Slide 1

Walking and Stopping over Tactile Paving Childs, Craig R; Tyler, Nick Accessibility Research Group, UCL, London, UK Slide 2 UK reports on Tactile Paving 17.5% neighbourhoods have poorly laid tactile paving fine provided they are in the right place and at the right angle, but so often they are not IDGO, 2010. Tactile paving design, siting and laying. 5% wrong type 12% wrong colour Loo-Morrey, 2005. Tactile Paving Review. Slide 3 Layout 1 ? ? ~30m 2 Edge? Slide 4 Layout 2 ? ? Slide 5 Previous study Revisit data for detection distance Childs et al, 2010. Shared Space Delineators : Are They Detectable? Slide 6 PAMELa Pedestrian Accessibility and Movement Environment Laboratory Slide 7 Surfaces Table 2 Tactile Paving Test Characteristics Test 1Test 2Test 3Test 4 Depth400mm800mm Gradientlevel 1:24level Slide 8 Participants Test 1Test 2Test 3Test 4 Long Cane22161417 Guide Dog0636 None7384 Participants2925 27 Trials53979899 Slide 9 'walk towards me stopping if you detect change in surface otherwise keep walking at your normal walking pace' Task Slide 10 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane None 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 Slide 11 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane None 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 8% 0% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 69% 26% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 54% 53% 54% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% 16 15%8%13 15%0%13 16% 5% 19 8% 0% 26 29% 23% Slide 12 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane None 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 8% 0% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 69% 26% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 54% 53% 54% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% 16 15%8%13 15%0%13 16% 5% 19 8% 0% 26 23% 29% Slide 13 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane None 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 8% 0% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 69% 26% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 54% 53% 54% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% 16 15%8%13 15%0%13 16% 5% 19 8% 0% 26 23% 29% Slide 14 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane None 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 8% 0% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 69% 26% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 54% 53% 54% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% 16 15%8%13 15%0%13 16% 5% 19 8% 0% 26 23% 29% Slide 15 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% 9%56 Sthl et al. 2010 1000 87% 0%16 29% Slide 16 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% Sthl et al. 2010 1000 87% 0%16 Sueda et al. 2000 98% 9%56 29% Slide 17 Results Guide dog 04008001200 Fail n Long Cane 800mm 800mm 1:24 400mm 800mm 800mm 1:24 40% 26% 27% 34% 29% 0% 6% 35% 48% 41% 13% 38% 3% 21% 23% 14% 46% 58% 56% 23% 40 15%2%61 2% 0% 56 5% 56 13%0%24 13%0%24 0% Sthl et al. 2010 1000 87% 0%16 Sueda et al. 2000 98% 0%56 Peck & Bentzen, 1987 GD LC 95% 0%40 9%56 29% Slide 18 Results Summary 400mm is not reliably detectable 800mm is detectable But stopping distance can be > 800mm 400 < detectable < 800? Slide 19 Discussion Tactile paving guidelines exist Inappropriate use examples Confusing results even following guidelines Should guidelines be revised? On what additional evidence? Slide 20 Dhanyavad