In Australia, cycling hospitalisations are increasing and the cycling participation rate is stagnating. In an effort to improve cyclist safety, many Australian jurisdictions have mandated a minimum passing distance that vehicles much provide when overtaking a cyclist on a public road, including the Australian Capital Territory (ACT). However, it is not currently clear how vehicle-cyclist passing distances are affected by various parameters such as the road environment, the vehicles involved, or the speed limit. This naturalistic bicycle riding study examined data from passing distance measurement devices that were installed on the bicycles of volunteer cyclists who ride in the ACT, to explore how passing distances and compliance with the minimum passing distance were affected by several parameters. Over a four-week period, 23 volunteer cyclist participants undertook 465 journeys and travelled 6531 km over a total period of 271 h. There were 10,959 passing events identified on roads zoned greater than 60 km/h (high speed roads) of which 1349 (12.3 %) were non-compliant. On roads zoned 60 km/h or less (low speed roads) there were 5517 passing events of which 153 (2.8 %) were non-compliant. Regression analyses showed that differences in passing distance and non-compliance with the minimum passing distance were associated with road classification, bike lane presence, and speed limit. The results were mixed but, in general, passing distances were greater on roads with a lower (hierarchy) classification and on motorways as well as on roads with higher speed limits. An exception to this was roads with a speed limit of 50 km/h where passing distances were closer in comparison to roads with a speed limit of 60 km/h. Bike lanes were generally associated with an increase in passing distance except on ‘trunk’ classified roads, where a bike lane resulted in closer passing events. This suggests that on trunk roads, which are assumed to carry large amounts of traffic, bike lanes may be insufficient to offer protection to cyclists and additional measures may be required.

在澳大利亚，骑自行车的住院人数正在增加，而骑自行车的参与率却停滞不前。为了提高骑自行车者的安全性，许多澳大利亚辖区都规定了车辆在包括澳大利亚首都领地（ACT）在内的公共道路上超越骑自行车者时必须提供的最小通过距离。但是，目前尚不清楚骑车人的通过距离如何受到各种参数的影响，例如道路环境，所涉及的车辆或速度限制。这项自然主义的骑车研究检查了安装在参加ACT的自愿骑自行车的人的自行车上的通过距离测量设备的数据，以探讨通过距离和最小通过距离的遵循性如何受到几个参数的影响。在四个星期的时间内，23名自愿参加自行车运动的参与者进行了465次旅行，并在271小时的时间内行驶了6531公里。在时速超过60 km / h的道路（高速道路）上，发现10959起过境事件，其中1349起（12.3％）不合格。在时速为60 km / h或以下的区域（低速道路）上，有5517个通过事件，其中153个（2.8％）不合格。回归分析表明，通过距离的差异和不符合最小通过距离的差异与道路分类，自行车道的存在和限速有关。结果好坏参半，但总的来说，分级（等级）较低的公路，高速公路以及限速较高的公路的通行距离较大。例外是速度限制为50 km / h的道路，与速度限制为60 km / h的道路相比，通过距离更近。自行车道通常与通行距离的增加有关，除了“货车”分类的道路外，在自行车道上，自行车道导致更近的通行事件。这表明在假定承载大量交通的主干道上，自行车道可能不足以为骑自行车的人提供保护，并且可能需要采取其他措施。