return to the former, explicit task. We end up understanding that
‘direct’ harmonisation was going to be difficult. First, messages from the
different partners had to be exposed then compared, and possible solutions
projected. In the harmonisation process, the WB is but the very first step.
As we explained on the first edition [13], the problem of harmonisation
between European VMS operators is then reduced to the question: What
messages do I/YOU/WE display on VMS when I/YOU/WE confront this or that
specific situation on the road? If we all use the same specific VMS design to
inform about the same road event we can say that we have achieved VMS
harmonisation. So, in order to reach VMS harmonisation, “VMS x road/traffic
situation” has to be specifically addressed by all participants (be it at the
local/national or the international level). If we obtain the same answer from
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
all parties we will have VMS harmonisation... If we can discern why everyone
does not use the same VMS then we will know why harmonisation is not
being achieved. Part of the key to harmonisation lies there: identifying the
potential group of collaborators and, identifying the specific road situations
that need to be standardised.
VMS harmonisation is generally thought of as something global that should
be achieved once and forever by all participants in all respects (i.e. for all road
events). However, harmonisation can be partially but successfully achieved. It
depends on how we set the stage. The long, step-by-step history of 146 signs
agreed upon at the 1968 Convention is a good example: only four signs were
harmonised in the first international meeting held in Paris in 1909 [4].
ground for appraising the main hindrances towards harmonisation in Europe, be it
lack of general design principles, of common pictograms, or message structures.
The result is compiled in the WORKING BOOK (see pages 25 to 103). It is important
to note that when new members come to ES4-Mare Nostrum, the first task they
are required to assume is complete each of the N road/traffic situations (now 34)
within the WB with the messages they use on VMS at home.
Back in 2006, when the first edition of the Working Book was presented
in the Euro-regional Conference in Barcelona, it was the main output of
the Mare Nostrum VMS project [13]. It included our revision of the start of
the art concerning VMS harmonisation, our ideas concerning VMS design,
some empirical results and the road/traffic situations and displays that
should be harmonised. At the time of the present edition, the Working Book
is not the star of the ES4-Mare Nostrum project. After all it only shows the
reasons to take the need to harmonise seriously. However, its role within
the harmonisation process is utterly consolidated. Currently, ES4 grounds
the harmonisation task on three main activities (figure 4):
2. Partners solve the problems detected and put together in the WB.
Potential solutions must be international (European), following the spirit of
documents as the 1968 Vienna Convention on Road Signs and Signals –i.e.,
logically adopted. Problem solving includes plain consensus or empirical
work. New signing formulations (pictograms, alphanumeric) are empirically
studied follo wing
the 4-step Method.
Potential new members
may decide either that
the empirical material
concerning such and
such formulation as
revealed in the different
countries is convincing,
or that they want to
perform the studies at
home, as did the rest of
the group members.
1. Partners share their views concerning a) what road/traffic events are
important and have priority and b) the specific VMS displayed by the partners.
This information, provided by the real users (VMS operators), constitutes the basic
3. Partners propose
harmonised VMS that
could be used in Europe
The Working Book, first gear within ES4
FIGURE 4. The three main components on the VMS
harmonisation process within ES4
17
considering the specific road/traffic situation and the type of VMS used
(VMS showing text, one pictogram + text; pictogram + text + pictogram;
two pictograms + text; full matrix). That is the pragmatic contribution
that should be expected at the European level concerning VMS design
for a variety of road/traffic situations (up to 34 at the moment). The
result is compiled in a document called The ES4 Guidelines. Both the
Working Book and the ES4 Guidelines hold the same structure of road/
traffic events.
Figure 4 shows more than the way ES4
task is being organised; it shows how VMS
harmonisation goals can be pursued for
whatever group at local, national or European
levels. Italian partners, for example, have a
complex structure of motorways and have
their own ‘Mare Nostrum’ meeting. Similar
processes could be expected in Spain or in the
UK, where several national road or transport
administrations cooperate. This can be set
to a lower level too, as it was the case of
the VMS guidelines produced in Catalonia in
2008 [14]. Catalonian Traffic Administration
(Servei Català de Trànsit) joined with several
private motorways (ACESA, AUMAR, AUTEMA),
with tunnel operators (CADI-TABASA) and
with Barcelona’s Council in order to define
a common set of road/traffic situations and
common (harmonised) messages. The level of
specificity and number of situations obviously
18
varies: upper levels, as ES4, forcefully show fewer situations and focus on
wider issues.
Table 1 compares the 2006 and 2009 versions of the ES4-Mare Nostrum
Working Book. More partners, more road situations and a wider goal make
the largest difference between both editions. The heterogeneity condensed
within the Working Book is its main raison d’être. The Working Book is an
PARAMETERS
WB 2006
WB 2009
Working Book structure
6 Work Packages, following ‘road/traffic 6 Work Packages, following
variations’
VMS operators practice
Number of road/traffic
situations tackled
16
34
Participating countries
France, Italy, Netherlands, Spain
France, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal,
Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Republic
of Ireland, United Kingdom
Goal
Long Distance Corridor Seville-Trieste
TERN
Types of VMS devices on
the network
Pictogram – Text
Pictogram- Pictogram-Text
Pictogram-Text-Pictogram
Text only
Pictogram – Text
Pictogram- Pictogram-Text
Pictogram-Text-Pictogram
Full Matrix
Number of meetings since 17 meetings
September 18, 2003
31 meetings
TABLE 1. The Working Book: comparing 2006 and 2009 versions
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
explicit claim, a way of showing how European partners really need to
do something about harmonisation. This is a negative feature but it can
change into a positive one. For example, by having a look at the respective
contributions, some design solutions can be easily assumed or copied by
some partners at the respective national levels (that is the case for Spain,
that has imported solutions from France and Italy, see WP. 4.1 and 4.2). ES4
partners know that the other partners are also road operators that use such
messages at home (not VMS philosophers).
adequate location formulations, the missing pictograms, and the number of
VMS necessary to respond to certain situations) are identified and shown
as ‘raw data’ on the WB. It is, in sum, a way for constituting the first stage
towards harmonisation under a prism that aims both realism and utility.
Some of the solutions brought in by one partner or another may outshine
as the best solution for the whole group. In the Working Book, the design
parameters and information concerning each partner locate in a column.
Late in 2006 we began to ask ourselves for the Best Practice Column, the
design solution that suits better harmonisation goals from the European point
of view. This was then changed into the Harmonisation Column (in order to
avoid suspicion on biased labels). As the right design principles, emerge
well suited to the European public, some design solutions are clearly better
than other. This was the origin of the ES4 Guidelines, its first version being
right now prepared.
Beyond ES4 partners, any European country, national or local administration,
may make the most of this knowledge, just looking at the overview of problems
and signing solutions applied by up to nine partners independently in their
respective signing contexts. This is also a very important reason to publish
the Working Book, the place where it all begins concerning harmonisation:
the WB includes the more important road/traffic situations and events form
the point of view of the whole group; road/traffic situations and events are
tackled according to certain level of specificity, not necessarily the same for
all situations. Important parameters (what means ‘near’ or ‘far’, what are the
19
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Existing VMS Signing For Changing Road/Traffic
Conditions Within The ES-4 TERN Area
The following pages show agreements and disagreements concerning 34
different road/traffic situations identified by ES4-Mare Nostrum members as
important topics for the TERN. The structure differs formally from the previous
one in 2006, as we have adapted it to our idea of the perspective of the European
VMS operator. The compilation includes six main Work Packages (WP): WP1
Congestion, WP2 Rerouting, WP3 Unplanned Events, WP4 Road Works, WP5
Dynamic Traffic Management, and WP6 Weather Information (Table 2).
Each page is structured indicating above (upper left) the description of the
road/traffic situation and besides it (to the right) a graphical sketch, locating
the M-VMS, the specific road/traffic situation, etc. The main signing functions
involved are also synthesised (regulatory, danger warning, informative) and
also the main type of action, either tactical, affecting only the road section
were the VMS is situated, or strategic, actions having an influence on other
roads [9]. A box includes the main pictogram/s used, the main alphanumeric
elements and structure (information on the first, second and third line,
following FIVE). Some space is allowed for comments and then some real
examples are included showing VMS in current national/official languages
(French, Italian, Portuguese, Dutch, English, and so on).
Nowadays the ES4-Mare Nostrum project is conducted by nine countries: France
(coordinated by SETRA), Italy (with the contribution of seven northern private
motorways coordinated by SINA), the Netherlands (Rijkswaterstaat), Portugal
(BRISA), Slovenia (DARS), Spain (where two official traffic administrations
contribute: Dirección General de Tráfico, DGT, and Servei Català de Trànsit,
SCT), Sweden (Vägverket) and Republic of Ireland and United Kingdom (where
also two official administrations, Transport Scotland and Highways Agency,
contribute). Columns are placed in alphabetical order of country names.
Agreements and disagreements among the ES4-Mare Nostrum members
are self-explanatory: sometimes pictograms differ, sometimes the structure
or the position of the alphanumeric characters, and other times the very
relevance of the road/traffic situation is what differs between members.
Immediate harmonisation alternatives vary substantially: wind, and to some
extent congestion or road capacity show potential improvement. Other
issues, notably bad visibility, slippery road (both ice/water) or rerouting
present more complex situations. All in all, ES4-Mare Nostrum members
should still expect a lot of work in terms of harmonisation2.
(2) As the rest of the ES4-Mare Nostrum members, the Republic of Ireland uses the standard danger warning pictorials yet not the same danger warning frame, using yellow diamond with black border and not the red triangle. Quite exotic in Europe, it still complies with the 1968 Convention dispositions.
21
WP
1. CONGESTION
ROAD/TRAFFIC SITUATIONS COMPILED
1.1. Congestion –no exit
1.1.1. Congestion –no exit, VMS just within
1.1.2. Congestion –no exit, VMS near
1.1.3. Congestion –no exit, VMS far away
1.2. Congestion –exit available
1.2.1. Congestion –exit available, VMS just within
1.2.2. Congestion –exit available, VMS near
1.2.3. Congestion –exit available, VMS far away
WP
3. UNPLANNED
EVENTS
3.1. Accident ahead
3.2. Debris on the road
3.3. Ghost driver
3.4. Hard shoulder occupied
3.5. Road closed –no exit
4. ROAD WORKS
4.1. Road closed –exit available
4.2. Closed exit
4.3. Lane closed
4.4. Hard shoulder occupied
5. DYNAMIC
TRAFFIC
MANAGEMENT
5.1. Hard shoulder usage
5.2. Additional lane
5.3. Speed reduction
6. WEATHER
INFORMATION
6.1. Wind
6.2. Bad visibility
1.3. Congestion on exit
1.3.1. Congestion on exit, VMS just within
1.3.2. Congestion on exit, VMS near
1.3.3. Congestion on exit, VMS far away
1.4. Low speed limit due to congestion
1.5. Traffic flow info on two routes to same end
1.6. Traffic flow information
– 1 to 3 routes, not same end
1.6.1. Main road congested
1.6.2. Exit to alternative locations congested
2. REROUTING
2.1. Explicit rerouting
2.2. Implicit rerouting
2.3. Travel times
ROAD/TRAFFIC SITUATIONS COMPILED
5.3.1. Due to incident ahead (sharp reduction)
5.3.2. Due to pollution limits (moderate reduction)
5.3.3. Average speed monitored (moderate reduction)
6.2.1. Bad visibility due to fog
6.3. Slippery road
6.3.1. Slippery road due to snow/ice
6.3.2. Slippery road due to rain-water
TABLE 2. Road/Traffic events compiled on the ES4-Mare Nostrum Working Book
22
Existing VMS signing for changing road/traffic conditions
• WP1. Congestion
• WP2. Rerouting
• WP3. Unplanned events
• WP4. Road works
• WP5. Dynamic traffic management (also speed)
• WP6. Weather information
23
WP1. Congestion
WP1.1. Congestion –no exit
• 1.1.1. Congestion -no exit, VMS just within
• 1.1.2. Congestion -no exit, VMS near
• 1.1.3. Congestion -no exit, VMS far away
WP1.2. Congestion –exit available
• 1.2.1. Congestion –exit available, VMS just within
• 1.2.2. Congestion –exit available , VMS near
• 1.2.3. Congestion –exit available , VMS far away
WP1.3. Congestion on exit
• 1.3.1. Congestion on exit, VMS just within
• 1.3.2. Congestion on exit, VMS near
• 1.3.3. Congestion on exit, VMS far away
WP1.4. Low speed limit due to congestion
WP1.5. Traffic flow info on two routes to same end
WP1.6. Traffic flow info – 1 to 3 routes, not same end
• 1.6.1. Main road congested
• 1.6.2. Exit to alternative locations congested
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.1.1 Traffic congestion ahead-no exit. The VMS is placed just within congestion
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (no exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
26
L.1.
Situation 1: END OF CONGESTION
Situation 2: TRHOUGH-TIME
CONGESTION-INCIDENT SLOW TRAFFIC
CONGESTION OF XX KM QUEUE
End point with “tot” (till). In this case a
nearby “splitting point”
L.2.
Situation 1: XX KM AWAY
Situation 2: [NAME OF INTERCHANGE]
OF XX KM (WAITING TIME)
# of km of “file” (queue)
L.3.
TILL [LOCATION]
Sometimes the message “increasing
or decreasing queue” is given.
CODA DI 5 KM
IN AUMENTO
FINO A ORTONA
Since this type of signs is normally
placed before intersections to inform
about the situation after the intersection,
this particular message is only displayed in case there is only a queue before
the nearby intersection.
If congestion is caused by a specific
event, an appropriate message is used
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
CONGESTION
“FOR XX MILES” OR QUEUE TIME
LOCATION OF EVENT
REDUCE SPEED
LENGHT –
Distance can be changed
CONGESTION
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1. LENGTH
2.
3.
1.ADVICE
2. TILL
3. LENGTH
1. ADVICE
2. LOCATION
3. CAUSE
LOCATION OR TRAVELTIME
—
PLACE XX MIN
—
PLACE YY MIN
Other distance-length formulations
KM XX
KM YY
Possible second pictograms: accident, road
works, pass from 2 to 1 lane
Cause can be displayed on third line or
second pictogram
Generally the distance, is
placed under the pictogram
= 6 KM
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
2-15 km
RESTID TILL
FINS A
(
155) NYBO 25 MIN
ST. BOI
(
157) HAGA 45 MIN
DE 9 KM
ACCIDENT
27
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.1.2 Traffic congestion ahead-no exit. The VMS is placed near congestion (≤ 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (no exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
28
L.1.
Situation 1: CONGESTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC IN 2 KM
CONGESTION IN 2 KM
QUEUE in 2 KM
L.2.
Situation 1: SLOW DOWN
Situation 2: XX KM AWAY
LENGTH
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.3.
MODERATE SPEED
Alert with flashing lights
In NL this sort of information is not
given with the sort of VMS considered
here. The standard Motorway Control
System is used to display queue warnings in case of nearby congestion.
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
CONGESTION
“FOR XX MILES” OR QUEUE TIME
LOCATION OF EVENT
REDUCE SPEED
LATERAL
CONGESTION
= < 5 KM
SPAIN
SWEDEN
LOCATION OR TRAVELTIME
ADVICE
—
PLACE XX MIN
ADVICE
—
PLACE YY MIN
Possible second pictograms: accident,
road works, pass from 2 to 1 lane
Cause can be displayed on third line or
second pictogram
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
2-15 km
RESTID TILL
MODERI
VELOCITAT
29
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.1.3 Traffic congestion ahead-no exit. The VMS is placed far away congestion (> 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (no exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
30
L.1.
CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC IN 3 KM
CONGESTION IN 3 KM
QUEUE in 3 KM
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
AT XX KM AWAY
LENGTH
Node 1 – Node 2
L.3.
Situation 1: null
Situation 2: TRHOUGH-TIME: XXHYY
CAUTION
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here.
The standard Motorway Control System is
used to display queue
warnings in case of nearby congestion
(<2 km).
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
CONGESTION
FROM JUNCTION XX
DISTANCE
LATERAL
LENGHT >2KM
Distance can be changed
CONGESTION
> 5 KM
SPAIN
SWEDEN
LOCATION OR TRAVELTIME
1. DISTANCE
2. LOCATION A
3. DISTANCE
1.
2. LOCATION B
3.
—
PLACE XX MIN
—
PLACE YY MIN
Distance-length formulations
A XX KM; KM XX KM YY; KM XXX YYY
Loc. A-Loc. B
Possible second pictograms: accident, road
works, pass from 2 to 1 lane
Cause can be displayed on third line or
second pictogram
A 10 KM
RESTID TILL
HOSTALRIC
CARDEDEU
A 4 KM
31
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.2.1 Traffic congestion ahead-exit available. The VMS is placed just within congestion
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (one exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
32
L.1.
Situation 1: END OF CONGESTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION LENGTH
CONGESTION-INCIDENT SLOW TRAFFIC
CONGESTION OF XX KM QUEUE
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
Situation 1: XX KM AWAY
Situation 2: [NAME OF INTERCHANGE]
LENGTH
LOCATION
(Node 1 – Node 2)
CAUTION or
ALTERNATIVE <name>
L.3.
Sometimes exit suggested,
according to the Police.
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here.
See WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where
this exit is the “other” standard route
the sign is informing about.
Alternative, if applicable, is given by
Operational Managers and\or Police
Authorities.
CONGESTION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
CONGESTION
“FOR XX MILES” OR QUEUE TIME
SECTION OF THE EVENT
REDUCE SPEED
SECTION OF THE EVENT
LATERAL
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2. LENGTH
3. ROAD Nº
1. DISTANCE-LENGTH
2. RECOMMENDED
3. ALTERNATIVE
1.
2. ROAD Nº
3. ROAD Nº
LOCATION:
LINK/ROAD SECTION
ALTERNATIVE
S.1 is a tactical action; S.2-3 are strategic
actions.
Distance-length formulations depended on
the case.
Cause: third line or second pictogram
(Accident, Road works)
(
KM 223
154) VÄST
238
VÄLJ ANNAN VÄG
= 25 KM
RECOMENDADO
R-3
C-31
ALTERNATIVA
C-32
33
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.2.2 Traffic congestion ahead-exit available. The VMS is placed near congestion (≤ 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (one exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
L.1.
Situation 1: CONGESTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC IN 2 KM
CONGESTION IN 2 KM QUEUE IN 2 KM
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
Situation 1 : SLOW DOWN
Situation 2 : XX KM AWAY
LENGTH
LOCATION
(Node 1 – Node 2)
L.3.
Situation 1 : NULL
Situation 2 : ADVICE
Alert with flashing lights
EXAMPLES
BOUCHON
34
20 KM
A5 CONSEILLEE
CAUTION or
ALTERNATIVE <name>
Sometimes exit suggested,
according to the Police.
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here. See
WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where this exit
is the “other” standard route the sign is
informing about
Alternative, if applicable, is given by
Operational Managers and\or Police
Authorities.
CONGESTION
< 5 KM
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
60
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
“FROM JUNCTION XX” OR DISTANCE
LOCATION OR TRAVELTIME
DISTANCE
REDUCE SPEED
LATERAL
ADVICE
—
PLACE XX MIN
ADVICE
—
PLACE YY MIN
Second pictogram: informative cause
(road works, accident, pass from two
lanes to one, recommended speed)
(
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
156) NYBO
2 km
RESTID TILL
MODERI
VELOCITAT
35
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.2.3 Traffic congestion ahead-exit available. The VMS is placed far away congestion (> 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the road section (one exit available)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
Situation 1: DIRECTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION LENGTH
SLOW TRAFFIC IN 2 KM
CONGESTION IN 2 KM QUEUE IN 2 KM
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
Situation 1 : CONGESTION
Situation 2 : ADVICE
LENGTH
LOCATION
(Node 1 – Node 2)
L.3.
Situation 1 : ADVICE
Situation 2 : NULL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
Sometimes exit suggested,
according to the Police.
EXAMPLES
= > LYON
36
CAUTION
BOUCHON
A5 CONSEILLEE
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here. See
WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where this exit
is the “other” standard route the sign is
informing about
CONGESTION
> 5 KM
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“Congestion ahead” or “ Queueing Traffic”
FROM JUNCTION XX
DISTANCE
Distance can be changed:
2, 3, 4 km
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2. CITY/PLACE
3. ROAD Nº
LOCATION OR TRAVELTIME
1. DISTANCE-LENGTH
2. ALTERNATIVE
3. ALTERNATIVE
DISTANCE
PLACE XX MIN
1.
2. ROAD NUMBER
3. ROAD NUMBER
PLACE YY MIN
S.1 is a tactical action; S.2-3 are strategic actions.
Distance-length formulations depend on the case.
Cause: third line or second pictogram (Accident,
Road works)
(
KM 223
238
MADRID
ALTERNATIVA
R-2
156) NYBO
5 km
RESTID TILL
(
155) NYBO 25 MIN
(
167) HAGA 45 MIN
C-32
ALTERNATIVA
C-31
37
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.3.1 Traffic congestion on next exit. The VMS is placed just within congestion
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the exit available
TYPE OF
ACTION:
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
Situation 1: END OF CONGESTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION
QUEUE
CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
Situation 1: AFTER EXIT [NUMBER]
Situation 2: EXIT [NUMBER]
EXIT
EXIT TO <name>
L.3.
CAUTION
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here. See
WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where this exit
is the “other” standard route the sign is
informing about
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
EXAMPLES
TRAFIC NORMAL
38
APRES SORTIE 21
TRÄNSITO LENTO
saida p/. Fátima
SEJA PRUDENTE
BOUCHON EN
SORTIE 21
CONGESTION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SWEDEN
1.
2. LENGTH
3. EXIT Nº
“CONGESTION AHEAD”
OR “QUEUEING TRAFFIC”
“AT JUNCTION XX” OR
“ON A/M XX ROAD”
SPAIN
LOCATION
OF THE EVENT
ROAD, DIRECTION
AND PLACE
1. ADVICE
2. EXIT Nº
3. TILL LOCATION
1. ADVICE
2. CAUSE
3. CAUSE
REDUCE SPEED
Distance can be changed:
2, 3, 4 km
Distance-length formulations depend on the case.
Cause: third line or second pictogram (Accident,
Road works)
E4N EUGENIA
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
DE 3 KM
SDA. 13
OBRES
SDA. C-32
FINS A GAVA
ACCIDENT
39
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.3.2 Traffic congestion on next exit. The VMS is placed near congestion (≤ 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the next exit available
TYPE OF
ACTION:
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
CONGESTION
QUEUE
CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
EXIT [NUMBER]
LOCATION
AT <road> -direction
L.3.
CAUTION
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
Used only in critical cases
EXAMPLES
BOUCHON
40
EN SORTIE 22
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here. See
WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where this exit
is the “other” standard route the sign is
informing about
TRÄNSITO LENTO
VCI - Freixo
SEJA PRUDENTE
CONGESTION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
REDUCE SPEED
SWEDEN
1.
2. EXIT Nº/NAME
3. a) EXIT Nº/ROAD Nº; b) -
“CONGESTION AHEAD”
OR “QUEUEING TRAFFIC”
“AT JUNCTION XX” OR
“ON A/M XX ROAD”
SPAIN
LOCATION
OF THE EVENT
ROAD, DIRECTION
AND PLACE
1. ADVICE
2. ADVICE
3. a) LOCATION; b) ADVICE
1. ADVICE
2. ADVICE
3. a) -; b) ADVICE
S.3 shows an alternate message.
Advice: “moderate / speed”
MODERE
Distance never shown when
the queue is on another road.
E4N EUGENIA
VELOCIDAD
SDA. SITGES
MODERI
VELOCITAT
SDA. C-32
ST.BOI
MODERI
VELOCITAT
41
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.3.3 Traffic congestion on next exit. The VMS is placed far away congestion (> 5 km)
Messages intended to warn about traffic jam on the next exit available
TYPE OF
ACTION:
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
42
L.1.
QUEUE
CONGESTION
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
LOCATION
AT <road> -direction
L.3.
CAUTION
Used only in critical cases
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here. See
WP1.5 or WP1.6.2 for cases where this exit
is the “other” standard route the sign is
informing about
TRÄNSITO LENTO
VCI - Freixo
SEJA PRUDENTE
CONGESTION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“CONGESTION AHEAD”
OR “QUEUEING TRAFFIC”
“AT JN XX” OR “ON
A/M XX ROAD”
REDUCE SPEED
SPAIN
SWEDEN
ROAD, DIRECTION
AND PLACE
1.
2. EXIT/ ROAD Nº
LOCATION
OF THE EVENT
1. ON ACCESS
2. CITY NAME
1.TO MALL
2. CAUSE
Distance never shown when the
queue or problem is on another
road.
E4N EUGENIA
ACCESO
C. COMERCIAL
SDA. C-31
GRANOLLERS
OBRES
43
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.4 Fixing ‘low’ speed limit due to congestion far ahead
Messages intended to obtain a moderate reduction of speed in order to ease congestion ahead and avoid congestion to worsen
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
IN XX KM
(IF < 5 KM)
CONGESTION
QUEUE
L.2.
REDUCE SPEED
IN XX KM
L.3.
Compulsory speed limits
only by Police
EXAMPLES
A 4 KM
44
SLOW TRAFFIC
REDUCE SPEED
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
RALENTISSEZ
MODERATE SPEED
In NL this sort of information is not given
with the sort of VMS considered here.
The standard Motorway Control System is
used to show speed reductions in case of
congestion (experiments under way).
TRÄNSITO LENTO
MODERE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
30
Moderate reduction of speed limit
SLOVENIA
CONGESTION
SPAIN
SWEDEN
OR
60
WORKS/
ACCIDENT AHEAD
REDUCE SPEED
80
1. INFORMATION
LOCATION
OF THE EVENT
1. INFORMATION
1. INFORMATION
Reduced speed limits outwith
roadworks are advisory only
when MS4 or contolled motorway
signs are not used
TEXT: ‘To reduce / pollution / and accidents’
(Only applied in Catalonia)
80
PER REDUIR
CONTAMINACIO
I ACCIDENTS
45
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.5 Congestion on two alternative routes leading to the same end
Messages intended to inform about travel conditions on two alternative routes of same category (e.g., motorways) to the same end
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
46
L.1.
End point of the routes the information
applies to, starting with “tot” (till)
L.2.
Description of route 1, with either # of km
of “file” (queue) or “filevrij” (queue free)
L.3.
Description of route 2, with either # of km
of “file” (queue) or “filevrij” (queue free)
Not applied on usual VMS
End point is in most cases the name of a
motorway intersection or an exit name.
Arrows are used to indicate the direction to
follow to take this route. On some places
travel time / no delay is used instead of
queue / queue free.
PORTUGAL
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
“CONGESTION AHEAD”
OR “QUEUEING TRAFFIC
ON MXX AND MXX TO
DESTINATION
REDUCE SPEED
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1. TIME EXPECTED
2. TO RING ROAD
3. TO RING ROAD
1. ROAD Nº A XX MIN
2. ROAD Nº / ROAD Nº
3. ROAD Nº A XX MIN
1. ROAD Nº B YY MIN
2. XX MIN / XX MIN
3. ROAD Nº B YY MIN
TRAVELTIME
VIA ROAD A XX MIN
VIA ROAD B YY MIN
S.1. Second pictogram: Accident, Road
works.
S.2 Changes to a vertical layout.
TIEMPO PREV.
RESTID TILL CITY A
A-2
15 min
VIA E4
25 MIN
A-1
30 min
VIA E6
45 MIN
A RONDES
C-31
10 MIN
B-20
8 MIN
A RONDES
C-31
30 MIN
C-20
12 MIN
47
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.6.1 Traffic flow information to 1-3 routes, not same destination
Messages intended to indicate congestion on main road (via travel times or queue length) and its influence upon alternative exits to different destinations
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
48
L.1.
NAME OF INTERCHANGE 1: TRAVEL TIME
CONGESTION
SLOW DOWN
L.2.
NAME OF INTERCHANGE 2: TRAVEL TIME
FOR XX KM
TILL LOCATION
Situation: peri-urban
Not applied usually
L.3.
A4: 10 MIN
A 86: 5 MIN
See 1.6.2.: In The Netherlands this type of
information is always given, irrespective of
where the congestion is.
PORTUGAL
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
“CONGESTION AHEAD”
OR “QUEUEING TRAFFIC
1. EXIT/ROAD Nº A XX MIN
2.
TRAVELTIME TO
FROM JN XX TO JN XX
1. EXIT/ROAD Nº B YY MIN
2. EXIT/ROAD Nº A XX MIN
EXIT A XX MIN
REDUCE SPEED” OR
“EXPECT DELAYS”
1. EXIT/ROAD Nº C ZZ MIN
2. EXIT/ROAD Nº B YY MIN
EXIT C YY MIN
Situation: peri-urban
CV-30
5 min
CV-35
15 min
(
155) NYBO 25 MIN
v-21
45 min
(
157) HAGA 45 MIN
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
RESTID TILL
49
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 1.6.2 Traffic flow information to 1-3 routes on exits (not same destination)
Messages intended to indicate congestion (via travel times or queue length) on different exits to several destinations
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
L.1.
NAME OF INTERCHANGE 1: TRAVEL TIME
QUEUE CONGESTION SLOW DOWN
Description of route 1, with either # of km of
“file” (queue) or “filevrij” (queue free)
SLOW TRAFFIC
L.2.
NAME OF INTERCHANGE 2: TRAVEL TIME
DIRECTION 1 AND
Description of route 2, with either # of km of
“file” (queue) or “filevrij” (queue free)
EXIT name 1
DIRECTION 3
Description of route 3, with either # of km of
“file” (queue) or “filevrij” (queue free
EXIT name 2
Usually not applied
End points are in most cases the name of
a motorway intersection or an exit name.
Arrows are used to indicate the direction to
follow to take this route. On some places
travel time / no delay is used instead of
queue / queue free.
L.3.
Situation: peri-urban
EXAMPLES
A4: 10 MIN
50
A 86: 5 MIN
TRÄNSITO LENTO
Saída P. 25 Abril
Viaducto D. Pacheco
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
CONGESTION ON MXX OR AXX
TO DESTINATION
Only used on non- trunk/m/way
roads if congestion is significant
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1. a) IN EXIT/ROAD Nº / b TO DESTINATION
2.
3. TO RING ROAD
1. a) DISTANCE / b 2. EXIT/ROAD Nº A XX MIN
3. EXIT/ROAD Nº A XX MIN
1. a) IN EXIT/ROAD Nº / b TO DESTINATION
2. EXIT/ROAD Nº B YY MIN
3. EXIT/ROAD Nº B YY MIN
TRAVELTIME TO
CITY A XX MIN
CITY B YY MIN
S.1. Involves altenating messages
CV-30
5 min
CV-35
15 min
v-21
45 min
A MADRID
RESTID TILL
CITY A
25 MIN
CITY B
45 MIN
USE A-4
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
A RONDES
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
51
WP2. Rerouting
WP2.1. Explicit rerouting
WP2.2. Implicit rerouting
WP2.3. Travel times
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 2.1 Recommended rerouting
Messages intended to explicity recommenend an alternative itinerary by means of a road of lower category
TYPE OF
ACTION:
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
54
L.1.
Exit suggested
[ROAD] AFTER [LOC.]
L.2.
ROAD WORKS
L.3.
[LOC.] FOLLOW [ROAD]
Rare cases, for particular
events, analysis ongoing
for possible messages
Cross-border management.
Pictogram displayed besides
alphanumeric text.
Sometimes black on white,sometimes
black on yellow,depending on type of sign.
PORTUGAL
DESTINATION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SWEDEN
1. DESTINATION
2. EXIT/ROAD Nº
3. a) EXIT/ROAD Nº / b) DESTINATION
1. DISTANCE
2. ALTERNATIVE
3. a) LOCATION A / b) ALTERNATIVE
1. VIA ROAD Nº
2. EXIT/ROAD Nº
3. a) LOCATION B / b) EXIT/ROAD Nº
M(x) closed at J(x)
FOR LOCATION / VEH
Use M(x) / A(x)
Specific diversion advice only given
if diversion is on road authority’s
network or route agreed with police
and other authority
SPAIN
SKS (LED sign is implemented in the fixed
sign! and is harmonized with VMS on the
section)
MADRID
A 3 KM
VIA R-3
C-32
ALTERNATIVA
C-31
C-32
GAVA
ST. BOI
BARCELONA
ALTERNATIVA
C-31
55
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 2.2 Rerouting implicitly recommended
Messages intended to suggest rerouting via a road of lower category by means of information about congestion
TYPE OF
ACTION:
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
L.1.
Situation 1: DIRECTION
Situation 2: CONGESTION LENGTH
EVENT
L.2.
Situation 1: CONGESTION
Situation 2: ADVICE
Exit suggested
L.3.
Situation 1 : ADVICE
Situation 2 : NULL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
Normally not applied
EXAMPLES
A7 => ORANGE
56
BOUCHON
N7 CONSEILLEE
No implicit rerouting because of congestion
used in NL.
PORTUGAL
DESTINATION
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
TO (Location)
1.
2.
3. a) ROAD Nº /b) DESTINATION
TRAVEL TIME TO CITY
(x) MILES
1. DISTANCE-LENGTH
2. ALTERNATIVE
3. a) LOCATION A /b) ALTERNATIVE
VIA ROAD A XX MIN
(x) MNS (DELAY)
1.
2. ROAD Nº
3. a) LOCATION B /b) ROAD A THEN ROAD B
VIA ROAD B XX MIN
In “DELAY” situations line 3 replaces
line 2. In “NON-DELAY” situations,
line 2 can be removed due to sign
capacity
SKS (LED sign is implemented in the fixed
sign! and is harmonized with VMS on the
section)
S.3. Involves altenating messages
=> Meant to indicate road switch
(RD. A then RD. B)
KM 223
238
RESTID TILL KISTA
VIA E4
25 MIN
VIA E18
45 MIN
ALTERNATIVA
R-2
AP-7
ST. CUGAT
RUBI
AEROPORT
ALTERNATIVA
C-33 => B-10
57
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 2.3 Travel times
Messages intended to inform about journey times on a given road section
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
ITALY
1
EXAMPLES
PORTUGAL
2
L.1.
Situation 1: [LOCATION 1] X H YY
Situation 2: CONGESTION XX KM AWAY
EXPECTED TIME
Message indicating that there is queuing;
line 1 shows “TILL X” when this is not the
case
L.2.
Situation 2: THROUGH TIME X H YY
[CITY]/[EXIT A] XX ‘
“TRAVEL TIME TILL X” (in case of queue);
“NO DELAY” when no queue
[CITY]/[EXIT B] XX ‘
# OF MINUTES in case of queue; empty
when no queue
L.3.
Situation 1:
• Inter-urban travel times displayed only in
case of disruption
• 2 locations max.
Situation 2: Through-time always displayed
when available and >10min. (See sl. 23)
See also sl. 10
MONTPELLIER
58
NETHERLANDS
ESPAGNE 3H20
Travel time on a road section (without alternative route being present) not generally
used. In some cases shown as a sort of
“comfort” message.
TEMPI PREVISTI
CAPRIATE
5´
MILANO EST 20´
BOUCHON A 5 KM
TRAVERSEE OH35
Not yet implemented
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
(Travel time info displayed)
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
ROAD Nº A XX MIN
TRAVEL TIME
ROAD Nº B YY MIN
EXIT A XX MIN
ROAD Nº C ZZ MIN
EXIT B XX MIN
CV-30 5 min
CV-35 15 min
(
155) NYBO XX MIN
V-21 45 min
(
157) HAGA XX MIN
A-1 15 min
A-6 30 min
SDA.4
2 min
SDA.8
5 min
SDA.11
8 min
RESTID TILL
59
WP3. Unplanned Events
WP3.1. Accident ahead
WP3.2. Debris on the road
WP3.3. Ghost driver
WP3.4. Hard shoulder occupied
WP3.5. Road closed –no exit
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 3.1 Accident ahead
Messages intended to warn about and accident that just happened near ahead –effects or consequences still unknown
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
ACCIDENT
ACCIDENT
Indication of the location
L.2.
SLOW DOWN
REDUCE SPEED
The text “Accident”
EXAMPLES
MODERATE SPEED
On MS4 type signs the pictogram is used
and text Accident not used..
A12 na
Ede
Utrecht volg
A50/A15
ACCIDENT
62
ACCIDENT
Consequences; in this case “only 1 lane
open”.
L.3.
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
RALENTISSEZ
ACIDENTE
MODERE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
Short distance to accidente ahead
Incident
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
60
CAUTION ACCIDENT AHEAD
LOCATION
JUNCTION XX
ADVICE
REDUCE SPEED
ADVICE
ADVISE
Advice: “moderate / speed”
(
156) NYBO
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
2 km
MODERI
VELOCITAT
63
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 3.2 Debris on the road
Messages intended to warn about and accident that just happened near ahead –effects or consequences still unknown
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
OBJECT ON CARRIAGEWAY
L.2.
L.3.
CAUTION
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
EXAMPLES
Line 1 (+2): Indication of the location
FALLEN OBJECTS
Line 3: the “What”, in this case
dropped load
DISTANCE
Line 4: details, or continuation of line 3
CAUTION REQUIRED
See 1.6.2.: In The Netherlands this type of
information is always given, irrespective of
where the congestion is.
OBJET SUR LA
64
OBSTACLES
CHAUSSEE
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
A12 bij
Woerden
afgevallen lading
op de rijbaan
OBSTÁCULO
a 3 km
SEJA PRUDENTE
Location of
VMS
Area of decision making
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
Area of dropped items
SPAIN
SWEDEN
60
CAUTION
1.
2. DISTANCE
DEBRI
DEBRIS ON ROAD AHEAD
1. ADVICE
2. OBJECT
LOCATION
1. ADVICE
2. ON THE ROAD
OVIRA = OBSTACLE
Both messages alternate
HINDER
MODERI
VELOCITAT
VÄSTBERGA
5 km
A 4 KM
OBJECTE
A LA CALÇADA
65
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 3.3 Oncoming illegal vehicle
Messages intended to warn about the presence of an oncoming vehicle (ghost driver)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
GOST DRIVER
GHOST DRIVER
L.2.
L.3.
CAUTION
Line 4: “give light signals”.
EXAMPLES
DANGER
MODERATE SPEED
See 1.6.2.: In The Netherlands this type of
information is always given, irrespective of
where the congestion is.
VEHICULE EN
66
Line 1+2: “Ghostdriver reported”
Line 3: “drive on the right”
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
CONTRESENS
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
Spookrijder
gemeld
rijd rechts
geef lichtsignalen
PERIGO
MODERATE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
Area of decision making
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
Ghost driver area
SPAIN
SWEDEN
CAUTION
CAR
DANGER
ONCOMING VEHICLE
ONCOMING
ON COMING VEHICLE
WRONGWAY
VEHICULO
FARA
SENTIDO
FORDON I FEL
CONTRARIO
KÖRRIKTNING
67
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 3.4 Hard shoulder occupied
Messages intended to warn a potentially dangerous hard shoulder occupancy -not due to road works
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
68
L.1.
L.2.
L.3.
OBSTACLE
or STOPPED VEHICLE
or VEHICLE IN FIRE
Situation 1: REPORTED
Situation 2: XX KM AWAY
Situation 3: XX KM AFTER
Situation 1: SLOW DOWN
Situation 2: CAUTION
Situation 3 : [LOC.]
Situation 1: Alert with flashing lights if
Distance VMS – obstacle < 2 km
Situation 2: Normal if Distance VMS –
obstacle >= 2km and < 60 km
Situation 3: in the presence of an exit
between the VMS and the obstacle
OBSTACLE
SIGNALE
RALENTISSEZ
VEHICLE ARRETE
A 10 KM
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
OBSTACLE or
STOPPED VEHICLE or
VEHICLE IN FIRE
Line 1+2: indication of location
Line 3+4: “vehicle on hard shoulder”
A12 na
M broek
voertuig
op vluchtstrook
In case of an event on the hard shoulder
with effect on traffic circulation, an
appropriate message is used
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
Hard shoulder
section
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
100
1.
2.
3. HARD SHOULDER
4. DISTANCE
1. DISTANCE
2. ADVICE
3. DISTANCE SHOULDER
4. HARD SHOULDER
1.
2. ADVICE
3.
4. OCCUPIED
REASON or CAUSE
LOCATION
HARD SHOULDER OCCUPIED
A 5 KM
HINDER
SÖDRA LÄNKEN
3 km
VÄGREN AVSTÄNGD
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
VORAL DRET
A 4 KM
A 3 KM
VORAL DRET
OCUPAT
69
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 3.5 Road closed ahead-no exit available
Messages intended to indicate that the road is closed ahead when there is not exit available
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
L.1.
[MOTORWAY] CLOSED
MOTOR WAY CLOSED
Line 1: indicates closure, and location
CLOSED TRAFFIC
L.2.
Situation 1 : XX KM AWAY
Situation 2 : AFTER [LOC.]
WAITING TIME
Line 2: Cause
DISTANCE
L.3.
TUNE TO 107.7
CAUTION REQUIRED
• Reason for closure only mentioned by the
pictogram (when available)
• Location displayed only if big city
• FM 107.7 always mentioned for further
information
EXAMPLES
A9 COUPEE
A 20 KM
ECOUTEZ 107.7
A7 COUPEE
APRES VALENCE
ECOUTEZ 107.7
A7 COUPEE
A 20 KM
ECOUTEZ 107.7
70
Usually all VMS are located
before an exit point
In case of an event on the hard shoulder
with effect on traffic circulation, an
appropriate message is used
TRÂNSITO CORTADO
a 10 km
SEJA PRUDENTE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
L.1.
ROAD CLOSED
L.2.
AFTER JUNCTION XX
L.3.
CAUSE
L.4.
DELAY INFO
SLOVENIA
Point or road
closure
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2.
3.
4. ACCIDENT
1. ADVICE
2. ADVICE
3. LOCATION A
4. DISTANCE
1. ADVICE
2. ADVICE
3. LOCATION B
4.
LOCATION
CLOSED
Advice: ‘moderate / speed’
S.1 and S.2 for near events
S.3 and S.4 for far away events
E4 N NYBODA
MODERE
VÄGEN STÄNGD
VELOCIDAD
3 km
MODERI
VELOCITAT
MATAS
LAS ROZAS
ACCIDENT
A 7 KM
71
WP4. Road Works
WP4.1. Road closed –exit available
WP4.2. Closed exit
WP4.3. Lane closed
WP4.4. Hard shoulder occupied
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 4.1 Road closed ahead-exit available
Messages intended to indicate that the road is closed ahead due to road works and that there is a compulsory exit available
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
74
L.1.
L.2.
L.3.
Situation 1: EXIT
Situation 2: EXIT [NUMBER]
Situation 3: FIRST EXIT
Situation 1: [NAME]
Situation 2: COMPULSORY
Situation 3: COMPULSORY
Situation 1: COMPULSORY
COMPULSORY EXIT
COMPULSORY EXIT
COMPULSORY EXIT
LOCATION 1
RE-ENTERING AT
LOCATION 1
(CAUSE)
LOCATION 2
LOCATION 2
Situation 1: inter-urban
Situation 2: peri-urban
Situation 3: for long distance displays
this pictogram may be replaced by the
pictogram explaining the reason of the
closure
Line 1: indicates closure, and location
ROAD CLOSED
Line 2: Cause
NODE 1 – NODE 2
Line 3: Advice or additional information
MANDATORY EXIT
Sometime this message is preceded by
other indicating “Stopped Traffic” while the
decision of closing the road is taken
SORTIE
OBLIGO USCITA
AVIGNON-SUD
BIANDRATE
OBLIGATOIRE
CAUSA LAVORI
SORTIE 31
OBLIGO USCITA
OBLIGATOIRE
RIENTRO A
ORTONA
TRÂNSITO CORTADO
T. Novas-Santarém
SEJA PRUDENTE
TRÂNSITO CORTADO
a 10 km
SEJA PRUDENTE
Point or road
closure
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
OR
XXX m
L.1.
MXX CLOSED
L.2.
AFTER JN XX
L.3.
DIVERSION VIA MXX
L.4.
EXIT AFTER JN XX
1. CLOSED
2. ROAD Nº CLOSED
LOCATION (TUNNEL)
1. DISTANCE-LENGTH
2. EXIT
CLOSED
1. USE ROAD Nº B
2. COMPULSORY
ALTERNATIVE
Pictogram used in one region and at
tunnels only,
otherwise relevant pictogram depending
on cause for closure (road works etc)
CORTADO
KM 223
GÖTATUNNELN
238
USE N-470
AVSTÄNGD
3 km
VÄLJ ANNAN VÄG
3 km
VÄLJ ANNAN VÄG
C-31 TALLADA
E4 N NYBODA
SORTIDA
OBLIGATORIA
VÄGEN STÄNGD
75
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 4.2 Next exit closed due to road works
Messages intended to indicate that the next exit is closed due to road works and that drivers should remain in the main road or take a different exit
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
76
L.1.
Situation 1: EXIT
Situation 2: EXIT [NUMBER]
Situation 3: FIRST EXIT
EXIT
Line 1: Location
EXIT CLOSED
L.2.
Situation 1: [NAME]
Situation 2 & 3 : CLOSED
[EXIT]
Line 2: EXIT xx closed
<exit name>
L.3.
Situation 1: CLOSED
CLOSED
ALTERNATIVE \ DETOUR
Situation 1: inter-urban
Situation 2: peri-urban
Situation 3: for long distance displays
this pictogram may be replaced by the
pictogram explaining the reason of the
closure
Usually the pictogram is
Displayed when the exit is
closed due to road works suggestion
Rerouting messages must be authorised
by Operational Manager and Police
Authorities.
SORTIE
USCITA
AVIGNON-SUD
BIANDRATE
FERMEE
CHIUSA
SORTIE 31
FERMEE
SAÍDA CORTADA
para A4-Matosinhos
DESVIO ASSINALADO
Point of exit closed
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
JN XX AHEAD CLOSED
REASON (e.g. roadworks)
DESCRIPTION
FOLLOW DIVERSION
CLOSED EXID LJUBLJANA
Fixed plate roadwork signs used usually
experienced for roadworks only
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1. ROAD NºA CLOSED
2. ROAD NºA CLOSED
3. USE ROAD Nº A
4. EXIT CLOSED
1. DIRECTION
2. DIR. CITY
3. ROAD NºB CLOSED
4.
1. CITY NAME
2. USE ROAD Nº B
3. DIR.CITY
4. CAUSE
EXIT (number and/or name)
EXIT CLOSED
S.1 No other alternative.
S.2 and S.3 with alternative
(previous to the road cut or after the road cut).
A-3 CORTADO
(
DIR.
155) NYBODA
AVFART AVSTÄNGD
VALENCIA
A-7 CORTADO
2 km
DIR. VALENCIA
USE N-340
USE N-340
A-7 CORTADO
DIR. VALENCIA
SDA.
TALLADA
ACCIDENT
77
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 4.3 Lane closed due to road works
Messages intended to indicate that one or several lanes ahead are closed due to road works
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
1
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
2
L.1.
Situation 1: WORKS
Situation 2: WORKS
Situation 3: WORKS
L.2.
L.3.
Line 1: Location
ACCIDENT \ ROAD WORKS
Situation 1: SLOWDOWN
Situation 2: XX KM AWAY Situation 3: AFTER
Line 2: Cause
DISTANCE \ ON WHICH LANE
Situation 3: [NAME OF EXIT]
Line 3: Advice or addtional information
CAUTION
Cause in this example Road works
Additional info in this case
tells that only 1 lane is left open
Both pictograms should reflects situation
and lanes closed
ROAD WORKS
Situation 1: Alert with flashing lights if
Distance VMS – Point of closure < 2 km
Arrows displayed only in this situation
Situation 2: Normal if Distance VMS –
point of closure >= 2km and < 60 km
EXAMPLES
TRAVAUX
RALENTISSEZ
TRABALHOS
1
a 1 km
SEJA PRUDENTE
TRAVAUX
A 10 KM
2
TRAVAUX
APRES
AVIGNON SUD
78
Usually managed with mobile VMS
(sparingly, for road works).
Sometimes “WORKS” is
indicated, with the related
pictogram.
2
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
Point of lane
closure
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
100
OR
1.
2. ADVICE
3.
4.
1. ADVICE
2. ADVICE
3. ADVICE
4. DISTANCE
1. ADVICE
2. CAUSE
3. ADVICE
4.
“LANE CLOSED” OR
“ROADWORKS AHEAD”
LOCATION
NUMBER OF LANES CLOSED
ADVICE: ‘moderate/speed’
S.1. Very near to danger
S. 2. Near to danger
S.3. Near to danger
S.4. Far from danger
Fixed plate roadwork signs used usually
experienced for roadworks only
(
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
MODERI
155) NYBODA
1 KÖRFÄLT AVSTÄNGT
2 km
VELOCITAT
or
PER OBRES
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
A 5 KM
79
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 4.4 Hard shoulder occupied due to road works
Messages intended to warn a potentially dangerous occupancy of hard shoulder due to road works or maintenance operations
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
L.1.
L.2.
L.3.
OBSTACLE
or STOPPED VEHICLE
or VEHICLE IN FIRE
Situation 1: REPORTED
Situation 2: XX KM AWAY
Situation 3: XX KM AFTER
Situation 1: SLOW DOWN
Situation 2: CAUTION
Situation 3: [LOC.]
Situation 1: Alert with flashing lights if
Distance VMS – obstacle < 2 km
Situation 2 : Normal if Distance VMS –
obstacle >= 2km and < 60 km
Situation 3: in the presence of an exit
between the VMS and the obstacle
EXAMPLES
OBSTACLE
80
SIGNALE
RALENTISSEZ
VEHICULE ARRETE
A 10 KM
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
OBSTACLE or
STOPPED VEHICLE or
VEHICLE IN FIRE
Line 1: Location
Line 2: warning
In case of an event on the hard shoulder
with effect on traffic circulation, an
appropriate message is used
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
Hard shoulder
section
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
100
1. LENGTH
2. LENGTH
3. RIGTH HARD SHOULDER
REASON or CAUSE
1.
2.
3. ADVICE
LOCATION
1.
2.
3. ADVICE
HARD SHOULDER CLOSED
ADVICE: ‘moderate/speed’
= 1 KM
HINDER
SÖDRA LÄNKEN
3 km
VÄGREN AVSTÄNGD
= 1 KM
VORAL DRET
MODERI
VELOCITAT
81
WP5. Dynamic traffic
management
WP5.1. Hard shoulder usage
WP5.2. Additional lane
WP5.3. Speed reduction
• WP5.3.1. Due to incident ahead (sharp reduction)
• WP5.3.2. Due to pollution limits (moderate reduction)
• WP5.3.3. Average speed monitored (moderate reduction)
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 5.1 Hard shoulder available
Messages intended to establish the use and availability levels of the shoulder
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
1
84
2
3
L.1.
L.2.
L.3.
Specific VMS over the lane, open
for all vehicles at peak hours
(only 1 case in France)
Situation managed only on Tangenziale di
Mestre, but not on M-VMS. Green
arrow / red cross pictograms are used.
P.1. Hard shoulder open
P.2. HS is going to close
P.3. HS is closed
Specific VMS device, no text used
Only in very special occasions and must be
decided by the Police Authorities
Location of VMS
VMS before
hard shoulder
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
VMS within
hard shoulder
VMS within
hard shoulder
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1
2.1
USE HARD SHOULDER
Hard Shoulder running for private vehicles
only in England. Used for buses in Northern
Ireland. Only used for r/ works elsewhere.
Fixed plate roadwork signs used usually
experienced for roadworks only.
2.2
2.3
1. CIRCULATION
2. CIRCULATION
3. END OF HARD SHOULDER
4. END OF
1. DISTANCE
2. ALLOWED
3. DISTANCE
4. CIRCULATION
1. USE HARD SHOULDER
2. USE HARD SHOULDER
3.
4. BY HARD SHOULDER
S.1. Before entering hard shoulder
S.2. Within the hard shoulder
S.3. Within the hard shoulder, end of circulation
approaches.
S.4. Within the hard shoulder, end of hard
shoulder.
CIRCULACION
1
A 3 KM
POR ARCEN
CIRCULACION
2.1
PERMITIDA
POR ARCEN
FIN DE ARCEN
2.2
A 2 KM
FIN DE
2.3
CIRCULACION
POR ARCEN
85
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 5.2 Additional (contra-flow) lane available
Messages intended to deviate part of traffic flow from the Main road using the direct lane (additional or reversible lane). It also tries to ensure a safe return to the main road
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL/
STRATEGIC
Main road functions:
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
2
1
1
1
EXAMPLES
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
L.1.
Situation 1: WORKS
Situation 2: WORKS
WORKS
REVERSIBLE LANE OPEN
WORKS
L.2.
Situation 1: SLOW DOWN
Situation 2: XX KM AWAY
CAUTION
REVERSIBLE LANE CLOSED
Distance in xx km
CAUTION REQUIRED
L.3.
Situation 1: Alert with flashing
lights if Distance VMS – Transfer beginning
< 2 km
Situation 2: Normal if Distance VMS –
transfer beginning >= 2km and < 60 km
Contraflow lane set up only in case
of works
TRAVAUX
RALENTISSEZ
A 6 KM
Fixed signs used normally in addition
LAVORI IN CORSO
1
TRAVAUX
2
TRAVAUX
A 10 KM
86
ITALY
2
ATTENZIONE
Only one reversible lane (“wisselstrook”)
near Amsterdam. A text indicates if this is
open or closed (“dicht”)
VMS messages are used in complement
with temporary road signs
TRABALHOS
a 6 km
SEJA PRUDENTE
Transfer begins
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
Transfer ends
Additional lane area
Location of
VMS
SPAIN
SWEDEN
OR
ROADWORKS AHEAD
1. DISTANCE
2. DISTANCE
3.
CONTRA-FLOW IN OPERATION
1. DIRECT
2. DIRECT
3. DISTANCE
1. CITY
2. CITY
3.
Fixed plate roadworks signs used usually
experienced for roadworks only
S.1. Just before entering additional lane
S.2. Near entrance to additional lane
S.3. Before additional lane flow come back
A 2 KM
DIRECTE
BARCELONA
A 3 KM
DIRECTE
BARCELONA
A 5 KM
87
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 5.3.1 Fixing low speed limit –due to incident
Messages intended to produce a prompt response, decreasing traffic flow speeds due to near incident ahead
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
88
L.1.
INCIDENT
L.2.
REDUCE SPEED
DANGER
MODERATE SPEED
L.3.
Compulsory speed limits
only by Police
Not used in NL
PERIGO
MODERE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
30
Sharp reduction of speed limit
SLOVENIA
Incident
SPAIN
SWEDEN
OR
60
WORKS/
ACCIDENT AHEAD
REDUCE SPEED
ADVICE
ADVICE
Reduced speed limits outwith
roadworks are advisory only
when MS4 or contolled motorway
signs are not used
MODERI
VELOCITAT
89
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 5.3.2 Fixing low speed limits -due to pollution
Messages intended to fix a moderate reduction of speed to reduce pollution levels within the section ahead
TYPE OF
ACTION:
Main road functions:
ITALY
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
90
50
NETHERLANDS
FUMO
L.1.
POLLUTION
POLLUTION SMOKE
L.2.
VITESSE LIMITEE
REDUCE SPEED
L.3.
Speed limit depending on road
category and pollution level
80
POLLUTION
VITESSE LIMITEE
POLLUTION
70 KM/H MAXI
Rarely applied
Tests ongoing
Not used in NL
PORTUGAL
Area of excess of pollution
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
Moderate reduction of speed limit
SPAIN
80
SWEDEN
80
EXPLANATION
EXPLANATION
EXPLANATION
TEXT: ‘To reduce / pollution / and accidents’
(used in Catalonia only)
80
PER REDUIR
CONTAMINACIO
I ACCIDENTS
91
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 5.3.3 Fixing low speed limits -due to speed control
Messages intended to inform on a section of speed control ahead
TYPE OF
ACTION:
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
92
L.1.
ATTENTION
L.2.
SPEED CONTROL
SPEED CONTROL
L.3.
Not used in NL
CONTROLO
DE
VELOCIDADE
Area of average speed measurement (radar, camera)
Location of
VMS
Expected moderate reduction of speed
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
SPAIN
SWEDEN
100
SPEED
CONTROLLED
BY RADAR
VELOCITAT
CONTROLADA
PER RADAR
93
WP6. Weather information
WP6.1. Wind
WP6.2. Bad visibility
wp6.2.1. Due to fog
WP6.3. Slippery road
Wp6.3.1. Due to snow/ice
WP6.3.2. Due to rain-water, pools, flooding…
95
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 6.1 Cross wind
Messages intended to warn against the existence of cross wind
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL- BRISA
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
96
L.1.
STRONG WIND
STRONG WIND GUSTS
Line 1: reports closure
L.2.
CAUTION
BEGIN [EXIT]
Line2: rerouting advice
END [EXIT]
L.3.
Road event hard to locate
(distance/length not displayed)
WIND
CAUTION
Fixed signs used normally in addition
VENT VIOLENT
VENTO FORTE
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
FRANCAVILLA
Only used in specific cases when bridge
or surge barrier is closed due to wind.
Only on MS4 type VMS
VENTO
SEJA PRUDENTE
ORTONA
RAFFICHE
FRANCAVILLA
ORTONA
N256 brug dicht
Zierikzee volg 3
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
L.1.
CAUTION HIGH WINDS
L.2.
LOCATION( if definable)
L.3.
RESTRICTION/CLOSURE
L.4.
DIVERSION(if appropiate)
SLOVENIA
WIND
MAX SPEED
Depends on sign capacity, if MS4 sign used,
Line 1 text used for a period of time for
education purposes then removed.
For text only signs, lines 1 to 4 protocol
above used
Wind
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2.
3.
4.
1. LOCATION A
2. LOCATION A
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION A
1. LOCATION B
2. LOCATION B
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION B
WIND SENSITIVE VEHICLES or
CLOSED BRIDGE
S.1. Informing far away
S.2. Warning near
S.3. Warning near or within wind
S.4. Warning and recommending speed within
wind
ALBORAYA
Mounted at a few windy bridges, one in
connection with variable speed limit signs.
Display of wind cone changes according to
wind direction.
VINDKÄNSLIGA FORDON
PUZOL
SITGES
VILANOVA
MODERI
VELOCIDAD
VIC
RIPOLL
97
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 6.2.1 Bad visibility -due to fog
Messages intended to warn on reduced visibility (due to fog)
Main road functions:
ITALY
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
98
NETHERLANDS
NEBBIA
L.1.
FOG
FOG
FOG CLOUDS
CAUTION FOG
L.2.
CAUTION
[Beginning point]
VISIBILITY 100 M
MIST
WITH FOG
TILL [End point]
VEL MAX 50KM/H
L.3.
Road event hard to locate
(distance/length not displayed)
PORTUGAL
Sometimes meters of visibility and
speed are given, in accordance with
the Police
BROUILLARD
NEBBIA
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
FRANCAVILLA
FINO A ORTONA
BROUILLARD
NEBBIA A BANCHI
GARDEZ VOS
VISIBILITA
DISTANCES
RIDOTA
MODERATE SPEED
Used on lane-control VMS,
but not on M-VMS
COM NEVOEIRO
MODERE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
Fog
SPAIN
SWEDEN
i.e. no sign used
CAUTION
FOG
FOG
MAX SPEED
Road event difficult to locate
(distance/length not displayed)
1. FOG
2. FOG
3. FOG
4. FOG
1. LOCATION A
2. LOCATION A
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION A
1. LOCATION B
2. LOCATION B
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION B
FOG
S.1. Informing far away
S.2. Warning near
S.3. Warning near or within wind
S.4. Warning and recommending speed within
wind
NIEBLA
MATAS
DIMMA
LAS ROZAS
BOIRA/NIEBLA
VIC
RIPOLL
NIEBLA
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
BOIRA/NIEBLA
GAVA
ST. BOI
99
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 6.3.1 Slippery road due to ice or snow
Messages intended to warn on the existence of a slippery road section due to ice or snow
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
L.1.
L.2.
Situation 1: SNOWFALLS
Situation 2: ICE
Situation 3: ICE
Situation 1 : CAUTION
Situation 2 : SLOW DOWN
Situation 3 : CAUTION
SNOW
ICE
SLOW DOWN
CAUTION
LOCATION 1
EXAMPLES
CAUTION
LOCATION 2
L.3.
Situation 1: Display intended for long
distance traffic management
For ICE ONLY:
Situation 2: Alert with flashing lights if
Distance VMS – ice < 2 km
Situation 3: Normal if Distance VMS – ice
>= 2km and < 60 km
CHUTES DE NEIGE
SUR A7
2
VERGLAS SUR A6
3
Posted signs only.
Never displayed on VMS
GELO
BARBERINO
RONCOBILACCIO
VERGLAS
RALENTESSEZ
Various messages possible,
depending on situation
NIEVE
1
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
100
ICE
SEJA PRUDENTE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
LOW TEMPERATURES
FORECAST or RISK OF ICE
ICE
“ Reduce Speed” or
“Drive Carefully”
Distance/Lenght/max speed
snow,ice
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2. LENGTH
3.
4. SNOW
1. DISTANCE
2.
3. LOCATION A
4. LOCATION A
1. ROAD Nº CITY
2.
3. LOCATION B
4. LOCATION B
First and second messages correspond to general
indication of snow levels by association with colours
(black, red, yellow, green). Example with red level.
Second message alternates snow chain picto
with speed limit picto. Third message for general
situation (far) Fourth message for ice danger
General advise near or within Snow (‘moderate/
speed’)
RISK OF
1. SLIPPERY ROAD
2. SNOW DRIFT
RISK FÖR HALKA
A 50 KM
A-1 BURGOS
3-8 km
= 10 KM
SNÖDREV
5-30 km
BRUC
PANADELLA
NEU/NIEVE
HOSTALRIC
CARDEDEU
80
101
SPECIFIC SITUATION:
WP 6.3.2 Slippery road
Messages intended to warn on the existence of a slippery road section (e.g. due to excess of water or pools)
TYPE OF
ACTION:
TACTICAL
Main road functions:
ITALY
NETHERLANDS
PORTUGAL
EXAMPLES
COMMENTS
ALPHANUMERIC
PICTOGRAM
FRANCE
102
L.1.
FLOODS
WITH RAIN
L.2.
XX KM AWAY
MAX SPEED
L.3.
CAUTION
110 KM/H
This alert message is only displayed in case
of a danger linked to the presence of flood/
pools
A patroller car located upstream will
reinforce the alert message
WITH RAIN
MODERATE SPEED
Usually without pictogram
Analysis ongoing with Police
INONDATION
CON PIOGGIA
A 8 KM
VELOCITA´ MAX
SOYEZ PRUDENTS
110 KM/H
Posted signs only.
Never displayed on VMS
COM CHUVA
MODERE
VELOCIDADE
Location of
VMS
REP OF IRELAND & UK
SLOVENIA
“CAUTION HEAVY RAIN” OR “FLOODING” or
“SURFACE WATER”
SLIPPERY
LOCATION (if known)
Distance/Lenght/max speed
REDUCE SPEED or DRIVE CAREFULLY
water, pools
SPAIN
SWEDEN
1.
2.
3.
4. RAIN
1.
2. ADVICE
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION A
1.
2. ADVICE
3. ADVICE
4. LOCATION B
LOCATION
S.1.Far away rain
S.2.Near/within –mild rain
S.3.Near/within –strong rain
S.4 Within rain
ULLEVIMOTET
ATAQUINES
ADANERO
6 km
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
MODERE
VELOCIDAD
PLUJA/LLUVIA
SITGES
VILLANOVA
103
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Overview of Existing VMS Signing
Within ES4-Mare Nostrum
VMS harmonisation at the European level is both complex and difficult.
The method followed is to identify the specific road/situation of interest,
then describe its specific features or main parameters and then obtain the
messages. The Working Book is a compilation of VMS displays according to
the way each road/traffic situation is defined by the group. The result is a
sample of the messages that each partner, private or public road operators,
use at home. Obviously, not all the subtle variations of the signing praxis at
the national level are included. What is important to note here is that each
of us contributes with a sort of archetype message to each road/traffic
situation analysed by the group.
The archetype message is the most important message, the most frequently
used at home. It represents the organising principle that generates the
design of other variant-messages derived from it. Some parameters
may change around such archetype message at home: what defines the
situation, what are the informative elements, the text structure, and the
use of complementary measures (e.g., flashing lights, enforcement, and
so on). But the main root remains, that is, the main pictogram displayed on
the VMS. In general terms, the amount of information communicated by the
main pictogram (see figure 3) determines the type and amount of information
that needs to be added. After choosing the specific main pictogram, the
nature of the event gets confirmed (“this is about…”), and so does the
information complementing the main pictogram (be it alphanumeric, legends
or other pictograms). The main pictogram opens or closes alternative logical
paths both in terms of design and in terms of the driver’s mind: use of
distance-length information, advices, alternatives, and so on, all is read
and interpreted accordingly.
Some data may help us to overview the global situation concerning the 34
road/traffic events compiled. Let us remember that we have 8 columns
(countries) per situation, totalling 272 potential contributions. To what extent
is such the case? Not all situations are faced by all partners the same in
their respective countries. The possibility of actually doing it depends on the
need to do it so, but also on available technical and staff resources. However,
the average contribution per case is 6.4 (216 contributions, 79.4%), not
bad. After all, members contribute according to their real experience. The
situations with fewer contributions (3, 4 out of 8) are logically the newer ones,
recommended rerouting (2.1), hard shoulder use (5.1) and speed reduction
(5.3), situations that not all road operators face in our days.
105
Another important figure concerns the number of contributions that include
pictograms, averaging 5.6 (191 contributions, 70.2%). The situations with
fewer pictograms (2-3 out of 8) are related to complex management of
traffic flows (1.5, 1.6, and WP 2) and speed (5.3). This includes one case in
which not always pictograms are used (2.3, travel times). New situations
involving traffic management goals via VMS lack a standard pictogram,
CASE
particularly within the domain of strategic actions (redistribution of traffic
flows). The old goal ‘help optimise existing infrastructures by redistributing
flows avoiding congestion’ is still a goal to accomplish.
Also of interest is the number of different pictograms per case, the
heterogeneity of pictograms. Complete harmonisation would require
PICTOGRAMS/VARIANTS OBSERVED
3.2 Debris on the road
3.1 Accident ahead
1.1.3 Congestion -no exit, VMS far away
1.2.3 Congestion -exit available, VMS far away
4.3 Next exit closed due to road works
4.3 Lane closed due to road works
FIGURE 5. Examples of pictogram heterogeneity on the Working Book
106
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
one pictogram per case -34 out of 34, or 34/34=1. The more variants of
pictograms per case the greater the heterogeneity index, and here it is
91/34=2.7, not too bad. A few cases are ‘perfect’ or nearly perfect (3.2.Debris on the road, 6.1-Wind) as they show 8 contributions with the same
pictogram. Then we should talk about different heterogeneity sources (figure
4). The case 3.1.-Accident ahead shows 8 contributions, all with accident
pictograms although (no less than) four alternative variants for the accident
pictogram can be identified (one without red triangle). The case 1.1.3.-Traffic
congestion ahead no exit (far) is similar: 7 contributions; at least 3 different
pictures to show congestion and two variants with no danger warning
pictogram. The case 1.2.3 shows an additional feature, different variants
for the congestion pictogram mixed with different formal changes, either
removing the red triangle or placing congestion in a simple representation
of the main road and exit. Similar design trends are observed in other cases
(see 4.1, 4.2). Finally, the case 4.3.-Lane closed due to road works (but see
also 4.4., 5.2., 6.3) triggers a different question. Some pictures refer to the
idea ‘lane closed’ some other to ‘road works’ and some to the idea of plain
‘danger’. This view is not really encouraging, however we shall see that
although innovation on pictogram designs may go against harmonisation
it may also help to reach harmonisation. We shall also appreciate to what
extent the Working Book is a stimulating laboratory where ideas from all
European partners reciprocally enrich the practice of the rest.
Framing the road/traffic situation that should be harmonised
On harmonising VMS and achieving common standards (e.g., through the
future ES4 Guidelines) we must be aware of the importance of framing
each situation appropriately. There is an optimal degree of specification of
the context and parameters concerning the road/traffic event at hand. Too
specific may make the harmonisation not viable, too general leaves too
many degrees of freedom to each response. The degree of specificity we
set when we define the situation is a key parameter on the result we obtain.
When we say ‘congestion –no exit’, alternative responses will probably show
that some partners think about very nearby congestion, some others about
far away congestion. Some think about the need to regulate speed or to
indicate the length of the congestion, others about danger. Selecting the
right parameters to build the situation, and then making all partners think
about the same parameters is a key issue.
This idea was somehow applied when the original cases concerning
congestion in the first edition of the Working Book (2006) were partitioned
into three in order to incorporate location parameters: VMS far, near, within
congestion. This context was applied to two main cases: road utterly closed
vs. road congested. Such location parameters seem so important that the
future ES4 Guidelines will incorporate them structurally, in all events.
Heterogeneity may simply derive from differing perspectives. For example,
the alternatives shown in figure 4 concerning the case 4.3 indicate that
some partners focus on lane restrictions and on the distance to the place
where the lane (presumably near) is actually closed whereas other members
think about road works globally (far away). While some partners assume
that VMS are important in order to anticipate the situations others probably
think that the situation is controlled via posted signs and beacons on site,
according to national regulations for road works. What a priori should we
assume when defining this situation? Are European norms concerning
road work posted signs equivalent in the different countries? Do we share,
legally or de facto, the same signing standards concerning for example road
works in Europe? Setting up the appropriate degree of specificity bring us
107
to the background of variable signing, beyond signs themselves: which are
the operative parameters (measurement of speed, visibility, humidity-grip,
strength of wind, enforcement levels, rerouting alternatives, maintenance
support, etc.) below decisions impinging on VMS displays. Then, do we share
such background in Europe?
functions, putting existing contents into different frames (triangle,
circle…).
c) Innovation: content not seen previously in whatever form on road
signs.
On innovation and design strategies
Innovation and standardisation go hand in hand as the cases 1.2.3 or 4.2
show in figure 5. If some designs already apply, innovation goes against
harmonisation, but then if the new idea performs better (i.e., makes a
better description of the situation, needs fewer or no words at all, etc.)
we may eliminate several non-proficient signs and simplify displays. The
second example in case 1.2.3 shows a French idea: imposing the congestion
pictogram on a simple graphic indicating road and exit allows for a clear
explanation without words. Using the standard congestion pictogram makes
it difficult for foreigners, as words must be used to indicate that congestion
does not happen in the main road but in the exit, writing the exit name,
etc.
All in all, there are three main design strategies to create road signs
(pictograms), although only one is utterly innovative. Such strategies have
been used long ago for making road signs (figure 5). We can create signs
by derivation (of two types: addition or translation) or we may innovate
absolutely [15].
a) Addition: Making the most of the combination of existing contents forming
a new sign.
b) Translation: Making the most of the formal traits of signs indicating
108
FIGURE 6. Traditional ways of road sign innovation via derivation [15].
Real cases in figure 4 show several examples of addition and translation. If
the red triangle means danger, removing the red triangle may allow to relief
the sense of urgency (for example, when events are far away). Conversely,
this helps to preserve the adequate sense of urgency when dangers are
near and the red triangle is visible. The idea of the main road and exit is
also easy to depict. Mixing it with other well known signs make help to
find solutions for traffic flow redistribution. Examples here are forbidden
circulation, congestion… why not wind, snow, different speeds, and so on?
Many informative elements follow one rule: when independent signs that
are understood are mixed the result is (normally) also understood. Provided
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
that VMS may display them, many official signs could be combined and
used in this way.
Complete innovation is hard to achieve. Italian semiotician Umberto Eco [17]
says that for us to approach understanding at least some previously known
elements must be present and somehow recognised (utter innovation may
not be even mentally codified or categorised –ergo not seen or understood).
Some examples of (relative) signing innovations are shown in figure 7.
FIGURE 7. Polluting car [14], rain [15], car breakdown, HOV lane [10] and Dutch
bridge (WP6.1).
Notes on structure and alphanumeric characters
Here and there, we see how messages forming the WB compilation
could improve, not only on pictogram heterogeneity. We can sample the
information displayed and compare it with the recently issued R.E.2 [10].
Against point 7 (see pages 6-7 on R.E.2) we may find different examples of
redundancy. For example, the word ‘congestion’ accompanies many times
the congestion pictogram (sometimes in two alternative languages). Also,
words as ‘caution’, ‘attention’, ‘be prudent’ are redundant with the red
triangle of danger warning. Sometimes the congestion pictogram is displayed
twice –another form of redundancy, not as frequent. Against point 6, also
alternant messages can be identified, sometimes showing the complexity
of certain road/traffic events given the informative elements available, and
sometimes apparently due to plain unawareness of such rule. Concerning
point 9, the ‘seven words rule’ seems to be frequently followed, with few
exceptions (also in alternant messages).
The potential for standardising the structure of messages is normally
compromised by the amount of information that needs to be displayed. That
issue was mentioned when discussing the need for specific, consequence
oriented pictograms. Heterogeneity on structures is to some extent normal
given the disparity between the numbers of characters per line (from 12 to
20 or more) that can be displayed on each VMS type. Another parameter that
fosters heterogeneity on structures is the different definitions and intentions
concerning information use. This is particularly evident with rerouting. Up to
four main types of rerouting can be distinguished: compulsory, recommended,
just informed and implicit (table 3).
109
TYPE
Compulsory
Straightforward,
unavoidable
Recommended
Advised
Driver interpretation
Great problems ahead. 100%
of drivers should reroute. It is
absolutely necessary that drivers
take the appropriate exit.
There is a serious problem ahead. Especific pictogram –idea of
I have to take the exit mentioned closed road/compulsory exit
Drivers are being driven by us all
along the route
Problems ahead. At least XX%
of flow should reroute. It would
clearly improve the situation and
there is no doubt about it.
The situation is clearly worsening
ahead. It seems to be better
to divert than to stay, although
diversion is not compulsory
Implicit
Inferred
Difficulties ahead. A smooth flow The situation is somehow tricky
of rerouting drivers is convenient. ahead. Some alternatives are
offered for consideration, just in
Drivers taking alternative ways
case. I (do not) feel sure about it.
must manage themselves.
Difficulties ahead. A smooth flow
of rerouting drivers knowing
how to manage using alternative
itineraries is convenient.
Drivers must manage themselves
Examples
SORTIE
AVIGNON-SUD
OBLIGATOIRE
VIA CORTADA
Name/location for further
entrance on the road again.
Cause of congestion
Drivers are getting assessed by
us
Informed
Possible
Key/complementary
informative elements
Road manager goal
The situation is getting worse.
I (don’t) know some alternative
routes I could take to avoid it.
A 4 KM
USE R-3
Specific pictogram –problem/exit
recommended
= > LYON
BOUCHON
A5 CONSEILLEE
= 25 KM
Congestion length
Direction of problem
Cause of congestion
Specific pictogram –congestion.
Specification of (two) alternative
routes
Congestion length for each case
Travel times
Cause of congestion
Specific pictogram –congestion
Information about congestion
length
Travel times
Cause of congestion
RECOMENDADO
R-3
TOT GOUDA
VIA A12 40 KM FILE
VIA A13 FILE VRIJ
(
156) NYBO
5 km
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
A RONDES
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
RALLENTAMENTO
TRA 10 KM
TABLE 3. Different rerouting strategies identified on the Working Book
110
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Certain heterogeneity is also found in simpler structures –such as travel
times (figure 8). Travel times are shown indicating road number or road
name, exit number or exit name, also city names. Sometimes numbers
are used, sometimes abbreviations (e.g., SDA., abbreviating SORTIDA in
Catalan,i.e. exit). Interestingly, sometimes also abstract characters are
used on the alphanumeric part. Magnitude of time displayed varies from
minutes to hours. When displayed, the abbreviation for ‘minute’ is shown
in several ways (MIN, min, MN, or apostrophe ‘). It should be shown always
in lower case, as it eases the identification of the travel time set. Structures
are normally horizontal, although may also be vertical. Complementary
informative elements (pictograms, heading words as “Expected time”, “to
ring road”, “to city A”, also vary.
The use of abstract alphanumeric signs on VMS is a very strategic question
with a wide margin of development. The Mare Nostrum VMS group and also
ES4 are performing different studies in order to obtain abstract alphanumeric
for distance-length formulations [16]. Here and there, the Working Book
shows potential applications not yet standardised, but very interesting.
Figure 9 shows three columns. The first one displays VMS including one or
various arrow types and used. The second column displays VMS using a
small alphanumeric sign for exit. The third column shows examples of more
heterogeneous uses: dashes, dots, apostrophe, and the equal sign tested by
the ES4-Mare Nostrum group. Some cases treat complex situations. In the
first column (arrows), the first message (top-down) intends to communicate
congestion in road A-7 on the way to Orange (A-7 => ORANGE). The alternate
message, just below, uses an arrow to indicate the link to an alternative
itinerary from one road to another road to get to the airport (AEROPORT
ALTERNATIVA C-33 => B-10) -a complex case. Then, two Dutch signs make
an extensive use of arrows to indicate to drivers what happens on the
RESTID TILL CITY A
VIA E4
25 MIN
VIA E6
45 MIN
RESTID TILL
CITYA
25 MIN
CITYB
45 MIN
RESTID TILL
(
155) NYBO 25 MIN
(
157) HAGA 45 MIN
MONTPELLIER OH50
ESPAGNE
3H20
A4: 10 MIN
A 86: 5 MIN
SDA.4
2 min
SDA.8
5 min
SDA.11
8 min
A RONDES
C-31
B-20
10 MIN
8 MIN
TEMPI PREVISTI
CAPRIATE
5´
MILANO EST 20´
C-31
30 MIN
B-20
12 MIN
BOUCHON A 5 KM
TRAVERSEE OH35
TEMPO
CV-30 5 min
ESTIMADO
CV-35 15 min
30 min
V-21 45 min
FIGURE 8. Different travel times formulations observed on the Working Book
different, alternative itineraries –one of them openly recommended. The
last message indicates congestion between two kilometre-points making
use of the arrow as a connector: from A to B (KM XX KM YY). The second
column shows messages using the sign for exit. The three first messages
use the sign as indication of way to follow, while the two last VMS use the
sign in order to support the location function (e.g., “congestion on exit
number 19”). The last message within this set shows the potentialities of
the association between pictogram and exit alphanumeric sign. The third
column displays a more heterogeneous set of messages (including the
111
equal sign to indicate congestion length in the first, option tested by the
ES4-Mare Nostrum group).
A7= > LYON
RESTID TILL
BOUCHON
(
155) NYBO 25 MIN
N7S CONSEILLEE
(
157) HAGA 45 MIN
AP-7
USE R-3
A4: 10 MIN
A MADRID
ST. CUGAT
A 86: 5 MIN
RUBI
USE
19
AEROPORT
A12 na
Ede
ALTERNATIVA
C-33 => B-10
E 19 NA BRECHT
Utrecht volg
A50/A15
WEGWERKZAAMHEDEN
ANTWERPEN VOLG A17
19
CORTE
KM 223
=25 KM
19
238
USE
17
TEMPI PREVISTI
CAPRIATE
5´
MILANO EST 20´
TRÂNSITO CORTADO
T. Novas-Santarém
SEJA PRUDENTE
ZASTOJ
VRANSKO-TROJANE
CONGESTION
VRANSKO-TROJANE
FIGURE 9. Different examples of alphanumeric potential uses on VMS
112
New ideas: on alternative coding schemas using VMS
The Working Book shows some innovative possibilities considering the
VMS as a whole, particularly for events related to the network topology.
New display capacities (notably full matrix) would allow for simple, direct
displays as such. One example is the double-pictogram VMS changing
layout from horizontal to vertical, in order to adapt to the bifurcating
alternative routes on a ring road, and using travel times (figure 8, first
column, third message bottom up). But the most compelling source
of such signing style comes from the Slovenian partners, mixing the
potential of crosses-arrows signs and pictograms on VMS (figure 10).
Technically and graphically sophisticated VMS as such could also help
in special (high risk) infrastructures such as bridges or tunnels with
reversible lanes.
We don’t think the accident pictogram used, the redundancy of
pictograms, or even the use of alternating VMS is adequate [10]. From
this point of view, the message could be simplified. What this sample
on figure 10 does so smartly is making the most of existing knowledge
on traffic signs on the part of drivers, and also relying on a simple
representation of the motorway (two, three lanes) by using the whole
VMS. What normally is the main information part, pictograms on one or
both sides, here is just complementary information because the ‘text’
part, in the middle, has been literally transformed in the main pictogram
within the VMS (a true icon of the road). Compare it with the pictogram
for lane assignment recently included in R.E.2 [10] (figure 5, case 4.3,
fourth pictogram from left to right). This Slovenian example shows a
magnificent sign, which can probably be seen from quite far away and
includes all relevant information without text.
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
The first column on figure 10 shows the possibility of displaying the
consequence (right lane closed) due to accident, and bringing speed limit
to 60km/h. The same column, at the bottom, shows the same context,
indicating drivers to leave the two right lanes. A very interesting aspect to
mention is the position of arrows, pointing up or down. Arrows pointing down
(first column) play the oldest function in arrows: index, indicators, or signals
for attracting attention. This arrow indicates the position to occupy on the
lane it points to right after the VMS: ‘here is where you have to be’, ‘this is
the place you have to move from’. Crosses complement this indicating ‘here
is where you cannot be’. That is why complementary information concerning
distance has no sense. The first VMS on the second column also shows an
arrow with an indicative function. Our Slovenian partners prefer to support
this sign with the words ‘use exit’ probably because the place the VMS points
to is not right after the arrow.
UPORABITE IZVOZ
60
60
60
USE EXIT
60
1,5 km
80
80
80
1,5 km
80
FIGURE 10. Topologically oriented design on VMS (Slovenia)
On the contrary, more stylised arrows pointing up (second column, first VMS
bottom-up) are both indicators and symbols of the highway lanes. These
arrows portrait trajectories on the different lanes of the road to drivers,
indicating that one of the lanes will have to be abandoned in 1.5 km due
to an accident, and that speed must be kept at 80km/h. In sum, this VMS
show an integral solution well suited to certain events (lane issues) and it
surely builds a simple and effective reading on the part of drivers. Present
and future full matrix VMS may make the most of super simple, text bared,
and holistic displays as such.
113
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
Concluding Remarks
The second edition of the Working Book offers some interesting conclusions.
On the one hand it is true that the previous pages show a lot of heterogeneity
on VMS displays (on pictograms, alphanumeric characters, text structures
and, broadly speaking, varying approaches to signing). Some working
solutions have been appointed: stick to the basic design principles now
forming part of WP.1 R.E.2 [10], and when facing other or more specific
situations promote rules that maintain the compromise with the European
public. Promote pictograms that self-explain and need less o no text at all,
promote alphanumeric characters to display and link basic information (city
names, places, roads) without recurring to conjunctions or prepositions or
verbal connectors. Promote common text structures and layouts. Some of
the empirical studies undertaken to date will to some extent help on these
matters. Future studies will be a necessary aid for some, if not for all, the
decisions taken.
On the other hand, we may see the great creativity and richness of alternative
signing solutions emerging here and there from the practice of European
operators. We have to make the most of it because this is a heterogeneous but
FIGURE 11. A sample of pictographic and alphanumeric
solutions with potential wide applicability
115
excellent catalogue where many potential solutions lie as it has been shown
in the previous section. That background is very valuable as signing solutions
that have already being used have passed the main test of experience. Figure
11 shows some ideas confirming the potential of innovating by derivation,
i.e., considering existing (not new) informative elements and sings. Obviously
a serious scrutiny of alternatives will be needed and this is just an example.
Some alternatives will make the most of empirical test in order to confirm
its widest range of applicability.
We still have a lot to do in order to fully appraise and make the most of
the present edition of the working book, in terms of the design norms and
compromises that must be adopted, and also in terms of the potential
solutions that will transcend to shared use. And still, a future edition of the
Working Book should be expected. First, because new partners are plausibly
integrating the group (Greece, Austria,Hungary…). Second, because reality
changes quite quickly and members of ES4-Mare Nostrum are bringing
new road/traffic events that could be object of harmonisation –after all, the
Working Book is the first step towards the ES4 Guidelines. Enlargement of
the Working Book will affect its main structure as well as some particular
cases in the existing Working Packages (table 4).
The new context within EASYWAY will surely introduce other elements
on the work done by ES4-Mare Nostrum and particularly on the Working
Book. We refer in particular to activities followed by other complementary
European Studies, notably ES1 (Europe-wide Traveller Information Continuity
& Co-modality), ES2 (Europe-Wide Traffic Management Services) and ES3
(Freight & Logistics Services). In this way the role of the ES4 is transmitting
certain savoir faire concerning the principles of design that must be
assumed in whatever road information device in use, particularly visual
116
WP
ROAD/TRAFFIC SITUATIONS TO AD
1. Congestion
(…)
1.7 Traffic info about other road(s)
2. Rerouting
(…)
3. Unplanned EventS
(…)
3.6. Slippery road (not weather related)
3.7. Bad visibility (not weather related)
3.8. Bridge opening
3.9. Animals on the road
3.10. Damaged road ahead
3.11. Closure of road infrastructure (bridge, tunnel…)
4. Road Works
(…)
4.5. Road works –same road
4.6. Road works ahead + rerouting advice
4.7. Road works – different road
5. Dynamic Traffic
Management
(…)
5.4. Lane closed
6. Weather
Information
(…)
7.PreAnnouncements
7.1.Pre-announcement of road works (later in time)
7.2.Pre-announcement of events (later in time)
8. Intermodality
And Special
Circumstances
8.1. Events (Sports, other) & parking guidance
8.2. Park & Ride guidance
8.3. Special circumstances
9. Campaign
Messages
9.1. Traffic (safety) related
9.2. Non-traffic related
TABLE 4. Coming road/Traffic events on the ES4-Mare Nostrum
Working Book (3rd Edition)
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
ones. Conversely there is a lot ES4 may learn from other ES: new specific
road/traffic contexts, devices, end users (heavy trucks), etc. When dealing
specifically with their different issues, these three ES will get to know certain
road/traffic signing events that could be assumed within the ES4 agenda.
A good example of potential ES-4 involvement comes from the recently
issued European Directive on road Infrastructures safety management (19
November 2008) [18]. Obviously road signing plays a broad role in this
Directive, but also specific demands have been issued: road users should be
informed of high accident concentration section within the Community (let us
say TERN). This mandate should probably be assumed and followed by ES4,
that is, country members propose what they consider an appropriate way to
sign such context, the Working Book compiles these proposals, and then a
European harmonised solution is issued on stage 3, the ES4 Guidelines.
After examining the messages on the Working Book, we cannot deny the
paradoxical value of heterogeneity. More and more, the role of ES4 is clear
on this respect. As corresponds to basic democratic ways, we do not intend
to silence heterogeneity; rather we want to make the most of it, reaching a
constructive management and control of the diversity of solutions appointed
by the partners. The end stage is adopting the better, more functional VMS
solution from the point of view of the European road user both within and
beyond national borders.
117
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
References
[1] Piaget, J. (1957). Jan Amos Comenius. In Prospects (UNESCO, International
Bureau of Education), vol. XXIII, no. 1/2, 1993, p. 173-196. Available in: http://
www.ibe.unesco.org/publications/ThinkersPdf/comeniuse.PDF
[2] Comenius, J.A. (1658). Orbis Sensualis Pictus/The Visible World in Pictures.
Translated into English by Charles Hoolf, London, 1777. Available at: http://
books.google.com/books
[3] Aguirre, M.E. (2001). Enseñar con textos e imágenes. Una de las aportaciones
de Juan Amós Comenio. Revista Electrónica de Investigación Educativa, 3 (1).
Consulted on February 6, 2009 in: http://redie.uabc.mx/vol3no1/contenido-lora.
html
[11] Staley, S., Moore, A. (2009). Mobility First. New York: Rowman & Littlefield
Publishers.
[12] WERD/DERD (2000). Framework for harmonised implementation of variable
message signs in Europe. Final version 3.0, spring 2000. West European Road
Directors (WERD), Deputy European Road Directors (DERD).
[13] Lucas, A., Blanch, M.T., Messina, C. (2006). Mare Nostrum: Towards VMS
Contents Harmonisation. Madrid: Dirección General de Tráfico.
[14] Montoro, L., Lucas, A., Vargas, C. (2008). Quadern de Trànsit 5. Manual
d’ús dels panells de missatge variable a Catalunya. Barcelona: Servei Catalá
de Trànsit.
[4] Krampen, M. (1983). Icons on the road. Semiotica, 43 (1/2), 1-203, p. 30.
[5] Neurath, Otto (1936). International Picture Language. London: Kegan Paul.
Facsimile re-edited by the University of Redding, United Kindgom, 1980.
[6] Lucas, A., Montoro, L. ,Blanch, M. (2009). Road signs and new technologies:
vectors of development within the European context. Securitas vialis, 2,
57-62.
[7] Nouvier, J., Duhamel, M., Arbaiza, A., Lucas, A. (2007). The history of traffic
signing in France and Europe: the role of international conventions. Proceedings
of the 23rd Road World Congress. International Road Federation. September
17-21, 2007. Paris, France.
[8] ETSC (1999). Intelligent transportation systems and road safety. Brussels:
ETSC.
[9] Nenzi, R. (1997). Use of Dynamic Signing (VMS). Volume 3C. Telematics on the
Trans European road Network 2 – TELTEN2. Final Report. Brussels: ERTICO.
[15] Arbaiza, A., Lucas, A. (2008). Manual de operadores de Centros de Gestión
de Tráfico. Madrid: Dirección General de Tráfico.
[16] Arbaiza, A., Conte, R., Desnouailles, C., Lucas, A.; Blanch, M.T., Moran, J.,
Remeijn, H., Sequeira, P., Tognoni, G., Thyni, G., Whitehead, P., Zorin, U. (2007).
The Mare Nostrum VMS Group: Enlarging the Long Distance Corridor. Proceedings
of the 15th World Congress on Intelligent Transport Systems. New York, United
States of America, November 16-20, 2008.
[17] Eco, U. (1968/1994). La estructura ausente. Barcelona: Lumen.
[18] Official Journal of the European Union (2008). DIRECTIVE 2008/96/EC OF
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 19 November 2008 on
road infrastructure safety management. Available at http://eur-lex.europa.eu
[10] UNECE (2008). ECE/TRANS/WP.1/119 - Consolidated Resolution on Road
Signs and Signals (R.E.2). Available at: http://www.unece.org/trans/roadsafe/
wp1fdoc.html
119
ES4-Mare Nostrum: The Working Book
MINISTERIO
DEL INTERIOR
ES4-Mare Nostrum:
The Working Book
Josefa Valcárcel, 28 - 28027 Madrid
w w w . d g t . es
MINISTERIO
DEL INTERIOR
Subdirección General
de Gestión de Tráfico
y Movilidad