Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to www.scribd.com

0% found this document useful (0 votes)
12 views31 pages

Topic 5 Junctions Priority

Uploaded by

ANDREW ODEO
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
12 views31 pages

Topic 5 Junctions Priority

Uploaded by

ANDREW ODEO
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 31

Topic 5:

INTERSECTIONS/JUNCTIONS:
PRIORITY
 Introduction
◦ What is an intersection/junction?
◦ Basic forms of junctions
◦ Movements/manoeuvres at junctions
◦ General design principles of junctions
 Intersection/Junction types
◦ Priority
◦ Space sharing
 Roundabouts
◦ Time sharing
 Signalized/Traffic lights

2
3
 Are junctions where one traffic stream has
precedence over another
◦ Major traffic has priority over minor road traffic
 Control is through:
◦ Stop or Giveway signs
◦ Carriageway markings on minor road
◦ Islands
 Types
◦ Simple T junction
 No physical or ghost islands on both major and minor
roads
 Suitable for new rural roads when AADT (2-way) on minor
road is less than 300veh/day
 For existing rural and urban roads when AADT (2-way)
on minor road is less than 500veh/day
4
5
◦ Ghost Island

 Area is marked on carriageway, shaped and located to


direct traffic movements
 Ghost islands (rep by carriageway markings) in the middle
of major road to provide a diverging lane and waiting space
for vehicles making right turning movements
 Applicable where AADT (2-way) on minor road exceeds
500veh/day
 Or accidents result from mainly right turning movements
6
◦ Single lane dualling

 Central island reservations are shaped and located


to direct traffic movements
 This provides a diverging lane and waiting area, and
shelter area for vehicles making right turns
 Applicable where AADT (2-way) on minor road
exceeds 5,000veh/day

7
8
 Unchannelised- no traffic islands, suitable where turning
traffic volumes are minimum

 Partly-channelised- traffic island in the minor arm,


suitable where there is moderated turning traffic volumes

 Channelised- suitable for high volumes of turning traffic


or high speeds, traffic islands in both the major and
minor arms

9
Intersection Traffic control Intersection types
category
Major road Minor road

Priority Priority Stop or Give way A Unchannelised T-


intersection sign intersection

B Partly Channelised
T-intersection

C Channelised T-
intersection
Control Traffic signals or Give way sign D Roundabouts
intersection E Signalised
intersection

10
11
 Junction of unclassified road with a classified
road
 Connect properties to road network
 If access are connecting important
developments (industrial developments, etc)
then they should be designed
 Corner radii = f(vehicle characteristics)
◦ Minimum entry radius = 6m
◦ Minimum exit radius = 15m
 Minimum width = 3m

12
13
 Predictive equations derived from empirical
research:
 6 separate traffic streams (See figure)
 Priority streams:
◦ qC-A, , qA-C(through movements on major road); qA-B(left
turn from major to minor road)
◦ Do not suffer delays from other traffic
 But streams:
◦ qB-A, (right turn from minor to major road); qB-C, (left turn
from minor to major); qC-B (right turn from major to minor)
◦ Suffer delay as they need to give way to higher priority
streams

14
15
 Predictive capacity equations for 3 non- priority
streams:
q Bs  A  D627  14WCR  Y 0.364 q AC  0.114 q A B  0.229 qC  A  0.520 qC  B 
q Bs C  E745  Y 0.365q AC  0.144 q A B 
qCs  B  E745  0.364Y q AC  q A B 

 Capacities are in pcu/hr, 1 HGV = 2pcu


Where : Y  1 - 0.0345W 
D  1  0.094 wB  A  3.651  0.0009 VrB  A  120 1  0.006 VlB  A  150 
E  1  0.094 wB C  3.651  0.0009 VrB C  120 
F  1  0.094 wC  B  3.651  0.0009 VrC  B  120 

16
 qsB-A , superscript s denotes saturated stream flow,
where there is stable queueing
 Geometric parameters:
◦ wB-A, wB-C = average width of each of minor road
approach lanes for waiting vehicles in streams B-A &
B-C respectively. Measured over a distance of 20m
upstream of Give way line
◦ wC-B = average width of right turn (central) lane on the
major road in stream C-B or 2.1m if no provision is
made for right turners
◦ VrB-A & VlB-C right and left visibility distances
respectively available from the minor road
◦ VrC-B is visibility available to right turning vehicles,
waiting to turn right from major road
17
 Geometric parameters:
◦ W= average major road carriageway width at the
junction
◦ WCR= average width of central reserve lane at the
junction on a dual carriageway
◦ All distances are measured in metres
Parameter Value
w 2.05-4.70m
Vr 17-250m
Vl 22-250m
WCR 1.2-9m
W 6.4-20m

18
 Gap acceptance theory (HCM, 2000):
◦ Availability of gaps especially in major traffic stream flow
◦ Gaps are sought by minor traffic streams mostly
◦ Priority of vehicular and pedestrian movements
◦ Movements are ranked (rank 1, 2, 3, etc) with those with highest
priority being ranked 1 (through movements and left turn
movements on a major road/approach)

◦ Conflicting volumes for movements (expressed in hourly


volumes or flow rates) are determined for each of the
movements in ranks 2, 3, etc

19
 Gap acceptance theory (HCM, 2000):
◦ Critical gap and follow up times are determined
 Critical gap
 Minimum average acceptable gap that allows entry of one minor
street (or major street right turn) vehicle into the junction

 Follow-up time
 Minimum average acceptable time for a second queued minor street
vehicle to utilize a gap large enough to admit 2 or more vehicles.

 HCM (2000) gives guide values for critical gaps and follow-up
times
 These are adjusted for heavy goods vehicles presence, grade, etc

20
 Gap acceptance theory (HCM, 2000):
 For Uganda’s case:
 Critical gap and follow-up headways of 3.5 seconds and 2
seconds respectively have been recommended
 Although, these times were derived from studies for
roundabouts in Uganda; they can be applicable for junctions
that operate on the gap-acceptance principle.

21

22
 Gap acceptance theory (HCM, 2000):
◦ Potential capacities are computed using gap acceptance models
 Capacities may be corrected for impedances from higher priority
movements (vehicle and pedestrian flows), sharing of lanes, etc.

 cmx = cpx pvi ppj;


 Where: cmx =movement capacity for movement x (veh/hr);
cpx= potential capacity for movement x (veh/hr);

pvi= probability that impeding vehicular movement i is not blocking the


subject flow (also known as vehicular impedance factor for movement i);

ppj= probability that impeding pedestrian movement j is not blocking the


subject flow (also known as pedestrian impedance factor for movement j).

23

24

25
 Gap acceptance theory (HCM, 2000):
◦ Potential capacity concept assumes that all available gaps are
used by the subject movement, i.e. there are no higher priority
vehicular or pedestrian movements waiting to use some of the
gaps
◦ Also it assumes that each movement operates out of an exclusive
lane

◦ Shared lane capacity:


 Movement capacities represent an assumption that each minor road
movement operates out of an exclusive lane
 But there is need to modify capacities to reflect a situation where 2
movements from the minor road share a lane.

26

27

28

29
Table 1. LOS for TWSC junctions (Ref.: HCM 2000, Exhibit 17-2, page
17-2
LOS Delay per Comments
vehicle
(s/veh)
A 0-10 Free flow
B >10-15 Reasonably free flow
C >15-25 Stable flow
D >25-35 Approaching unstable flow
E >35-50 Unstable flow
F >50 Forced flow or breakdown
flow

30
 For further understanding of analysis and capacity
determination for priority junctions read a hand out
on:
◦ Roess et al (2004). Analysis of unsignalized
intersections, chapter 23.
◦ Critically review the sample problem in section 3.1.11.

31

You might also like