1

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE:

ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction ......................................................................................................1

Rumble Strip Considerations for Bicyclists .......................................................3

Providing Rideable Space beyond the Rumble Strip .......................................4

Traversing Rumble Strips .....................................................................................6

Collaboration and Outreach..............................................................................8

Summary ...........................................................................................................9

Where to Learn More.........................................................................................9
In an effort to save some of the 500,000 lives expected 

to be lost in roadway departures in the next 25 years, 

the highway community needs to move forward 

installing rumble strips as appropriate. 

Photo: Thinkstock
1

This guide serves to educate safety, planning, and design professionals about the need to collaborate with the 

bicycle community and understand the functional and safety needs of bicyclists as edge line, shoulder, and 

even center line rumble strips are being considered for implementation. The guide presents design flexibilities 

on bicyclist accommodation that have been used by agencies with successful large-scale implementation of 

rumble strips on two-lane rural roads.

Introduction 

Longitudinal rumble strips are an effective, low-cost 

countermeasure for preventing roadway departure crashes, 

including both run-off-road and opposite direction sideswipe 

crashes. Rumble strips1,2 are milled or raised patterns near the 

center line or edge line of the roadway that provide both an 

audible warning (rumbling sound) and a physical vibration 

to alert drivers that they are crossing into opposing traffic or 

leaving the roadway. Rumble strips placed underneath center 

line or edge line striping are referred to as “rumble stripes.” 

Rumble Strip Basics. There are two main applications for 

rumble strips:3

1 FHWA Technical Advisory T 5040.39: Shoulder and Edge Line Rumble Strips. Available at: 

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/pavement/rumble_strips/t504039/.

2 FHWA Technical Advisory T5040.40: Center Line Rumble Strips. Available at: http://safety.fhwa.

dot.gov/roadway_dept/pavement/rumble_strips/t504040/.

3 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Safety, “Rumble Strips and Stripes” web page. 

Available at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/pavement/rumble_strips/.

• Shoulder rumble strips and edge line rumble stripes 

(shown in Figure 1) are primarily used to prevent run-off-theroad (ROR) crashes by warning drivers that they are drifting 

onto the roadside. While shoulder and edge line rumble 

strips perform the same function, the placement sets them 

apart. Shoulder rumble strips are historically common on 

freeways and other divided highways, but the decision to 

use one or the other on two-lane roads is made based on 

a number of factors. 

The edge line rumble 

stripe aligns the 

rumble strip with the 

pavement marking 

and thereby improves 

the visibility of the 

marking in wet, dark 

conditions. By placing 

the rumble strip closer 

to the travel lane, it FIGURE 1. Edge Line Rumble Stripes.

Photo: Kentucky Transportation Cabinet

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE:

ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS
2

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

alerts the driver sooner that they are leaving the roadway. 

Shoulder rumble strips and edge line rumble stripes have 

been shown to reduce single vehicle, run-off-road fatal and 

injury crashes by 29 percent on rural two-lane roads.4

• Center line rumble 

strips or stripes (shown 

in Figure 2) can prevent 

head-on collisions and 

opposite-direction sideswipes, often referred 

to as cross-center line 

crashes. They are primarily used to warn drivers 

who are drifting into an 

opposing travel lane. 

While they are most often used on rural twolane, two-way roadways, they can also be applied to multilane, undivided facilities. Center line markings are typically 

placed on center line rumble strips, which have an added 

benefit of improving the visibility of the marking in wet, dark 

conditions. Center line rumble strips have been shown to 

reduce head-on and opposite-direction fatal and injury 

crashes by 44 percent on rural two-lane roads.5

Rumble Strip Challenges for Bicyclists. Whether riding in the 

lane or on the shoulder, bicyclists are legal road users and 

have the right to use the roadway. Rumble strips can pose 

challenges to bicyclists if their needs are not considered. It is 

important to keep in mind that bicyclists have varying abilities. 

4 D. J. Torbic, J. M. Hutton, et al. NCHRP Report 641, Guidance for the Design and Application of 

Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2009. 

Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_641.pdf.

5 Ibid.

Experienced riders prefer a direct route and are comfortable 

riding with the flow of traffic and using the full width of narrow 

travel lanes when appropriate. Casual and less confident 

riders typically ride more slowly and may use a less direct 

route to avoid heavy traffic. The equipment also varies, from 

very light bikes with high-pressure tires that may be damaged 

by roadway debris to heavy-duty bikes with wide tires that can 

easily ride on a gravel shoulder. 

Traversing rumble strips on a bicycle can be uncomfortable 

and could possibly lead to loss of control. Gaps in the rumble 

strip are provided to allow bicyclists to travel between the 

shoulder and the travel lane, to turn left, and to avoid debris 

or other obstacles in their path. Depending on the size and 

location, a shoulder rumble strip may remove the shoulder as 

an option for bicycle travel. Center line rumble strips are less 

problematic, the primary concerns being that drivers may be 

less likely to cross the rumble strips to pass a bicyclist or that 

drivers may move away from the rumble strip, closer to where 

the bicyclist is likely to be traveling. The strategic placement 

and design of edge line, shoulder, or center line rumble strips is 

important as practitioners balance safety improvements and 

increasing the viability of alternative modes of transportation. 

FIGURE 2. Center Line Rumble Stripes.

Photo: Connecticut DOT
3

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

Rumble Strip Considerations for Bicyclists

While rumble strips provide many safety benefits for motor 

vehicles, they can present rideability issues for bicyclists. A 

paved shoulder is often the safest location for bicycle travel, 

particularly on roadways with higher operating speeds than 

those typically achieved by bicyclists. However, bicyclists may 

utilize the travel lane or alternate between the shoulder and 

travel lane depending on conditions. Designated bicycle 

routes6 and other roadways with known frequent bicycle 

traffic may warrant special consideration regarding the effects 

of adding rumble strips. Flexibility in application is available 

on all roadways, but the extent of current and projected bicycle 

traffic may help agencies prioritize where to employ alternative 

design options to better accommodate bicyclists and increase 

use of rumble strips beyond the standard practices.

Rumble strips are most effective on or very near the edge of 

the travel lane7 both because they provide more alerting noise 

and vibration at shallower departure angles and because 

the sooner the driver is alerted that he or she is leaving the 

travel lane, the more likely a recovery maneuver is to succeed. 

However, the 2 or 3 feet of shoulder nearest the travel lane is 

also a preferred location for bicyclists in some cases, as it is out 

of the travel lane and there is less likely to be debris. 

6 According to FHWA (http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/fapg/cfr0652.htm), a bicycle 

route is “a segment of a system of bikeways designated by the jurisdiction having authority 

with appropriate directional and informational markers, with or without a specific bicycle route 

number.”

7 D. J. Torbic, J. M. Hutton, et al. NCHRP Report 641, Guidance for the Design and Application of 

Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips, Transportation Research Board, Washington D.C., 2009. 

Available at: http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_641.pdf.

The 2012 AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle 

Facilities states that “rumble strips are not recommended on 

shoulders used by bicyclists unless there is a minimum clear 

path of 4 feet from the rumble strip to the outside edge of 

a paved shoulder, or 5 feet to the adjacent curb, guardrail, 

or other obstacle.” Many DOTs have policies or guidance for 

edge line or shoulder rumble strips where there is sufficient 

existing paved shoulder width beyond it for the bicyclist to 

travel. However, agencies need not limit themselves to use on 

roadways where these standard applications provide sufficient 

space, as flexibility from an agency’s standard rumble strip 

design may provide the opportunity to improve overall safety 

on a wider variety of roads. This option is important for reducing 

severe roadway departure crashes, particularly on roadways 

where a systemic or spot analysis indicates a safety concern. 

For 3R (resurfacing, restoration, or rehabilitation) projects where 

identified safety concerns exist or for safety projects, agencies 

may also want to consider these alternative design options 

even if the full standard width beyond the rumble strip cannot 

be attained. The goal is to optimize safety for all road users. 

The needs of bicyclists and the tradeoffs in safety effectiveness 

of alternative rumble strip designs can be considered, along 

with other concerns (such as noise and pavement integrity), 

to determine the best design for each corridor on a project-byproject basis. 
4

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

Providing Rideable Space beyond the Rumble Strip 

Shoulders are a proven safety feature for all road users, but 

are particularly beneficial in reducing conflicts between slower 

traffic and those vehicles traveling at typical highway speeds. 

The presence, composition, and integrity of the shoulder 

surface can affect where a bicyclist chooses to travel. Many 

bicyclists prefer to use the shoulder when it is paved and well 

maintained. If a shoulder is not paved, it is more likely that 

bicyclists will ride in the travel lane, even when vehicles are 

passing them. 

Paving existing unpaved shoulders or widening existing 

shoulders may be the best overall safety solution in some 

locations. However, unless the highway segment is being 

reconstructed, the cost and environmental impact of widening 

the roadway cross-section for any significant length of a 

roadway corridor is often prohibitive. Permeable pavements 

that are currently being studied for other uses hold some 

promise for future shoulder widening with less impact. A solution 

frequently used by DOTs is to adjust the location and the size of 

the rumble strips. Many States have begun installing narrower 

(12 inches or 8 inches) rumble strips, rather than the previous 

standard of 18 inches to provide more room on the shoulder 

for bicyclists. Even narrower rumble strips have been used 

under the assumption that some warning is better than none. 

It is expected that there will be reduced safety effectiveness by 

narrowing the rumble strip, but widths under 12-inches have 

not been studied to any extent at this time. Installation of edge 

line rumble stripes has also become a somewhat common 

practice, which provides multiple benefits:

• Edge line rumble stripes may afford bicyclists additional 

travel width by shifting the rumble strips from 6 inches to 2 

feet closer to the travel lane.

• Roads with edge line rumble stripes are more likely to have 

rideable shoulder space that is free of debris.

• The noise associated with vehicles passing over the edge 

line rumble stripe can act as an “alert” to bicyclists that 

vehicles are encroaching on the shoulder, and it improves 

the likelihood that the motorist will return to their lane before 

leaving the roadway.

The way in which these potential design modifications 

(changing the size or location) are accomplished varies:

• It may be done as a standard practice or on a case-bycase basis.

• It may depend on the classification of the roadway or the 

paved lane and shoulder widths. 

Figure 3 shows an example of an early rumble strip installation 

where the offset was 12 inches from the edge line and 16-inch 

rumbles were used, leaving only 2 to 3 feet for bicyclists. Current 

FIGURE 3. Early Shoulder Rumble Strip Installation.

Photo: FHWA
5

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

installations use 12-inch rumble strips with either a 6-inch offset 

or an edge line rumble stripe to provide an additional 10 to 16 

inches of space for bicyclists traveling on the shoulder. 

States vary slightly in their preference for shoulder rumble strips 

or edge line rumble stripes. States’ standard practices also 

vary in the minimum shoulder width requirements for installing 

either type of rumble strip or stripe. Typical minimum shoulder 

width requirements are between 4 and 6 feet. 

• The policy in both Missouri and Idaho is to install edge 

line rumble stripes in order to provide a debris-free area 

on the shoulder side of the rumble strip for bicyclists. 

This placement also provides an audible warning to the 

bicyclists if a vehicle is coming over the edge line. Missouri 

DOT typically uses edge line rumble stripes in areas of high 

bicycle traffic in order to address some of the concerns 

associated with shoulder rumble strips.8 

• South Carolina DOT uses shoulder rumble strips on 

controlled access roads and edge line rumble stripes on 

all other roads.9 

• Pennsylvania DOT’s policy is to install shoulder rumble strips 

if the paved shoulder is 6 feet or greater in width, and edge 

line rumble stripes if the paved shoulder is between 4 and 

6 feet. The policy also requires at least 11-foot wide lanes.10

8 Interview with John Miller, Joe Jones, Ashley Reinkemeyer, Michael Curtit, and John Donahue, 

Missouri DOT, conducted on June 5-6, 2013.

9 Interview with Mark Hunter, David Rogers, Andy Johnson, Brett Harrelson, Joey Riddle, Rob 

Bedenbavgh, and David Cook, South Carolina DOT, conducted on January 23, 2013.

10 Interview with Gary Modi, Chris Speese, Lydia Peddicord, Scott Nazar, Brian Sanders, and Josh 

Freeman of PennDOT, conducted on August 27, 2013.

• Michigan DOT’s policy requires a minimum of a 6 foot paved 

shoulder in order to install shoulder rumble strips. Edge line 

rumble stripes are not commonly used in Michigan.11 

Arizona DOT also reviewed roadways where bicycles are 

allowed (i.e., non-urban Interstate) and identified all locations 

where rumble strips are installed with less than 4 feet of effective 

shoulder width on the “Cycle Arizona Bicycle User Map.” This 

map helps bicyclists chose specific routes that meet their 

individual needs and comfort levels.12

11 Interview with Jill Morena, Tracie Leix, Deirdre Thompson, Curtis Bleech, Andy Bennett, Tim 

Croze, Marc Beyer, and Erin Chelotti of Michigan DOT and Tim Gates of Wayne State University, 

conducted on May 22-23, 2013.

12 Arizona DOT, “Cycle Arizona Bicycle User Map,” (Phoenix, AZ: ADOT, 2009). Available at: 

http://www.azbikeped.org/images/Map2009_v12_0409_lowres_side1.pdf.

“If safety concerns outweigh other issues such as 

noise and bicycle use, non-freeway centerline and 

shoulder corrugations can be considered for use on 

roadways that do not meet the criteria given above.” 

– Michigan DOT Road Design Manual
6

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

While center line rumble strips do not present obstacles 

for bicyclists, there are a few issues to consider. The AASHTO 

Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities recommends 

a paved surface width of 14 feet beyond a center line rumble 

strip, which can include the driving lane and shoulder. While 

there is a perception that motor vehicles shy away from center 

line rumble strips, studies indicate that where this occurs it is a 

very small shift – less than 6 inches13 and where shoulders are 

narrow, drivers positioned the center of their vehicles closer to 

the center of the lane.14

Another concern is that motorists are less likely to cross a 

center line to pass a bicyclist at the edge of the lane or in the 

shoulder if there is a rumble strip on that center line. Michigan 

DOT conducted a field study15 that found 71 percent of drivers 

contacted the center line rumble strips to pass a bicyclist in 

comparison to 79 percent of drivers that contacted the center 

line when there was no rumble strip present. However, the 

effect of the presence of rumble strips was small in comparison 

to the location of the bicyclist (in the travel lane, or specific 

placement in the shoulder) and whether there was oncoming 

traffic in the opposing lane.16 

13 Savolainen, Peter T., et al., TRR No.2314 “Lateral Placement of Motor Vehicles When Passing 

Bicyclists,” 2012. Available at: http://trrjournalonline.trb.org/doi/abs/10.3141/2314-03.

14 Finley, Melisa D., et al. “Studies to Determine the Operational Effects of Shoulder and Centerline 

Rumble Strips on Two-Lane Undivided Roadways,” August 2009. Available at: 

http://d2dtl5nnlpfr0r.cloudfront.net/tti.tamu.edu/documents/0-5577-1.pdf.

15 Datta, Tapan K., et al. “Impact of Non-Freeway Rumble Strips Phase 1,” June 2012. 

Available at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_Research_Report_RC1575_

Report_394019_7.pdf.

16 Savolainen, Peter T., et al., TRR No.2314 “Lateral Placement of Motor Vehicles When Passing 

Bicyclists,” 2012. Available at: http://trrjournalonline.trb.org/doi/abs/10.3141/2314-03.

Traversing Rumble Strips

Another component of accommodating bicyclists using the 

shoulder where rumble strips are present is to provide gaps 

within the continuous rumble strips so that bicyclists can easily 

move between the shoulder and travel lane as necessary to 

avoid debris, make turns, pass, etc. The gaps are designed such 

that it is unlikely a motor vehicle will cross the line of rumble 

strips without alerting the driver. Most roadway departures 

where a rumble strip will reduce the likelihood or severity of 

a crash involve a low angle of departure (the driver drifts off 

the road as opposed to steering sharply to avoid an animal). 

A properly designed pattern considers the size of the rumble 

strips and the gap pattern. Since the gap exists entirely for 

use by bicyclists, the design should also consider how much 

space a cyclist needs to pass between the gaps, which may 

vary on steep grades. Gaps are not always needed but are 

encouraged, even when the surface on the other side of the 

rumble strip is not ideal for cycling. 

Michigan, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, and 

Washington DOTs all reported using a pattern with 10- to 12-

foot gaps in every 40 to 60 feet of continuous rumble strips. 

Pennsylvania DOT does not require bicycle gaps and leaves 

the decision at the engineer’s discretion or on a case-by-case 

basis.17

17 Interview with Jill Morena, Tracie Leix, Deirdre Thompson, Curtis Bleech, Andy Bennett, Tim 

Croze, Marc Beyer, and Erin Chelotti of Michigan DOT and Tim Gates of Wayne State University, 

conducted on May 22-23, 2013; interview with Gary Modi, Chris Speese, Lydia Peddicord, Scott 

Nazar, Brian Sanders, and Josh Freeman of PennDOT, conducted on August 27, 2013; interview 

with Mark Hunter, David Rogers, Andy Johnson, Brett Harrelson, Joey Riddle, Rob Bedenbavgh, 

and David Cook, South Carolina DOT, conducted on January 23, 2013; and interview with Gary 

Modi, Chris Speese, Lydia Peddicord, Scott Nazar, Brian Sanders, and Josh Freeman of PennDOT, 

conducted on August 27, 2013.
7

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

Figure 4 shows a typical example of rumble strips with a gap 

for bicyclists. 

Reducing the depth of the rumble strip is an alternative design 

to provide a rumble strip design that is less jarring to bicyclists 

as they need to cross from the shoulder to the lane or viceversa. This practice has become less common as the bicycle 

gap has gained popularity. Pennsylvania DOT uses shallower 

rumble strips (5/16 inch) at locations where additional bicycle 

considerations are needed.18 

In Washington State, whether the road is undivided or divided 

is a determining factor for rumble strip depth. On undivided 

highways, where bicycle traffic is greater in the State, the typical 

rumble strip depth is 3/8 inch, whereas on divided highways, 

it is 1⁄2 inch to 5/8 inch. Washington State DOT allows a large 

annual bicycle race to utilize the same roadway every year. 

Due to the large size of the race and the negative effects they 

could cause the bicyclists during the race, the DOT decided 

not to install rumble strips on this roadway.19 This is an isolated, 

unique situation, and is a good example of tradeoffs being 

considered on a case-by-case basis.

18 Interview with Gary Modi, Chris Speese, Lydia Peddicord, Scott Nazar, Brian Sanders, and Josh 

Freeman of PennDOT, conducted on August 27, 2013.

19 Interview with Dave Olsen, Matthew Enders, T.J. Nedrow, Ian Macek, Tim Sexton, Mark Russell, 

Jeff Uhlmeyer, and Steve Bennett of Washington State DOT, conducted on October 30, 2012.

FIGURE 4. Example of Bicycle Gap.

Photo: Doug Ryan, Adventure Cycling Association

It is important to understand the exact concerns of 

the bicycling community, to be flexible regarding the 

implementation and design of rumble strips, and to 

maintain dialogue with the bicycle community and 

other road users.
8

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

Collaboration and Outreach

As agencies consider installing edge line or shoulder rumble 

strips, public outreach to and involvement of the bicycle 

community is essential. 

In Michigan, the bicycle community, particularly the League 

of Michigan Bicyclists (LMB), collaborated with Wayne State 

University on the first phase of their research on the impact 

of non-freeway rumble strips.20 The LMB’s website was used to 

survey bicyclists’ opinions of rumble strip design-related issues. 

The LMB also worked with the Michigan DOT (MDOT) to create a 

“Share the Road” public service announcement to help drivers 

understand safe practices related to passing bicyclists where 

rumble strips exist.21 “Share the Road” signs were installed, but 

they have not been shown to have any significant effect on 

driver behavior. 

South Carolina DOT (SCDOT) developed a public marketing 

campaign, “Recognize-React-Recover” that seeks to educate 

the public on rumble strip safety benefits and how to react 

when leaving the roadway. In this campaign, SCDOT recognized 

the importance of engaging the bicycle community during 

the transportation planning phase and as an ongoing effort. 

SCDOT routinely engages the bicycle community, and before 

rumble strips are recommended for installation on designated 

bike routes, conducts crash analyses and discusses findings 

and recommendations with bicycle advocacy groups. Using 

this process, SCDOT has been successful in gaining the support 

20 T.K. Datta, T.J. Gates, and P.T. Savolainen, Impact of Non-Freeway Rumble Strips, Phase 1, 2012. 

Available at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT_Research_Report_RC1575_

Report_394019_7.pdf.

21 Michigan DOT, “Share the Road” Public Service Announcement, Published on May 9, 2012. 

Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUL8l9_65Ic.

of the bicycle community without having to exclude the 

application of rumble strips on designated bike routes. 22 

Pennsylvania DOT and Washington State DOT collaborate 

with bicycle advisory committees when planning, developing 

policies, and making implementation decisions regarding 

rumble strips. Since these groups typically have diverse 

representation, the DOTs receive comprehensive input and 

feedback. It is important to understand the exact concerns 

of the bicycling community, to be flexible regarding the 

implementation and design of rumble strips, and to maintain 

dialogue with the bicycle community and other road users.23 

22 Interview with Mark Hunter, David Rogers, Andy Johnson, Brett Harrelson, Joey Riddle, Rob 

Bedenbavgh, and David Cook, South Carolina DOT, conducted on January 23, 2013.

23 Interview with Gary Modi, Chris Speese, Lydia Peddicord, Scott Nazar, Brian Sanders, and Josh 

Freeman of PennDOT, conducted on August 27, 2013; and interview with Dave Olsen, Matthew 

Enders, T.J. Nedrow, Ian Macek, Tim Sexton, Mark Russell, Jeff Uhlmeyer, and Steve Bennett of 

Washington State DOT, conducted on October 30, 2012.
9

RUMBLE STRIP IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE | ADDRESSING BICYCLE ISSUES ON TWO-LANE ROADS

Summary

Edge line (or shoulder) and center line rumble strips are very 

effective at reducing severe motor vehicle crashes. Their use 

can, however, present challenges for bicyclists safely sharing 

the roadway. Where existing pavement widths do not readily 

accommodate both rumble strips and bicyclists, there are a 

number of ways to optimize safety for all road users. Paving or 

widening shoulders, while often providing the greatest overall 

safety benefit, is often not feasible with available funds. In 

those situations, flexibility in the design of rumble strips may be 

adequate to reduce the impacts to bicyclists. 

Shoulder rumble strips can be installed at the edge of the travel 

lane, which widens the available space for bicyclists and may 

provide a more debris-free ride. Depending on the standard 

design of an agency, narrower rumble strips may still be 

effective to alert drivers of passenger vehicles while providing 

several extra inches that may be useful to a bicyclist riding on a 

rather narrow shoulder. Bicycle gaps are a design feature that 

is encouraged in most situations where bicyclists are likely to be 

using a corridor. These design modifications have been used 

to varying degrees by many State DOTs, both as a standard 

practice and on a case-by-case basis, to improve their highways. 

Many States have also found that working with bicycle groups 

to understand their needs as road users, educating them on 

the safety benefits of rumble strips, and addressing the bicycle 

community’s concerns when implementing policies is critical to 

the successful implementation of this safety countermeasure. 

Where to Learn More

The following resources provide more details related to rumble 

strip implementation and bicycles:

 FHWA’s Rumble Strip Website: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

roadway_dept/pavement/rumble_strips/.

 NCHRP Report 641: Guidance for the Design and 

Application of Shoulder and Centerline Rumble Strips: 

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_

rpt_641.pdf.

 AASHTO’s Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, 

4th Edition: https://bookstore.transportation.org/item_

details.aspx?ID=1943.

FHWA, Office of Safety: 

Cathy Satterfield

cathy.satterfield@dot.gov

(708) 283-3552

Gabriel Rousseau

gabe.rousseau@dot.gov

(202) 366-8044


12 FHWA-SA-15-035

February 2016

For more information on

Rumble Strip Implementation Guide: 

Addressing Bicycle Issues on Two-Lane Roads, visit:

FHWA Office of Safety

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/