This document summarizes the methodology used to compare procedures for estimating capacity and level of service at unsignalized intersections. The analysis included: 1) Comparing the conceptual and computational structure of capacity methods; 2) Collecting gap data and estimating critical gaps; 3) Comparing critical gaps to other studies; 4) Determining capacities and levels of service using two methods and comparing to observed data; 5) Recommending revisions to better reflect U.S. drivers. The capacity analysis involved identifying non-priority movements, conflicting traffic streams, and applying critical gaps to determine maximum and adjusted capacities. Level of service was based on reserve capacity.
This document summarizes the methodology used to compare procedures for estimating capacity and level of service at unsignalized intersections. The analysis included: 1) Comparing the conceptual and computational structure of capacity methods; 2) Collecting gap data and estimating critical gaps; 3) Comparing critical gaps to other studies; 4) Determining capacities and levels of service using two methods and comparing to observed data; 5) Recommending revisions to better reflect U.S. drivers. The capacity analysis involved identifying non-priority movements, conflicting traffic streams, and applying critical gaps to determine maximum and adjusted capacities. Level of service was based on reserve capacity.
This document summarizes the methodology used to compare procedures for estimating capacity and level of service at unsignalized intersections. The analysis included: 1) Comparing the conceptual and computational structure of capacity methods; 2) Collecting gap data and estimating critical gaps; 3) Comparing critical gaps to other studies; 4) Determining capacities and levels of service using two methods and comparing to observed data; 5) Recommending revisions to better reflect U.S. drivers. The capacity analysis involved identifying non-priority movements, conflicting traffic streams, and applying critical gaps to determine maximum and adjusted capacities. Level of service was based on reserve capacity.
This document summarizes the methodology used to compare procedures for estimating capacity and level of service at unsignalized intersections. The analysis included: 1) Comparing the conceptual and computational structure of capacity methods; 2) Collecting gap data and estimating critical gaps; 3) Comparing critical gaps to other studies; 4) Determining capacities and levels of service using two methods and comparing to observed data; 5) Recommending revisions to better reflect U.S. drivers. The capacity analysis involved identifying non-priority movements, conflicting traffic streams, and applying critical gaps to determine maximum and adjusted capacities. Level of service was based on reserve capacity.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 1
CAPACITY ANALYSIS AND LEVEL-OF-SERVICE intersections controlled by two-way STOP or YIELD
ANALYSIS ON AN UNSIGNALIZED signs).
INTERSECTION A. CAPACITY ANALYSIS The overall objective of the study was an empirical comparison of procedures to estimate The computational steps involve identifying the unsignalized intersection capacity and level of non-prior to movements (all movements from service. Before the empirical analysis was the minor approaches and left turns from the conducted, each major capacity analysis method major road) / determining the traffic streams was reviewed in terms of theoretical structure, conflicting with each of the nonpriority applicability to a broad range of traffic conditions, movements, and then applying the appropriate and computational procedure. critical gaps. The maximum (or potential) capacity for each An overview of the study methodology for the movement is read from the graph of maximum empirical testing stated: First, each major capacity versus conflicting traffic stream. These component of the procedures (critical gaps, capacities are then adjusted to account for capacity, and level of service) is analyzed intersection congestion caused by the servicing individually. Based on the comparison of theoretical of conflicting movements. and computational structure as well as the empirical The existing (or projected) traffic demand for the results, each model is revised and again examined movement is converted to passenger car with respect to field data. The methodology sought equivalents per hour (pch) to account for to isolate the prediction errors that were due to approach grade and traffic mix. This demand is model structure from those that were due to deducted from the calculated capacity to give differences in drivers and driving conditions, which what is called the reserve capacity. Reserve were captured in the Swedish and German data. capacity determines what level of service (A through F) is assigned to the movement and The analysis of the two unsignalized describes the traffic delay that will be expected. intersection capacity procedures includes the If minor street delays are a function of critical following specific steps. gap and major street volume, reserve capacity 1. Comparison of the conceptual and should correlate fairly well with delay. This computational structure of the methods; capacity model assumes that 2. Collection of data on gaps at four two-way 1. Vehicles on the major road arrive at stop-sign controlled intersections and analysis of random; these data to estimate the mean critical gaps for the 2. Minor road vehicles do not force their way minor road movements. into the intersection and 3. Comparison of the critical gaps obtained from 3. Priority is given to traffic movements in the field data with those in Circular 212, the following sequence: main street through and subcommittee report, and the Swedish manual. right turn vehicles, minor street right turns, 4. Determination of the capacities of minor road major street left turns, minor street vehicles approaches and the level of service to minor road crossing the major street, and minor street left vehicles at the studied intersections using two turns. capacity methods followed by comparison of these B. LEVEL OF SERVICE results with observed capacities and delays; and 5. Recommendation of revisions to the Circular Level of service variables for freeways 212 and Swedish procedures that would make the (density), arterials (average speed), and procedures more closely reflect U.S. drivers and signalized intersections (stopped delay) can be driving conditions. measured in the field and compared with model predictions. Reserve capacity is a function of *Transportation Research Circular 212 --The model estimates and therefore cannot be procedure in Circular 212 (1) is a method for independently measured. computing the capacity and level-of service of priority-type non-signalized intersections (i.e., those
Neues verkehrswissenschaftliches Journal - Ausgabe 16: Capacity Research in Urban Rail-Bound Transportation with Special Consideration of Mixed Traffic