Analysis of Two Left-Turn Equations from the Highway Capacity Manual

1998 ◽  
Vol 1646 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. F. Hurdle ◽  
Dominique Lord
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Model ◽  
Reasonable Agreement ◽  
Empirical Equation ◽  
Analytic Approximation ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Left Turns ◽  
Theoretical Results ◽  
Insight Into

The left-turn procedures in the Highway Capacity Manual are complex, and some of the equations are presented with little explanation of how they were obtained and the assumptions they embody. This paper is an analytic exploration of two of the four equations used to estimate gq, the amount of green time needed to discharge the opposing queue, and gf, the amount of green time available for through vehicles before the first left-turning vehicle enters the intersection. The investigation reveals surprising hidden assumptions underlying Equation 9-17 for gq, which lead to errors when the opposing flow includes left turns. In the case of Equation 9-20 for gf, the theoretical results are consistently about 5 s larger but otherwise in reasonable agreement with the empirical equation and provide insight into how it could be improved. An analytic approximation is offered either as a replacement or as a framework for an improved empirical model.

Signalized Intersection Level of Service Incorporating Safety Risk

2003 ◽  
Vol 1852 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Zhang ◽  
Panos D. Prevedouros
Keyword(s):  
Level Of Service ◽  
Signal Timing ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Potential Conflict ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Vehicle To Vehicle ◽  
Comprehensive Level ◽  
Left Turns

A methodology that quantifies potential conflicts between left-turning vehicles and opposing through vehicles and pedestrians is presented. The methodology was based on and designed to be compatible with the Highway Capacity Manual 2000. A model was developed to combine delay and safety to get a comprehensive level-of-service indicator, the delay and safety index (DS). A case study of two intersections shows that if potential conflict is not considered, the signal timing plan with permitted left turns delivers a better level of service than that with protected left turns. However, if potential conflict is considered, the level of service under protected left-turn phasing is better than that under permitted left-turn phasing, according to the DS, when the safety weight factors exceed a certain value. The proposed method models the trade-off between safety and efficiency explicitly and considers both vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-pedestrian conflicts associated with left turns.

Modifying Highway Capacity Manual Methodology for Inclusion of Flashing-Yellow-Arrow Delay and Suppression

2020 ◽  
Vol 2674 (12) ◽  
pp. 233-242
Author(s):  
Daniel J. Cook
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Signalized Intersections ◽  
Signalized Intersection ◽  
Effective Strategy ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Flashing Yellow Arrow ◽  
Left Turns ◽  
Yellow Arrow

Dallas phasing is an effective strategy for increasing the efficiency of protected-permissive left turns (PPLTs) at signalized intersections, without creating left-turn traps. The flashing yellow arrow (FYA) is the most widely used PPLT signal indication when Dallas phasing is utilized. The Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) signalized intersection methodology currently contains guidance on how to handle PPLTs with Dallas phasing. At intersections with the FYA indication, some agencies have been using a feature known as FYA delay, which delays the FYA indication, usually by 1 to 4 s. More recently, some agencies have also began using another feature, which suppresses the FYA when a conflicting pedestrian phase is active. The HCM does not contain guidance on how to handle FYA delay or suppression. This research proposed modifications to the HCM signalized intersection methodology to address these two FYA strategies. A sensitivity analysis was conducted to check the reasonableness of the proposed modifications. The sensitivity analysis showed that the proposed modifications are reasonable and produced the expected results.

Modeling Capacity of Through Movement at Signalized Intersection Affected by Short Left-Turn Bay under Different Signal Settings

2021 ◽  
pp. 036119812110064
Author(s):  
Zihang Wei ◽  
Yunlong Zhang ◽  
Xiaoyu Guo ◽  
Xin Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Cycle Length ◽  
Signalized Intersections ◽  
Signalized Intersection ◽  
Essential Factor ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Proposed Model ◽  
Vehicle Demand ◽  
The One

Through movement capacity is an essential factor used to reflect intersection performance, especially for signalized intersections, where a large proportion of vehicle demand is making through movements. Generally, left-turn spillback is considered a key contributor to affect through movement capacity, and blockage to the left-turn bay is known to decrease left-turn capacity. Previous studies have focused primarily on estimating the through movement capacity under a lagging protected only left-turn (lagging POLT) signal setting, as a left-turn spillback is more likely to happen under such a condition. However, previous studies contained assumptions (e.g., omit spillback), or were dedicated to one specific signal setting. Therefore, in this study, through movement capacity models based on probabilistic modeling of spillback and blockage scenarios are established under four different signal settings (i.e., leading protected only left-turn [leading POLT], lagging left-turn, protected plus permitted left-turn, and permitted plus protected left-turn). Through microscopic simulations, the proposed models are validated, and compared with existing capacity models and the one in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The results of the comparisons demonstrate that the proposed models achieved significant advantages over all the other models and obtained high accuracies in all signal settings. Each proposed model for a given signal setting maintains consistent accuracy across various left-turn bay lengths. The proposed models of this study have the potential to serve as useful tools, for practicing transportation engineers, when determining the appropriate length of a left-turn bay with the consideration of spillback and blockage, and the adequate cycle length with a given bay length.

Validation of Left-Turn Delay at Two-Way Stop-Controlled Intersections

2000 ◽  
Vol 1710 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah A. Simpson ◽  
Judson S. Matthias
Keyword(s):  
Data Sets ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Control Delay ◽  
Unsignalized Intersections ◽  
Percent Confidence Level ◽  
The One ◽  
And Control ◽  
Control Delays

Control delay for left-turning vehicles at unsignalized intersections was observed in the field and compared with average control delay calculated from the methodologies presented in the 1997 update of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Unsignalized intersections with two-way left-turn lanes on the major street were observed in the peak and offpeak hours, and control delays were recorded for the one-stage and twostage left-turn processes. Next, the methodologies presented in the HCM were used to calculate the control delay for both processes and compared with the observed data. These comparisons were used as the basis for validation of the HCM methodologies regarding left-turn control delay at unsignalized intersections. From the comparisons, the calculated delay closely corresponds with the observed data, with a total approach volume at the intersection of approximately 2,500 vehicles per hour or less. Once the total approach volume increases above this level, the calculated values rapidly increase and the actual observed control delays gradually increase at a much lower rate. As a result, the observed and calculated delays are different when the intersection handles more than 2,500 approach vehicles in an hour. Statistical analyses were performed on the data to determine if the average observed control delay was related to the calculated control delay. Statistically, the observed control delay and the calculated control delay at the 95 percent confidence level show that the two data sets yield similar results for off-peak conditions. However, during the peak hour, when the total approach volumes are higher, the 95 percent confidence interval yields different results. Hence, the HCM procedures produce, on average, greater control delay estimates than the field observations when the total approach volumes are high.

Comparison of Queue-Length Models at Signalized Intersections

2000 ◽  
Vol 1710 (1) ◽  
pp. 222-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fadhely Viloria ◽  
Kenneth Courage ◽  
Donald Avery
Keyword(s):  
Queue Length ◽  
Theoretical Models ◽  
Traffic Signals ◽  
Comprehensive Treatment ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Classification Framework ◽  
Queue Model ◽  
Measures Of Effectiveness

Several measures of effectiveness (MOEs) are associated with the queuing process at traffic signals, including delay, number of stops, fuel consumption, emissions, and queue length. The focus in this study is on queue length in general and on the storage requirements for left turns in particular. Queue length is an important MOE because queues that overflow the available storage space have an adverse effect on the overall operation of the intersection. Many traffic models now provide queue-length estimates, but the procedures used by these models are based on different queue definitions and have different computational approaches that lead to different results. A classification framework is developed for the existing models, their behavior is compared with that of the proposed Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 queue model, and queue conversion factors are provided for translating the various model outputs to their HCM 2000 equivalent. The proposed HCM 2000 model and its parent model from the Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection Design and Research Aid (SIDRA) provide a comprehensive treatment of the queuing process, accounting for control parameters such as controller type and progression quality as well as for the random and overflow effects associated with traffic flow. As such, the queue-length estimates from these models are more analytically defensible than those of the simpler theoretical models. The SIDRA and HCM 2000 queue estimates are generally higher than those of most other models and are somewhat higher than what conventional wisdom would suggest. It is suggested as a result of the comparisons presented that the queue estimates from some models are unduly optimistic when demand approaches capacity and that a goal of 90 percent confidence in the adequacy of left-turn storage lanes may be difficult to achieve under these conditions.

Variations in Capacity at Signalized Intersections with Different Area Types

2000 ◽  
Vol 1710 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuewen Le ◽  
Jian Lu ◽  
Edward A. Mierzejewski ◽  
Yanhu Zhou
Keyword(s):  
Signalized Intersections ◽  
Capacity Analysis ◽  
Adjustment Factor ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Central Florida ◽  
Start Up ◽  
Study Results ◽  
Lost Time

The capacity analysis procedure for signalized intersections included in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) needs to consider the area type of a given intersection. The area-type adjustment factor used in the procedure is based on conclusions from a limited number of studies. In addition, the procedure for using an area-type adjustment factor is not well defined in the HCM. A study undertaken in central Florida to study the effects of four different area types on the capacity of signalized intersections is summarized. These four area types include recreational, business, residential, and shopping. Study results indicated that differences in saturation headways among different area types were significant. The saturation headways observed in recreational areas were significantly higher than those in other areas for both left-turn and through movements. The through-movement saturation headways obtained in residential, shopping, and business areas were not significantly different. This study resulted in a new area-type adjustment factor of 0.92 for recreational areas, whereas the factor is 1.00 for other areas. Results in this study also indicated that the differences in start-up lost time among different area types were not significantly different. In addition, according to the results of the analysis, 75 percent of the yellow interval in undersaturated conditions and 35 percent of the yellow interval in oversaturated conditions were found to be unused and considered clearance lost time.

Analysis and Evaluation of the Capacity of Roundabouts

1997 ◽  
Vol 1572 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abishai Polus ◽  
Sitvanit Shmueli
Keyword(s):  
The United States ◽  
Gap Acceptance ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Explanatory Variables ◽  
Geometric Characteristics ◽  
Critical Gap ◽  
Unsignalized Intersections ◽  
German Model

Roundabouts are replacing conventional unsignalized intersections in many parts of the world and could become more widespread in the United States, although there are some limitations as well as clear advantages. Models for entry capacity into the rotary were developed. Entry capacity depends on the geometric characteristics of the roundabout, particularly the diameter of the outside circle of the intersection. The geometric characteristics determine the speed of vehicles around the central island and, therefore, have an impact on the gap-acceptance process and consequently the capacity. Traffic conditions that impede entry capacity involve the flow around the roundabout. Flow and geometric data from six small to medium-sized roundabouts were analyzed. Individual and aggregated entry-capacity models were calibrated by using the diameter and circulating flows as explanatory variables. Very good fits to the data were obtained; the results also fit models developed in other countries. The Australian model resulted in slightly higher entry capacities for moderate to low circulating flows and lower entry capacities for high circulating flows. Very close proximity to the German model was obtained, although it does not depend on the geometric characteristics of the circle. The roundabout provides an advantage over a conventional unsignalized intersection. A faithful concurrence between the model developed and the latest Highway Capacity Manual model for right-turn capacity at an unsignalized intersection is obtained if the circulating flow is replaced by the conflicting flow. The advantage of entry capacities of the roundabout over the calculated capacities of the Highway Capacity Manual left-turn model is shown. Further research is proposed to study the effect on entry capacity of two circulating lanes rather than one and the effect of the increase in circulating flows on the gap-acceptance process, particularly the reduction in critical gap at high flows.

Background for HCM Section on Analysis of Performance of Roundabouts

1998 ◽  
Vol 1646 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rod Troutbeck
Keyword(s):  
Empirical Model ◽  
Level Of Service ◽  
Gap Acceptance ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Analysis Of Performance

The background to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) section on the analysis of the performance of roundabouts is discussed. The paper has two main objectives: to discuss the background of different techniques used to evaluate the level of service and to describe the method included in the HCM. The paper is in two parts. In the first part, the first objective is addressed and the parameters needed to predict both delay and capacity, which in turn are used to evaluate the level of service, are described. It is concluded that the gap acceptance approach is a reasonable one when the performance of roundabouts is predicted using data from uncongested sites. If there are a significant number of roundabouts with congested approaches, an empirical model should be used. It is also concluded that the results from one country cannot be immediately transferred to another. In the second part of the paper, the recommended practice included in HCM Chapter 10 is given.

Utilization of Auxiliary Through Lanes at Signalized Intersections with Downstream Lane Reductions

1997 ◽  
Vol 1572 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie W. Hurley
Keyword(s):  
Signalized Intersections ◽  
Stepwise Multiple Regression ◽  
Distribution Data ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
Traffic Characteristics ◽  
Geometric Factors ◽  
Auxiliary Through Lanes ◽  
Right Turns

The capacity of multiple through lanes at signalized intersections depends on the distribution of traffic within these lanes, with equal lane distribution corresponding to maximum capacity. However, traffic characteristics, land use, and geometric factors usually prohibit this from occurring. Although the 1994 update of the Highway Capacity Manual considers the case of continuous through lanes at signalized intersections, the default values provided do not address situations in which lane reduction takes place downstream of the intersection. Lane distribution data obtained in the field can remedy the situation but for existing conditions only. This research employed the concept of captive and choice lane users in modeling lane use for intersection configurations with a single continuous through lane and an “auxiliary” through lane, which is continuous upstream of the intersection but is dropped downstream of it. Stepwise multiple regression was performed on data collected at sites in Tennessee to ascertain those factors significantly affecting auxiliary lane use. These factors were found to be ( a) right turns off the facility at the intersection, ( b) total left turns off the facility downstream of the intersection, ( c) right turns onto the facility in the first 122 m (400 ft) upstream of the intersection, ( d) right turns off the facility in the last 152 m (500 ft) of the auxiliary lane, ( e) downstream auxiliary lane length, and ( f) the existence of left-turn bays or two-way continuous left-turn lanes downstream of the intersection. For the configuration studied, lane distribution data often differed considerably from the default values given in the Highway Capacity Manual.

Estimating Intersection Approach Delay Using 1985 and 1994 Highway Capacity Manual Procedures

1996 ◽  
Vol 1555 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-32
Author(s):  
Stephen M. Braun ◽  
John N. Ivan
Keyword(s):  
Field Measurements ◽  
Signalized Intersections ◽  
New Technique ◽  
Adjustment Factor ◽  
Highway Capacity ◽  
Flow Rates ◽  
Left Turn ◽  
Highway Capacity Manual ◽  
A New Technique ◽  
Saturation Flow

The current methods for determining average stopped delay at signalized intersections were studied. Field measurements of average stopped delay were obtained and compared with values computed using both the 1985 and 1994 editions of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The 1994 HCM uses an equation to predict the progression adjustment factor (PF), a new technique for determining the left-turn adjustment factor for saturation flow rates, and a new set of equations for determining the uniform delay parameter for left-turn lane groups with primary and secondary phasing. Overall, the 1994 HCM produces better estimates of intersection stopped delay than the 1985 HCM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document