Highway Capacity Manual Capacity Adjustment Factor Development for Connected and Automated Traffic at Signalized Intersections

Author(s):  
Adekunle Adebisi ◽  
Yi Guo ◽  
Bastian Schroeder ◽  
Jiaqi Ma ◽  
Burak Cesme ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Rahim F. Benekohal ◽  
Sang-Ock Kim

For oversaturated traffic conditions, the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) does not apply a progression adjustment factor to the delay model for signalized intersections when there is an initial queue. This causes counterintuitive results in the calculation of delay; for some cases, delay for a nonzero initial queue condition ends up being less than the delay with zero initial queue conditions. Also, for oversaturated traffic conditions, the delay model in the 2000 edition of HCM yields the same uniform delay values for all arrival types when there is an initial queue. This does not seem reasonable because it ignores the effect of platooning on delay. This paper introduces a new approach for computing uniform delay for oversaturated traffic conditions when progression is poor. This approach directly considers the platooning effects in delay and thus eliminates the need to apply a progression adjustment factor. The proposed model is applicable whether there is an initial queue or not. The approach was validated by a comparison of the control delays obtained from a CORSIM simulation to the delays from the proposed model. Validation procedures were conducted on the basis of zero and nonzero initial queue conditions. The proposed approach resulted in more accurate delay values than the HCM model.


2000 ◽  
Vol 1710 (1) ◽  
pp. 199-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuewen Le ◽  
Jian Lu ◽  
Edward A. Mierzejewski ◽  
Yanhu Zhou

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.


Author(s):  
Stephen M. Braun ◽  
John N. Ivan

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.


Author(s):  
Zihang Wei ◽  
Yunlong Zhang ◽  
Xiaoyu Guo ◽  
Xin Zhang

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.


1997 ◽  
Vol 1572 (1) ◽  
pp. 105-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nagui M. Rouphail ◽  
Mohammad Anwar ◽  
Daniel B. Fambro ◽  
Paul Sloup ◽  
Cesar E. Perez

One limitation of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) model for estimating delay at signalized intersections is its inadequate treatment of vehicle-actuated traffic signals. For example, the current delay model uses a single adjustment for all types of actuated control and is not sensitive to changes in actuated controller settings. The objective in this paper was to use TRAF-NETSIM and field data to evaluate a generalized delay model developed to overcome some of these deficiencies. NETSIM was used to estimate delay at an isolated intersection under actuated control, and the delay values obtained from NETSIM were then compared with those estimated by the generalized delay model. In addition, field data were collected from sites in North Carolina, and delays observed in the field were compared with those estimated by the generalized delay model. The delays estimated by the generalized model were comparable with the delays estimated by NETSIM. The data compared favorably for degrees of saturation of less than 0.8. However, at higher degrees of saturation, the generalized model produced delays that were higher than NETSIM’s. Some possible explanations for this discrepancy are discussed. The delays estimated by the generalized model were comparable with delays observed in the field. Researchers have concluded that the generalized delay model is sensitive to changes in traffic volumes and vehicle-actuated controller settings and that the generalized delay model is much improved over the current HCM model in estimating delay at vehicle-actuated traffic signals.


Author(s):  
Janice Daniel ◽  
Daniel B. Fambro ◽  
Nagui M. Rouphail

The primary objective of this research was to determine the effect of nonrandom or platoon arrivals on the estimate of delay at signalized intersections. The delay model used in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) accounts for nonrandom arrivals through the variable m, which can be shown to be equal to 8kI, where k describes the arrival and service distributions at the intersection and I describes the variation in arrivals due to the upstream intersection. The 1994 HCM delay model m-values are a function of the arrival type, where the arrival type describes the quality of progression at the intersection. Although an improvement to the fixed k I-value used in the 1985 delay model, the 1994 m values are based on empirical studies from limited field data and do not account for the decrease in random arrivals as the volume approaches capacity at the downstream intersection. This research provides an estimate of the variable kI for arterial conditions. An analytical equation was developed as a function of the degree of saturation, and a separate equation was developed for each signal controller type. The results from this research show that the proposed kI's provide delay estimates closer to the measured delay compared with the delay estimates using the kI-values in the 1994 HCM delay model.


1997 ◽  
Vol 1572 (1) ◽  
pp. 122-130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roelof J. Engelbrecht ◽  
Daniel B. Fambro ◽  
Nagui M. Rouphail ◽  
Aladdin A. Barkawi

With today’s ever-increasing traffic demand, more and more signalized intersections are experiencing congestion for longer periods of time. To better quantify oversaturated conditions, it is necessary to accurately estimate oversaturation delay. The generalized delay model, proposed for inclusion in the next update of the U.S. Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), is introduced here. The generalized delay model differs from the model in the 1994 edition of the HCM as it is sensitive to the duration of the analysis period and is not restricted to degrees of saturation less than 1.2. The TRAF-NETSIM microscopic simulation model was used to verify the generalized delay equation for oversaturated conditions. A simulation model was used, because it is extremely difficult to measure oversaturated delay in the field. The study was designed to cover as much of the domain of oversaturated traffic operations as possible. The variability in simulated delays was investigated, and an equation was developed to predict the standard deviation of oversaturated delay estimates. It was found that delays estimated by the proposed generalized delay model are in close agreement with those simulated by TRAF-NETSIM. On average, simulated delays are overestimated slightly, but the error is small compared with actual delays. The proposed generalized delay model is expected to provide a good estimate of actual oversaturation delays that occur in the field.


1997 ◽  
Vol 1572 (1) ◽  
pp. 167-173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamie W. Hurley

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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document