Purpose: The purpose of this study is to enhance the common knowledge of luminescent road markings, and how they affect the driver compared to conventional road markings. The quest is to succeed a study on luminescent road markings and if it can be adapted to a Nordic climate.

Method: The chosen methods for this degree are interview, field trips, document analysis and some own experiments. The interviews have been used to get answers from professionals about unpublished facts. The experiments were necessary to find out how the LumiPaint works in real conditions.

Findings: The LumiPaint does not reflect light in the same way as a conventional road marking, therefore it was necessary to apply glass crystals. Another finding is that the colour of the paint has a tint of green, and must be approved by the Wien convention (1968) before it can be applied to the road surface. Also the level of resistance from studded tire caused by abrasion must been improved.With today’s standard the LumiPaint is not a better alternative compared to the conventional road markings, but it has great potential to advance in the future.

Implications: The visibility of luminicent road markings is good in dark conditions, but the perceived experience disappears when car light hit the markings. Despite that, the paint is suitable to be placed on the inner curve on road cross section, or in though curves in general. This could be helpful for drivers with long vehicles to decide the position on the road surface and navigate by looking in the mirrors. Limitations: The test plates that have been used during the experiments, was made by limited equipment, and probably a more precise result could be accomplished by using more professional equipment and methods.

Keywords: Luminicent road markings, LumiPaint, luminicent paint, reflexion