Professional Documents
Culture Documents
service
d'tudes
techniques
des routes
et autoroutes
Translation :
Chapters 1 et 2 : Kevin RILEY, Traductions Routes et Transports (Mrs-Erign - 49)
Chapter 3 and appendices : Joe BARED, FHWA ( U.S. Washington)
Note: The first chapters have been translated into European English, the third and appendices into
American English.
FOREWORD
This technical guide deals with the general design and geometry of at-grade intersections on
major interurban roads. It sets out detailed technical guidelines on this topic which complement the
more general guidelines contained in the publication "Amnagement des Routes Principales".
It replaces two SETRA technical guides: "Les carrefours plans sur routes interurbains" which
dates from March 1980 and " Les Carrefours plans sur routes interurbaines - Carrefours giratoires"
which dates from September 1984.
It covers neither intersections in urban areas - these will be dealt with in a document to be
published by the CERTU ("Guide carrefours urbains") - nor signalized intersections which should not
exist outside built-up areas.
"Interurban Intersection Design - At-grade intersections" is intended to be used by all bodies
responsible for managing the road network. Indeed, most intersections are meeting points between
different networks for which different authorities are responsible.
The guidelines in this document should be considered as the rules of good practice the whole
engineering community.
This document was drafted by
L. DUPONT
(SETRA)
L. PATTE
(SETRA)
P. BOIVIN
(SETRA)
P. FLACHAT
(CETE de Rhne-Alpes)
B. GUICHET
(CETE de l'Ouest)
J.Y. GIRARD
(CETE de l'Ouest)
G DUPRE (CETE de Normandie Centre)
CONTENTS
u FOREWORD
u CHAPTER 1: GENERAL DESIGN
5
9
10
12
16
25
1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
27
37
57
63
67
1. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
69
79
3. SPECIAL ACCOMODATIONS
89
94
u GLOSSARY
99
u BIBLIOGRAPHY
107
u APPENDICES
111
INTRODUCTION
u SCOPE
This guide deals with the design and construction of at-grade intersections on major roads
outside urban areas and covers both upgrading of the existing network and the building of new roads.
As at-grade intersections are not compatible with roads that are isolated from their environment,
this document does not deal with the geometric design of type L roads (freeways) or type T roads
(express roads)1. However, the fundamental principles and the approach to be adopted when choosing
the type of intersection, which are explained in the first chapter "General Design", apply to all types of
intersections on all types of roads.
This guide does cover Type R bypasses2. However, it does not deal with ring roads; as the
function of most of these is to link different districts they should be considered as urban roads.
Where buildings are either few in number or widely spaced (perhaps constituting a hamlet but
not a built-up area as defined in the Highway Code (art. R1)), the site will generally be classified as nonurban and the technical guidelines for rural areas will be applied.
Cross-town routes, irrespective of the size of the built-up area they pass through, are to be
considered as urban roads. For these it is necessary to refer to the texts which deal with urban roads, in
particular the CERTU "Guide Carrefours Urbains". In addition, Chapter 7 of the A.R.P. states the general
principles that apply to the boundary between rural and urban areas and entrances to built-up areas and
contains some remarks concerning roads that pass through small towns and suburbs at the entrances
to large towns and cities.
1
Apart from the very specific exception of the use of a roundabout to provide a "terminal" at the end of a Type T road.
A bypass is defined in the A.R.P. as a non-urban road passing round a town and which is mainly used by through traffic.
The SETRA-CETUR document "Scurit des Routes et des Rues" presents a survey of this knowledge.
CHAPTER 1
GENERAL DESIGN
u 1. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF INTERSECTION DESIGN
10
10
11
12
2.1. DATA
12
13
13
15
2.5. SPEEDS
16
16
16
17
17
18
21
This approach is not completely sequential; in particular, data collection can be performed simultaneously
with several phases (data is necessary at the outset and some options or decisions can give rise to
additional data collection in the course of the design process.
The road typology used in this guide follows that of the ARP. In particular, it has been constructed with
reference to technical rather than administrative factors.
10
11
accidents: number, types and processes (data only available for existing intersections).
This data provides the main basis for the safety diagnosis that must systematically be
conducted before intersections are modified. In the case of intersections on new
infrastructure, the accident risk can be estimated using "predictive" models, on the basis of
the traffic and the characteristics of the intersection.
The sections which follow (2.2 to 2.5) provide additional information about the
collection and analysis of some types of basic data (i.e. accidents, traffic, measurement of
visibility conditions, speeds).
12
See SETRA Note d'information No. 113 (srie circulation, scurit, exploitation); March 1998.
The evening peak is generally involved. In some cases the reverse peak can provide useful additional
information; occasionally, a weekly peak hour, or even a seasonal peak can be considered, particularly when
one or other of these is exceeded for at least thirty hours during the year.
13
The graphs below show a few criteria for determining the traffic studies that should be
conducted. These are given for guidance only6, and are above all intended to warn the
engineer that such studies are necessary beforehand.
Fig 1 - A few criteria for the level of traffic studies that should be performed (rural roads with 2 or 3 lanes)
4000
3000
the minor
ADT)
2000
3
2
1
1000
0
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
3
2
3000
2000
1000
Traffic on the minor road(AADT)
0
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
These graphs are, in particular, based on simple hypotheses about the peak hour, the distribution of turning
movements etc.
14
15
2.5. SPEEDS
In order to evaluating an intersection's operating conditions and ascertain the sight
distances that are required, measurements of real speeds or forecasts of speeds are
essential.
Generally, speeds are measured, in accordance with international practice, using the
85th percentile speed (V85), which is the speed below which 85 percent of drivers travel under
free-flow (uncongested) conditions. The V85 speed can be estimated experimentally or
theoretically (see appendix 4).
In the case of an existing road, the 85th percentile speed can be deduced from the
distribution of observed speeds. Measurements are usually made using one of the various
types of vehicle detectors or hand-held radar equipment7 . The latter offers operational
flexibility and is able to discriminate easily between free-flow and impeded vehicles, but is
difficult to use over long periods.
3.1. PRINCIPLES
An intersection must belong to a readily identified type: the operation of an intersection
whose configuration is too individual is generally poorly understood by drivers and such
intersections frequently cause accidents. Following the instructions set out in Chapters 2 and
3 will generally ensure that an intersection belongs to a common, readily identified, type.
The types of intersections installed on a road help to make it clear to drivers what type
of road they are on. When intersections are too varied or inconsistent they are a source of
harmful ambiguity. For example, the construction of interchanges on an ordinary major road
generates behaviors downstream which are incompatible with the operating conditions of the
road in question (because of frontage access, at-grade intersections, etc.).
7
The document "Mesure des vitesse et ses applications" (SETRA 1997) lists available methods for measuring
vehicle speeds.
Irrespective of the representativeness of the measurement period (and the accuracy of measurement device),
about 25 measurements are required to estimate the V85 speed to an accuracy of 10 km/h, and 70
measurement to estimate it to within 5 km/h.
16
17
18
If a section of existing road is converted into a type T road, the exchange and access
points must receive appropriate treatment: grade-separation (with or without exchange of
traffic) or removal of the intersection and transfer to a nearby intersection, removal of frontage
access, provision of access to and creation of a parallel road system (for traffic which is not
authorized to use the type T road).
Otherwise, if the necessary funds are not available, a possible alternative is to
upgrade only a clearly marked sub-section, in a completely coherent manner, in accordance
with what has been stated above (see A.R.P. 1.2.b).
Under no circumstances is it acceptable to grade separate the principal access points
while deferring the other measures (grade-separation or removal of other intersections,
removal of frontage access, provision of access and parallel roads).
Table 1 - Suitable alternatives for type T roads and the general conditions for their use.
Alternatives
Removal of intersection (transfer to a nearby
roundabout or interchange)
Grade separation without exchange
Grade-separated intersection (interchange)
19
Table 2 - Suitable alternatives for type R roads and the general conditions for their use.
Alternatives
Roundabouts
In view of the specific problems affecting these roads as regards the safety of
standard at-grade intersections (the amount of crossing traffic, frequently unfavorable
location), the measures to be taken are as follows:
- roundabouts should be constructed at major exchange points (terminal intersections, and
possibly at a central point);
- minor intersections should be modified, either by elimination and transfer to an adjacent
intersection, or, if crossing traffic is relatively heavy, by grade separation with no exchange,
with costs kept to a minimum;
- no frontage access to ensure the road retains its primary purpose of carrying through-traffic
and to avoid urbanization which would result in an ambiguous identity.9
In the case of a high-traffic road, this is compulsory (see article L152-1 of the "Code de la voirie routire").
10
The systematic (or quasi-systematic) giving of priority to a minor road is generally not recommended.
20
This general decision may have been made already, for example in the context of the policy for a network with
an established hierarchy.
12
The choice between two types of interchange is not dealt with in this document which is concerned with atgrade intersections.
13
See the "Instruction modificatrice provisoire" of 28 July 1995 concerning the methods for evaluating road
investments in rural areas (Direction des Routes).
21
b) Cost
The costs of at-grade intersections vary greatly depending on local conditions, the
extent to which the existing pavement is reutilized (in the case of reconstruction), the amount
of road furniture installed, the construction of feeder roads, etc. Some aspects of design
(illumination, landscaping, choice of materials, etc.) can considerably increase the cost of a
project. Furthermore, operating costs (maintenance, electricity consumption if applicable)
must also be considered.
However, the cost of improving a standard at-grade intersection is frequently much
lower than the cost of building a roundabout, but it should not be forgotten that limiting the
dimensions of a roundabout considerably reduces its cost.
c) Delays
This criterion is also important on roads that carry long distance or medium distance
traffic (which although rarely predominant can be deliberately favored). Local traffic must also
be considered on roads of secondary importance.
Delays are, basically, of two types, the relative importance of which depends on the
traffic at the site:
- traffic delay (also known as congestion delay). This is due to not having priority and
interactions between vehicles. It can be considered as being the time spent in a queue and at
the front of a queue.
- geometric delay. This is the delay experienced by a vehicle when crossing the facility,
when not impeded at all by traffic. This exists because an intersection forces some traffic
streams to slow down. 14
Delays are usually negligible for rural roundabouts. If this is not the case there is
probably a capacity problem which may be detected by the GIRABASE software.15 Figure 2
below illustrates the field of application for roundabout intersections with regard to traffic, in
particular their capacity limit.
14
In the case of a roundabout too, drivers need to negotiate the central reservation which makes their trajectory
slightly longer than a straight line, but the corresponding delay is small, at least for the dimensions
recommended in this document (see Chap. 3).
15
22
AADT on major
road
AADT on major
road
The light area represents a reserve capacity of more than 30%. Delays are generally
low.
The dark area represents a reserve capacity16 of between 10% and 30%. Delays can
become very long in certain cases
Above this, one entry is likely to be saturated.
However, all the users passing through the roundabout are subjected to geometric
delay. The duration of this will vary according to the site. Its average value is 12s for light
vehicles (further information on geometric delay is given in Appendix 3).
16
See Appendix 2.
23
The OCTAVE software (SETRA, 1998) deals with the capacity of unsignalized intersections.
24
CHAPTER 2
25
This chapter deals with the construction and geometric design of non-roundabout atgrade intersections, known as standard at-grade intersections.
Standard at-grade intersections provide a lower average level of safety than other
types of intersection (roundabout, grade-separated). The priority in their design must therefore
be to maximize safety - capacity problems are comparatively rare in rural areas.
This chapter lays down guidelines to enable this objective to be achieved (while at the
same time adapting the facility to the type of traffic) and also states the rules and parameters
for constructing and sizing intersection components.
Fig 1 - Principal components and parameters of a standard at-grade intersection.
Minor leg
(non priority)
Exit lane
Island nose
Entry lane
Exit radius (R s)
Entry radius (Re)
Nez dlot
Splitte risland
Splitter
Major leg
( priority)
Left-turn lane
Through lane
Island tips
A roundabout is normally constructed at at-grade intersections between two major roads which belong to networks with
the same position in the hierarchy.
26
1. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The conceptual and geometric design phases of standard at-grade intersections must
take into account the basic principles enumerated in Chapter 1. This essentially involves
compatibility with the type of road, integration with the rationale of the route, legibility of the
facility, optimization of safety, provision of a high rate of flow for priority flows and taking
account of specific types of road users.
In addition to these fundamental principles which apply to intersections of all types, the
construction and design of a standard at-grade intersection requires the following specific
precautions.
With regard to the route:
- the number of conflict points (i.e. the number of intersections on the major road) must be
limited;
- there must be an adequate distance between two successive intersections. If not,
intersections must be grouped together to form a single facility (which means the objective in
the preceding paragraph is also attained);
- special attention must be given to changes in the type of intersection or the priority rule along
a route.
Upstream of the facility:
- the geometry or the environment should be modified to encourage speeds which are
appropriate for the type of facility and the priority rule;
- surroundings which assist good legibility.
In the approach to the intersection:
- satisfactory entry approach visibility of conflict points;
- visible and legible advance signing which informs drivers in the clearest possible terms of
the type of facility they are about to encounter and the priority rules which apply there
(directional and priority signing).
Within the intersection:
- satisfactory crossing visibility;
- the use of certain types of intersection which are compact, straightforward, tested and
rapidly identifiable and whose operation is well understood by drivers: T-intersections or 4way intersections (in addition to roundabouts);
- homogeneous geometrical features along a route; with facilities which comply as closely as
possible with the standard layouts described in the sections below;
27
- features which assist good legibility (it is generally only necessary to comply with the rule of
simplicity to achieve this);
- the simplest possible signing, which is consistent with the layout and placed where it is
clearly visible (particularly in the case of directional signing).
Fig. 2- Principal recommended and not recommended layouts for non-roundabout at-grade intersections.
1. Recommended
28
Several types of intersection must be rejected because they do not comply with these
principles and frequently cause accidents:
- "bulb" type intersections that are too large and rather complex, in which non priority traffic
flows too freely;
- Y-intersections which often have similar shortcomings and which suffer from a degree of
ambiguity; these should be replaced by either a T-intersection or a roundabout depending on
which is more appropriate.
- intersections in which there is a "left turning transition lane coming from the right", the
operation of which is ambiguous (left turning movements are unusual at at-grade
intersections);
- many other atypical types of intersection, frequently large, where the large number of islands
and transition lanes confuses drivers.
In addition, intersections with a nearside priority rule must not be allowed on type R
roads, because there is a risk they will not be understood by drivers on the major road, who
have generally had priority for long distances upstream of the intersection. Such intersections
are prohibited on roads which are classed as trunk roads.
Signalized intersections, which may surprise drivers and have a poor safety record,
should also be ruled out in rural areas. It is generally advantageous to replace them by
roundabout intersections, even in suburban areas or on cross-town routes.
To apply these principles of layout and design we need to distinguish between:
new roads: the principles set out above provide the basis for the design of planned
intersections;
existing roads: priority should be given to facilities which improve safety, and to a lesser
degree capacity. Any plan to reconstruct an intersection should be preceded by accident
and traffic analysis (see Chap 1). The design rules given in the remainder of this Chapter
should be considered as general guidance for improvements to existing roads.
1.2.1. VISIBILITY
a) Visibility requirement at an intersection
For safety reasons, drivers waiting on the minor road or at an access point must have
enough time to see whether there is a vehicle on the major road, decide to perform a crossing
maneuver and start and complete it 2 before the arrival of a priority vehicle that was masked
to begin with.
2
This includes maneuvers to cross the intersection and merge into the traffic on the major road.
29
Drivers turning left into the minor road must be provided with a similar length of time
with regard to opposing traffic on the major road.
The time required to cross the priority road, known as the "crossing time", naturally
depends on its width.
Table 1: Crossing time3 according to the width of the crossed road and the priority rule (to be taken into
account when calculating the visibility distance).
Cross-section of major road
2 lanes
4-lane divided :
merging from the
+
right
left-turn lane
at partial
intersections
2-lanes
STOP
YIELD
Left-turn lane
into minor road
recommended time
8s
9s
8s
absolute minimum
6s
7s
6s
recommended time
10 s
11 s
9s
absolute minimum
8s
9s
7s
recommended time
8s
absolute minimum
6s
N.B. These times should be increased by 1 s when access is via an upward grade of more than 2%,
which should, furthermore, be avoided (see 3.1.3.).
It must also be ensured that approaching vehicles have adequate visibility of the noses
of splitter islands on the major road and the secondary legs. This generally constitutes less of
a design constraint than the crossing time condition, and is set out in 2.1. for the major road.
b) Provision of visibility
This relates to the intersection crossing time and involves clearing a sight triangle for
each conflict between two traffic streams: there must be no visual obstruction within this
triangle.
The triangle is located 1 m above a plane which passes through the centerline of both
roads. Its corners are located as follows: (i) the conflict point between the two traffic streams
in question, (ii) an assumed observation point on the non-priority road beyond which a driver
must be able to see a vehicle traveling on the major road, and (iii) an observed point on the
major road. These elements vary depending on the priority rule (see Fig. 4 and 5).
3
The recommended times provide a greater margin of safety and are better suited to slow-starting vehicles (trucks, twowheel vehicles).
30
The assumed observation point is 2 m from the right edge of the non-priority road, set
back 4 m from the stop-line4 at a STOP-controlled intersection and set back 15 to 20 m from
the YIELD line5 where this rule applies. In the case of left turns into the minor road the position
of the assumed observation point is to be determined on a case by case basis depending on
the configuration of the intersection.
The observed point is at a height of 1 m above the centerline of the priority road,6
and at a distance from the conflict point which corresponds to the distance traveled by priority
vehicles during the crossing time (f); this distance is known as the crossing sight distance
(D). The 85th percentile speed (V85) is used to calculate D (see Appendix 4). 7
The distance D is given by: D = V85 x t, where the value of t is given below (Table 1)
and varies according the width of the road to be crossed and the priority rule.
Fig. 3 - Crossing sight distance (D) on the basis of the 85th percentile speed on the major road and the
crossing time (t).
400
t =11 s
350
t =10 s
t= 9s
300
t= 8s
250
t= 7s
200
t= 6s
150
100
Sight distance ( m) .
50
0
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
Site triangles will be provided (4 for a 4-way intersections, 2 for a T-intersections, 1 for
a partial intersections on a divided highway) on the basis of the elements described above
and the priority rules which apply. The visibility for left turning maneuvers from the major road
will be checked later (this generally imposes fewer constraints than left-turning movements
from the secondary road).
This is the position where road users gain information when enterring an intersection where the YIELD priority rule applies.
If the major road is a two-way road on which overtaking is allowed the lane in question is the left-hand lane (for traffic
coming from the right) for sight triangles to the right of the observation point. In all other cases it is the right-hand lane.
The V85 speed used to calculate the crossing sight distance is computed using the speeds of all vehicles, including those
exceeding the posted limit.
31
Fig. 4 - Sight triangles for drivers on the minor road, depending on the priority rule.
2m
15 to
20 m
2
m
7
2
m
AB3a
2m
4m
AB4
2m
Fig 5 - Visibility for the left-turn maneuver into the minor road
D (222m for example, when t=8s and V85=100 km/h
32
These crossing sight distances will be used in geometric design and the management
of roadsides.
c) Precautions as regards horizontal alignment and longitudinal profile
On a new road, intersections and access points must not be located on curved
alignment.8 It is, however, acceptable to install a T-intersection or an access point on the
outside of a bend whose radius is such that no more than the normal cross-fall is required, on
condition that sight distances are adequate. Right turning movements from the major road
must not be too tangential.
Installing an intersection where there is a salient angle is inadvisable. On a new road
this option is to be rejected if the longitudinal profile makes it impossible to comply with the
sight conditions stated above.
For an existing road, any measures required for poorly-located intersections or
access points can be determined on the basis of a check on visibility and/or accident analysis
(see e, below).
d) Precautions concerning roadside management
In the vicinity of an intersection, anything located near the road (signs or road
furniture9, slopes, trees, crops or other vegetation, buildings, engineering structures, walls,
parked vehicles, etc.) can potentially mask visibility. Thus, the visibility conditions set out
above demand a zone that is free of lateral masking with sufficient guarantees that it will
remain so. Exceptionally, localized masking may be tolerated, on condition that it does not
interfere with vision.
In order for traffic signs to be outside the sight triangles, they should be set back
roughly 200m from a YIELD line and at least 50 m from a STOP line. 10
e) The case of an existing facility where sight distance requirements are not
met
On an existing road, when it is not possible to remove the masking that impairs
visibility at an intersection, other measures must be considered. There are a number of ways
in which the visibility requirements stated above can be attained; we shall mention the
following:
- realigning the minor roads - for example, this can transform a 4-way intersection into two Tintersections, known as a staggered intersection (see 3.1.2.) - in some cases with a small
radius in a salient angle, it can be advantageous to move the centerline of the minor (nonpriority) road to the central point of the curve;
- transferring exchanges to an adjacent intersection;
- in exceptional cases, modifying the layout of the major road (horizontal alignment,
longitudinal profile);
8
Apart from the adverse effects on visibility, it is more difficult to judge speeds on a bend and information gathering is more
difficult when the non-priority branch joins the major road on the inside of a curve.
Safety barriers can also mask visibility, particularly when there is a summit curve on the major road.
10
If it is assumed that vehicles are 0.70 m away from the right shoulder (itself 2 m wide) and the 85th percentile speed is 100
km/h.
33
1.2.2. LEGIBILITY
Drivers arriving at an intersection must understand easily and rapidly how it operates ,
the behavior that is expected of them (for example slowing down and yielding) and what the
other drivers are doing or will do.
The following conditions are necessary to ensure satisfactory legibility:
- compatibility of sight distances with approach speeds;
- facilities or features that highlight the presence of the intersection (in particular splitter
islands)
- uniformity of geometric features along a route;
- facilities which comply as far as possible with the "standard layouts"
- the simplest possible signing, which is consistent and placed where it is clearly visible
34
35
Table 2 - Minimum recommended distance between successive intersections, and residual length for
overtaking13, depending on operating speeds.
V85 (km/h)
Minimum recommended
distance (m)
Length for overtaking (m)
60-70
600
80-90
900
100-110
1200
300
40
600
"Staggered" intersections should be considered as a single facility rather than two T-intersections close together.
13
This is a theoretical distance which may be reduced by other factors (for example the layout).
36
V85 (km/h)
d on a straight section (m)
d on a bend (m)16
50
50
55
60
65
72
70
85
95
80
105
121
90
130
151
100
160
187
14
The stopping distance d is made up of the braking distance (distanced covered during braking which reduces the speed
from V85 to 0 under specified wet pavement conditions) and the distance covered during the reaction time (taken as 2 s at
speeds of 100 km/h and less). In order to calculate the stopping distance d, readers are referred to 4.2.b. in the A.R.P.
15
It is also possible for only speeds below the speed limit (typically 90 km/h) to be used for calculating the 85th percentile
speed.
16
The stopping distance on a bend should be used for radii R< 5 x V85 (where V 85 is in m/s and R is the radius of the bend).
37
Opportunities for turning back must be frequent, about 5 km apart to avoid lengthening jounrneys excessively (this distance
should, however, depend on real needs and whether or not access roads have been constructed).
38
5 m
10 m
15 to 35 m
10 m 10 m
1,50 to 2,00 m
The aim should be to achieve a width of at least 5 m between the centerline of the
road and the edge of the widened section. This generally involves widening the road by
between 1.50 m and 2.00 m.
A total length of less than 40 m should be avoided (a short facility of this type is likely
to encourage hesitation and impede the avoidance maneuver). The total length may be
increased to 65 m when there are trucks turning left. Nothing should be done which might
deter drivers from using the shoulder for an avoidance maneuver: the surface must be of
good quality, without special markings (normal edge marking highlights the boundary between
the roadway and the shoulder, etc.).
However, use of the shoulder as a traffic lane should not be over encouraged: the
shoulder should not be treated as a lane (for example with marking on its outer edge, or a
long entry taper), and any signing which attempts to specify a particular use of the shoulder
should be avoided.
N.B. Parked vehicles do not generally cause a problem, as parking demand tends to be very low in rural
areas. Where problems arise a prohibitory sign may be installed (off the usable part of the shoulder).
Very occasional parking does not reduce the usefulness of this facility.
18
39
40
major
road
2-lane roads
< 8000 v/d
> 8000 v/d
no change or
no change
surfacing shoulder
or
same or
left-turn
lane
surfacing of shoulder
left-turn lane
left-turn lane
or
roundabout
3-lane roads
left-turn lane
left-turn lane
or
or
removal of access point removal of intersection with
(and provision of new
transfer to an adjacent
> 8000 v/d
access road dans le cas
intersection
dun crneau de
dpassement)
2. For a 4-way intersection
left-turn lane
Traffic on
major
road
left-turn lane
or roundabout
left-turn lane
or
roundabout
2-lane roads
< 8000 v/d
> 8000 v/d
no change
same or left-turn lane
left-turn
lane
left-turn lane
or
roundabout
3 lane roads
< 8000 v/d
> 8000 v/d
left-turn lane
or
removal of intersection with
transfer to an adjacent
intersection
left-turn lane
left-turn lane
left-turn lane
or
roundabout
or
roundabout
41
cross-section.
1. Width of between 5 and 6 m (typical cross-section)
"LC"
(3 u )
0,30
0,40 m
left shoulder
"T3"
(3 u )
1,00 m
3,00 m
right shoulder
left shoulder
"T3"
(3 u)
3,00 to 3,50
m
1,00 m
right shoulder
"T1"
(2 u )
7,00 m
median
left shoulder
"T3"
(3 u)
1,00 m
right shoulder
A minimum 1.25 m width of the right shoulder must be paved is if there is a large amount of two-wheel
traffic.
- The lane and the right shoulder should be at least as wide as in the typical cross-section of the road.
The left shoulder and the median strip are the same width as in the typical cross-section of the road
19
20
These features are to be considered is minima and do not remove the need to comply with the rules set out in the ARP.
42
2.5.2 DISPLACEMENT
A splitter island should always cause the roadbed leading to the intersection to be
displaced to the right. For reasons of legibility, it is preferable for displacement to be
symmetrical with respect to the centerline of the priority road. Clearly apparent displacement,
which creates some visual constraints, should also be preferred to a gradual change. A
displacement21 of 1/15th is satisfactory as far as safety is concerned.22
The length of the displaced zone can be reduced, but the advance signing of the
island nose by means the symmetrical marking that widens upstream of the island must have
a length of L/2 for the island to be clearly perceived.
21
The displacement (or "inclination of the island") is the angle formed between the curb of the island between its nose and its
widest point and the centreline of the road upstream of the island's nose.
22
43
Fig. 13 - Geometric design criteria for theapproach to splitter islands on major roads with reference to the
typical cross-section of the road.
L/2=39 m
L/6=13 m
me
1/15
3m
2,10 m
J5
3m
r=100 m
1,60 m
r=300 m
r=200 m
r=100 m
L/2=58,50 m
L/6=19,50 m
me
2,30 m
2,00 m
J5
r=300 m
r=200 m
Table 5 - Values of L (length of advance signing; see "Instruction Ministrielle sur la signalisation
routire; Livre 1 - Partie 7.".
Width of roadway
>7m
5 to 7 m
<5 m
L (m)
156
117
78
L/2 (m)
78
58.
39
44
Table 6 - Length (in m) of the components of splitter islands, in the principal scenarios (with
symmetrical displacement, depending on the width of the typical cross-section of the road and
the composition of left turning traffic.
Advance
marking
39 to 58,5
39 to 58,5
58,5
58,5
Displacement
Straight
Taper
Storage
a
section
Roadway < 6 m (negligible left-turning truck traffic)
10,5 to 16
10
15
15
0.25 to 1.10
Roadway < 6 m (considerable left-turning truck traffic)
10,5 to 16
10
15
25
0.25 to 1.10
Roadway 6 m (negligible left-turning truck traffic)
16.5 to 22.5
> 10
20-30
20-50
0.25 to 2.00
Roadway 6 m (considerable left-turning truck traffic)
16.5 to 22.5
> 10
20 - 30
40 - 60
0.25 to 1.75
b-
3.00 to 3.85
3.25 to 4.10
3.25 to 5.00
3.50 to 5.00
Displacement 1/15
10,5 to 22,5 m
Straight
section.
>10 m
Taper
15 to 30 m
Storage
15 to 60 m
a=
0,25 to 2
2,75 to 3,25
b=
3 to 5
1,60 to
2,00 m
a is the width of the part of the island between the left-turn lane and the through lane for opposing
traffic
- b is the total width of the central island, i.e. the sum of a and the width of the left-turn lane.
45
The nomograph below (Fig. 14) shows the number of vehicles that should be
considered when designing the storage zone. The storage length is obtained by simply
considering the average space that vehicles occupy. The following formula, for example,
could be used : Ls = (7 + 10p).Ns (where Ls is in meters, p is the proportion of trucks in the the
stream in question, and Ns is the number of vehicles obtained from the nomograph. 23
Fig 14 - The storage capacity to be provided (number of vehicles) on the left-turn lane (values given by
the OCTAVE software which deals with the capacity of unsignalized intersections, see Appendix 2).
400
10
12
6
350
5
300
250
200
3
150
100
50
0
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200
Taper : 20 m to 30 m
0,50*
Storage : 20 m to 50 m
LC (3u)
2m
4m
0,50*
T2 (5u)
3m
T'3 (3u)
R is
3,50 m
T2 (5u )
5,00 m
3,50 m
4m
Rie
* 0,30 mini
23
This formula can be modified to take account of specific sizes of turning vehicles.
46
LC (3u )
Accidents which involve right-turning movements are always rare and less serious than accidents of other types.
25
On the grounds that a wide road encourages higher speeds at an intersection, joining the minor road at excessive speed
or moving masking created by certain vehicles travelling on the highway.
47
2m
R=25 m
Lb=80 m
Ld25 m
1,50 m
4m
1m
When exiting traffic demand is low, the transition for the right-turning movement from
the major road will consist of a ciscular arc with a radius of 25 m, usually preceded by a
clothoid with a length of approximately 25 m.
26
The change in direction imposed by the circular arc must be at least half the total change in direction (a) between the exit
of the taper and the secondary road; the general condition to be satisfied is Lcl 0.44 x a (where Lcl is the length of the
clothoid and a is in degrees).
48
r=200 m
r=300 m
30 m
le=4m
L/2=39 m
2m
Re=25 m
70 m
40 m
2m
1,5 m
3,5 m
1m
Central reservation
49
27
However, if trucks will be making the left turn a minimum width of 2.0 m is required.
50
Fig. 18 - Minimum characteristics for intersection design on secondary roads with a narrow roadway (less
than 5 m).
R=7 m
2,5 m
2 ou 2,50 m27
L/6
L=39 m (mini)
6,5m
L/6
10 m
10 m
10 m
10 m 5 m 10 m
6,5m
L=39 m (mini)
Fig 19 Detailed features of painted islands at intersections on secondary roads with narrow roadways
(less than 5 m).
"CL"
(3u)
Painted island
(striped)
"LC"
(3u)
2,50 m to 3,00
Central island
Pavement
Right
shoulder*
* At least 1 m of the right shoulder must be paved if there is a large amount of two-wheel traffic.
51
<0
(1)
(1)
(2)
(2)
(3)
(3)
N.B. the solutions numbered (3) transform a 4-way intersection intersection into a staggered intersection
and replace through movements by a right-turning movement onto followed by a left-turning movement off
the major road (see 3.1.2.).
28
The angle of skew is measured with respect to the perpendicular of the axis of the major road, and is therfore zero for a
perpendicualr intersection.
52
70 to 100 m
90 to 150 m*
* Longer staggered intersections can be constructed when two T-intersections or a 4-way intersection do
not meet the distance conditions set out in 1.2.3.
Fig. 21 - Distance between the centerlines of the two minor legs of a staggered intersection.
This configuration has the advantage that vehicles cross the intersection in two stages, the first movement being a rightturn (which is generally safe) and the second a left turn which is protected by a central facility. However, nothing proves
that it is better than a properly designed crossroads.
30
"A section of road can only be considered as a "topographically difficult road" if problems occur continuously or frequently
over a distance of at least 10 kilometres. Local difficulties should not cause a road to be considered as belonging to this
category." (A.R.P.)
53
54
Centre of island
Curb
= -20
= +20
55
It is not advisable to place channelization islands beside the splitter island, except if
there are deceleration or acceleration lanes (which are, furthermore, generally discouraged
on undivided type R roads).
On extremely minor secondary roads, splitter islands still have an important safety
function. However, in order to make cost savings,31 very much smaller islands can be
constructed (see 3.4.). Nevertheless, it must not be forgotten that a certain minimum width is
required in order to install any new signing: a 500 mm J5 marker cannot be installed on an
island which is less than 1.90 m wide. In the light of this, raised islands that are smaller than
standard islands (defined below) are acceptable, so long as the minimum dimensions are
exceeded: below these minimum dimensions a painted island or a traversible island must be
constructed (no traffic signs can be installed on these).
31
56
0,50m
B
b2
H = 2 B
57
Fig 25. Splitter island and minor road entry and exit lanes (see Table 8).
l
le
Re
Rs
J5
R is
R ie
Rre
Rrs
l
R is
l
e
R ie
rn=1m
Rs
Re
1,50m
a
58
Table 8 shows the parameters for splitter island design, with reference to the
approach speed, the characteristics of the priority road and the width of the roadway of the
non-priority road (l). The input parameter for this table is the width l. To simplify matters, it has
been assumed that the approach speed on the minor road depends on this width. An advance
signing distance Lp can therefore be given for each shape of island (see 4.1.6.).
Table 8 - Summary of the main construction parameters for a splitter island and the entry and exit lanes
on the minor road (values in meters).
Notation
Parameters
l 7
V85
40-50
60-70
8090
Lp
3L/2
58,5
117
175,
5
Typical values
Island parameters
Height of construction triangle
4l
20
24
28
H/2=2l
10
12
14
b1
0,55 l
2,75
3,30
3,85
b2
1,45 l
7,25
8,70
10,1
5
Ris
2l + a
10+a
12+a
14+a
Rie
2l + b
10+b
12+b
14+b
rn
1,00
1,00
1,00
Rre
8l
40
48
56
Rrs
16l
80
100
110
(*)
Rs
4l
20
24
28
Re
2l
10
12
14
ls
l/2 + 0,5
3,5
le
sup(l/2 ; 3)
3,5
* where entry radii are small, it is necessary to ascertain that trucks on the minor road have appropriate turning
conditions (turning movement template) and take any necessary measures to assist them (in particular a wider
paved area, or moving the raised splitter island nearer the major road).
32
However, a standard at-grade intersection should not normally be installed at the meeting point between two roads whose
link sections are 7 m (or more) wide. A roundabout will normally be constructed at the intesection between two major
roads occupying the same position in the road hierarchy.
59
The splitter island marks the farside (left edge) of the entry and exit lanes. The position
of the outside edges will be established by drawing a line parallel to the inside edge. The
transition to the major road which widens the end of the lanes is the arc of a circle that is
tangential to this line and the right edge of the major road.
Where approach speeds on the major road are high, the exit radius (Rs) can be
introduced gradually (using a clothoid) with a length Lcl = 6 Rs0.4.
The geometry of the exit of the minor road must not allow side-by-side storage of
vehicles at the STOP or YIELD line, as this would be detrimental to visibility.
The entry lane should be the same width as lanes in the typical cross-section of the
road (l/2), with a minimum value of 3 m. Where the width l exceeds 5 m, it is strongly
recommended to make the transition to 5 m gradually, by a lateral displacement of one
thirtieth the longitudinal distance" from the beginning of the island approach (which could be
reduced to a minimum of 20 m).
The installation of stabilized, possibly also paved, 1 m wide edge strips, is
encouraged. These do not need curbs.
10
20 m
3m
3m
R s=15
e=7,50 m
3m
60
4m
1,50 m
61
Fig 27 - Standard layout for a splitter island and the minor road entry/exit lanes at a partial intersection.
l
Rrs
Rre
ls=4m
le
0,50
2m
Rs*=25 m
Re
1,50 m
mdian
* The transition to the circular arc can be made by a clothoid approximately 25 m in length.
62
4.1. SIGNING
The interdependence between layout and road furniture at or in the vicinity of intersections frequently means
that design work on signing (horizontal, vertical and directional) and road furniture must be conducted at the
same time as general design work on layout.
34
Where they are set back 0.70 from the edge of the right shoulder (which is itself 2,00 m wide) and the 85th
percentile speed is 100 km/h.
63
A different priority rule may apply on different minor legs of a given intersection.
36
In the specific case of a partial intersection on a divided highway, recommendatory signing can also include B2a and B2b
signs.
64
4.1.5 MARKERS
A J5 marker must be placed in the center of the nose of raised islands on both major
and minor roads. The regulations do not make this compulsory in the strict sense, but it is
recommended to install one systematically because it improves perception of the island.
In order not to interfere with the visibility of left turning vehicles, the J5 markers
installed on the tips of splitter islands on the major road should not be more than 1 m in
height.
J3 markers may be of value when the intersection is not sufficiently perceptible to
drivers on the major road. However, there is normally no need to install one when design
measures have already been implemented at the intersection (splitter island on major road,
etc.).
Lp1
V85
T3 (3u)
LC (3u)
T3 (3u)
37
T2 (5u)
u is the width unit. It differs according to the type of road: 7.5 cm for divided highways, 6 cm for major roads, 5 cm for all
other roads.
65
4.3 ILLUMINATION
In general, roads in rural areas are not illuminated, and this applies to their
intersections to, even when these have raised islands (retroreflective curbs and J5 markers in
particular provide adequate visibility). Indeed, except when there are illuminated zones in the
vicinity, there is no proof that illumination improves night-time safety.40 In fact, illumination has
certain drawbacks: high capital, maintenance and energy costs, poles that are agressive
obstacles which are difficult to isolate adequately at intersections.
Furthermore, it is important for illumination to be clearly associated with the urban
environment, in particular to improve the legibility of urban entries.
However, in suburban areas in particular, it can be beneficial to illuminate certain
intersections because of their proximity to other illuminated areas which might hinder their
perception. In such a situation, lighting may be installed so long as the columns are outside
the hazard zone or protected by safety barriers when located near shoulders.
38
Safety barrier is the term employed in French standards (and this document) to designate all restraining devices.
39
It must be considered that generally it is not possible to protect obstacles in the immediate vicinity of the intersection to a
satisfactory degree from all the possible paths of a vehicle that leaves the roadway (on its own or after colliding with
another vehicle).
40
66
CHAPTER 3
67
This chapter deals with the construction and geometric design of roundabout
intersections, commonly known as "roundabouts."
A roundabout is an at-grade intersection that provides the highest level of safety.
However, its performances can be degraded if precautions are not taken, be it during the
design phase (selection of the size and location of the roundabout, attention given to its
comprehensibility and visibility, trajectories of the various legs, layout of all the elements that
make up the facility, etc.), or during the actual implementation phase (construction of the
central island, selection and positioning of the signing, etc).
The adherence to a certain number of guidelines will ensure a good level of security
and optimize the capacity of the planned intersections, even if the conditions that favor safety
and capacity are not always compatible with each other. First of all, because it forces a
major slowdown, if not a complete stop, a roundabout must be well perceived by all users
who approach it. It must be rapidly identified as such, well before reaching the area where
calculating stopping distance is needed.
This chapter describes the principles that must be observed in order to obtain both a
good level of safety and a concurrence with the features of the types of traffic. It also
specifies the rules and parameters required for the construction and sizing of the various
components of the facility.4
Figure 1: The Major Components and Parameters of a Roundabout
Spliter island
Radius of the Roundabout (Rg )
Central island
Radius of entrance (Re)
Branche
Exit lane
Entry lane
The radius of a roundabout intersection (Rg) consists of the radius of the marking on
the outer perimeter of the circulating roadway, namely the radius at the right curb of the
circulating roadway. Defining a roundabout according to its outside radius provides a much
better notion regarding the intersection's footprint, and offers a better understanding of what
the actual turn movement constraints on the most disadvantaged vehicles will be (trucks,
especially).
4
In the case of the adaptation of an existing intersection, it might sometimes be quite difficult to confirm some
of the recommendations in this chapter. This does not mean that the roundabout concept should be
abandoned when it does turn out to be necessary, particularly from a safety standpoint (as other types of at
grade intersections generally don't perform any better). As the case may be, special attention must be given to
all the aspects of the facility and to its special features (e.g., illumination and signing).
68
1. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
1.1. DESIGN PRINCIPLES
The conceptual and geometric design phases of roundabout intersections must take
into account the basic principles enumerated in Chapter 1. Beyond that, as with any other
type of intersection, the construction of a roundabout must abide by the following guidelines:
-
Exclude all road hazards from the likely trajectories of vehicles that could
accidentally leave the roadway. In particular, the central island should not
include any obstacle or device that could aggravate the impact of an out-ofcontrol vehicle at the intersection's entrance;
Provide the user with a good perception during the approach of the
intersection: i.e., appropriate geometric design, visible and legible advance
signing that states as clearly as possible the type of facility that one is
approaching;
Confirm that the capacity of the facility is adequate to manage the type of
traffic involved. Saturation of a roundabout (i.e., of one its entrances) is rarely
reached in rural areas. A cursory analysis can be performed when traffic flow
is low; a more accurate analysis is required in cases of higher traffic flows
(See 1.2.);
69
70
widening of the entrance (without deviating from the values listed in 2.3.);
71
if the intersection is located on a curve or at the end of a curve, m if the radius is less
than the non-slanted radius (See 1.4.3.);
if the axes of the legs are off-center (m to the right) in relation to the central island (See
1.4.3.);
if the intersection is on a convex curve along one of the roads, even if it has a very
large radius in an outward projection,6 especially after a crest. If this configuration
cannot be avoided, placement at the crest is often preferable, and special attention
must be given to conditions of visibility during approach (See above);
trees in alignment with one of the roundabout's nearby legs--all the more so on either
side--giving the impression of a continuous trajectory;
72
What's more, a very large radius with an outward projection would not be suitable for a small facility.
1.3.2. VISIBILITY
Drivers approaching a roundabout must see the vehicles that have the right of way
soon enough in order to yield or even stop. A large sight triangle is however not required; a
complete view over the left quadrant of the circulating roadway at a distance of 15 m
(approximately) from the entrance, is enough.8
Furthermore, the central island must not include any visual obstacles (high plants)
within less than 2 m of its peripheral curb (or, if there is no curb, at 2.50 m from the edge
marking surrounding the central island).
In general, similar sight triangles should be designed on all the legs of a same
roundabout (in order to induce consistent behaviors).
Figure 2: Sight Triangle at the approach of a roundabout
2,50 m
4m
10 m
Leg A
Except perhaps, on certain areas of the circulating roadway, in the very special case of a roundabout
located on a road with strong grade (See 1.3.6.)--a solution which, by the way, is not recommended.
8
Too much visibility to the left can even be harmful to the facility's safety. Indeed, drivers approaching the
roundabout may focus their attention on the open spots on the entrance directly to their left, while neglecting
other movements that are not so visible (if there is heavy masking from the central island, for example).
73
To be avoided
74
Always desirable
Never
Alignment
Alignment
B
P2
75
however, on secondary roads with very little truck traffic, a radius (Rg) between 12 and
15 can be considered;
on more important roads, and if the constraints of the project make it possible, a value
of approximately 20 m should be sought for the extra level of comfort they provide to
trucks;
if there are many legs (> 4), radii in the range of 20 to 25 m may considered, but rarely
higher, considering that some minor legs do not require much space (See 2.3. and
2.5.2.).
b) On a road with two roadway beds: a radius (Rg) of 25 m (no more) is generally
advisable.
In all cases, the width of the circulating roadway cannot be less than 6 m.
76
1.4.5. DEFLECTION
The deflection of vehicles' paths through a roundabout (the trajectory traced by two
opposing or two adjacent arms of the roundabout) is a major factor determining the safety of
the facility. Indeed, the overall geometric design should not allow the most stretched out
trajectories to be taken at speeds in excess of 50 km/h.
A trajectory's deflection is the radius of the arc that passes at a 1.5 m distance away
from the edge of the central island and at 2 m from the edges of the entry and exit lanes. The
radius of such an arc should be less than 100 m.
Figure 8: Deflexion
R < 100 m
2m
2m
2m
1,50 m
77
1.4.6. GRADES
Installing a roundabout on a roadway with a grade lower than 3% is generally not a
problem.
Between 3% and 6%, some designs can adversely affect safety, notably by impairing
the stability of trucks (steep banking, high entrance speed, etc.).
If the grade is higher than 6%, it is generally acknowledged that this type of facility
can create some serious problems. However, under the same conditions, another type of atgrade intersection does not always perform better and offers a lower level of safety. The use
of a roundabout can therefore not be excluded in principle at grades of 6% or higher, through
the modification of existing roads. In the case of a new facility, giving up the roundabout
solution should not lead to the acceptance of another type of intersection, but to the
elimination or relocation of the intersection, or to a modification of its vertical profile.
In all cases, at no point should the banked areas on the outside of the circulating
roadway or the normal banked areas on the entry and exit lanes exceed a grade of 3%,
including the merge lanes to the left. For roundabouts on a sloped plane, no slope should be
added to the normal transverse grade of the circulating roadway (1.5% to 2%).
For steep grades, (5% to 6%), the slope may change around the circulating
roadway, for example between +2% at the crest of the circulating roadway (road tilted toward
the inside) and -2% at the low point (road tilted toward the outside).
If the intersection is located on the slope, or at the low point of the vertical profile of the
roads involved, a smaller facility can reduce the slope of the circulating roadway by about 1 to
2%.
78
2.1.2. SIZES
There is no maximum recommended radius for the central island, but designing it too
large is unnecessary; it does not improve the intersection's operation (no or only minor
capacity gains) and oftentimes produces negative effects (higher speeds on the circulating
roadway, higher costs...). In fact, moderate length radii should be chosen (See 1.4.4.).
However, a central island with an inscribed radius of about ten meters is generally
desirable if there is major semi-trailer traffic (always the case on main rural roads), to ensure
a decent comfort level for the movements of these vehicles.
79
2.1.4. LANDSCAPING
In general, the purpose of landscaping is to differentiate the roundabout from the "road
environment" and the immediate surroundings. The landscaping of the central island can
improve the perception of the roundabout from a distance, and block the perspective of the
incoming user on the circulating roadway. It may also help to beautify the road environment,
and underscore the transition process of the arrival into town, etc. On the other hand, the
nature or position of some types of vegetation can degrade the facility's perception. The
central island may be slightly elevated, but the slopes of the landscaped area should not
exceed 15%.
In rural areas, no obstacle that is aggressive or likely to cause the sudden stop of an
out-of-control vehicle (tree, massive sculpture, stone block, pole, lighting fixture, little wall,
earthen wall, embankment at a grade above 15%, ditch, etc) should be located on the central
island. This does not prohibit the use of non-hazardous materials (shrubs, flowers, water
fountains,9 sculptures made out of fragile and low-mass materials, etc).
The maintenance requirements of the central island are discussed in paragraph 3.2.
Figure 2: standard cross section
1. for Rg = 15 m
(To the right of the splitter islands)
6 cm
46%
2m
1m
1,5 2 %
6 cm
15 %
3 cm
<14 cm
1,50 m
6,50 m
7,00 m
(Circulating roadway)
R g=15m
2. for Rg = 20 m
To the right of the splitter islands
6 cm
1m
2m
15%
6cm
0,50 m
(ou 5 u )
12,50 m
R g =20 m
9
80
1,5 2 %
7,00 m
(circulating roadway)
<14cm
0,50 m
0,50 m
2.2.1. OPERATION
The circulating roadway should not be seen as a one-way road with 2 or 3 lanes
separated by lane markings responsible for their allocations, but as a single lane, wide
enough to allow trucks among others to complete their turns.
2.2.4. MARKINGS
In general, lane markings are not recommended; they should only be used for
circulating roadway widths in excess of 9 m or more, as long as the Rg radius is at least 20
m. Therefore, the circulating roadway is most often delineated, on the inside as well as the
outside, by a continuous line (except at the entry and exit lanes).
10
This width can sometimes be higher on existing roundabouts in high traffic areas located in the
outskirts of a town, where there are often 3 lanes on the circulating roadway: these very special cases
(such as a site listed as a historical landmark on which grade-separating is not allowed) can be
tolerated.
11
81
2.3. ENTRANCES
At each leg, the entry lane must be separated physically from the exit lane by a
projecting splitter island. Simple pavement markings are not enough (except perhaps to
delimitate extremely secondary legs).
Entries are generally single-lane, except when the capacity calculated at the time of
commissioning requires the creation of two-lane entries. If the capacity study shows the
need to build more than two lanes on one entrance, the choice of a roundabout for the
purpose of solving the problems of exchanges between lanes may have to be reconsidered.
Nonetheless, under these conditions, it is generally not acceptable to chose a standard atgrade intersection or one with traffic lights, which would be more unsafe than a roundabout.
Grade-separated solutions must then be contemplated, with one roundabout on each axis:
the good thing about them is that they don't encourage high speeds, and avoid transferring
safety problems to intersections located downstream. Otherwise, the roundabout solution
can be chosen in spite of the periods of saturation it will generate.
The recommended entry widths (le) (measured between pavement markings) are as
follows:
-
The entrance radii (Re) must always be less than or equal to the outside radius of the
roundabout (Rg). They generally range between 10 and 15 m (depending on the
configurations of the legs around the circulating roadway).
The entrance lanes are delineated by pavement markings (T3 type on the outside
perimeter) and by (traversable) curbs on the inside, located most often at the edges (See
Appendix 5). For the smallest entry radii (Re 12 m), the outside curb can be replaced with
cobblestones abutting the road surface, whose surface properties will act as a deterrent
against crossing.
On two-way, four-lane roads, it is always recommended to narrow the profile down to
one lane upstream from the roundabout (via a merger of the fast lane into the slow lane).
However, and if it is justified by the amount of traffic, the second lane can be restored at
approximately 40 m from the circulating roadway (See Figure 11). If the level of incoming
traffic onto the roundabout could exceed the capacity of a parallel-running lane, the overall
capacity of the intersection itself will have to be verified: otherwise the decision as to the type
of intersection will have to be entirely reconsidered.
Figure 3: Standard configuration of one leg ( where Rg= 20 m.)
Rg
Re
Rr
le =4 m
Ri
la =7
m
3,75 m
3,50 m
ls =4,50
Rs
12
3,50 m
1,0 m
Rr
To obtain the maximum benefit from two-lane entries, it should be recalled that the circulating roadway
should be at least 20% wider than the widest entry lane, with a limit of 9 m.
82
2.4. EXITS
Exits are always designed with one lane, except in the following cases:
-
the exiting traffic (Qs) is higher than 900 uvp/h, as well as 3 times higher than the
circulating traffic (Qt).14
The width of the exits (ls) is set at 4 or 5 m for one lane (depending on the value of
(Rg); it is also quickly reduced to the width of the roadway in a typical cross section, in
actuality at the connection point with the alignment on the right.
For two-lane exits, the ls width is usually set at 7 m. When the road includes on its
main roadway only one lane per direction, the merge from two lanes down to one lane is done
in the tangent section, in accordance with standard practices and at a speed of 60 km/h.
The exit radius (Rs) should be greater than the inscribed radius of the roundabout (Ri ),
with a minimum of 15 m and a maximum of 30 m. There are some special configurations of
the legs that may justify greater exit radii. Furthermore, the placement, right after an exit, of a
counter-curve with a smaller radius than the exit radius (Rs), should be avoided due to safety
and fluidity concerns.
Table 1 -- Summary of the Construction Parameters of Entrance and Exit Lanes
Notatio
n
Parameters
Values (in m)
Roundabout Radius
Rg
12 m Rg 25 m
Rg = 12
Rg = 15
Rg = 20
Rg = 25
la
6 m l a 9m
slf
1.5 m if Rg 15 m
1.5
1.5
--
--
Inscribed Radius
Ri
Rg -l a - slf
3.5
6.5
13
18
Entrance Radius*
Re
10 m Re 15 m and Rg
12
15
15
15
le
le = 4 m
Exit Radius*
Rs
15 m Rs 30 m and > Ri
15
20
20
20
ls
4 m ls 5 m
4.5
Connecting Radius
Rr
Rr = 4 Rg
48
60
80
100
* If these radii generate major modifications to the path of a secondary leg (which can occur when the
axes of two consecutive legs produce a sharp angle), they can be reduced down to the minimum listed
values (Re = 10 m and Rs = 156 m), or even lower. In this case, the turning maneuvers of trucks that
use the facility must be verified and, as the case may, specials arrangements must be made for them
(excess paved width area).
13
14
83
Figure 4: Case of a four-lane road with two roadbeds: typical treatment of the exit, and
example of the restoration of the second lane after a merge.
Between 35 and 40 m from the
circulating roadway
20 m
20 m
Li =234 m
Ld=90 130 m
they serve as a refuges for pedestrians, allowing them to cross a roadway in two stages;
they prevent collisions between the two directions of travel (especially where the exiting radius is
small) by separating entry and exit movements;
they increase capacity, by allowing drivers waiting at the entry yield line to ascertain earlier
which other vehicles are exiting and which ones they must yield to;
84
The position of a construction triangle of a standard island is derived from the axis of
the leg (which indicates the direction that determines the height of the triangle) and the edge
of the circulating roadway (which determines the base of this height). For a roundabout
radius (Rg) greater than 15 m, the construction triangle is slightly offset to the left, in order to
allow the axis of the road to pass through the center of the island's nose.
Whenever possible, the height (H) of the triangle should be greater than 15 m. In
actuality, the construction triangle can be assigned a height equal to the radius of the
roundabout. An island width (li ) of 4 m is adequate for small roundabouts.
The lowest acceptable width of a splitter island is 2 m. In reality, the construction triangle can
have a base (B) equivalent to a quarter of the radius of the roundabout.
These recommendations do not apply to extremely secondary legs which require
much smaller dimensions, or even the complete elimination of any island.
Figure 5: Construction of the splitters islands on the legs of a roundabout with a radius (Rg)
15 m (extremely secondary legs excepted)
H=Rg
R=Re +le
0,50 m (ou 5 u )
Rg
r=Rg/50
B=Rg/4
d=(r+0,5)/2
Rr =4Rg
r=Rg/50
1,0 m
Rr =4Rg
r=Rg/50
Rg/16
l
R=Rs+ s
85
Figure 6: Construction of the splitter islands on legs of roundabouts with a radius ( Rg) < 15
m (extremely secondary legs excepted).
H=Rg
R=Re+ le
0,50 m (ou 5 u)
Rg
Rr=4Rg
r=Rg /50
B=Rg /4
1m
r=Rg /50
Rr=4Rg
r=Rg/50
R=Rs +ls
* The curves that allow a tapering of the base of the island are respectively parallel to the
right edges of the entry and exit lanes.
Notatio
n
Roundabout Radius
Rg
Parameters
Values (in m)
Rg < 15
Rg = 15
Rg = 20
Rg = 25
H = Rg
12 to 15
15
20
25
B = Rg / 4
3 to 3.75
3.75
5.00
6.25
d = (0.5 + Rg/50)/2 or 0
0.40
0.45
0.50
r = Rg / 50
0.25
0.30
0.40
0.50
86
87
2.6.2. GEOMETRY
The slip lane is made up of:
a diagonal deceleration lane featuring a straight exit transition at least 80 m in length
(measured from the tip of the bevel and the exit island's head reduced down to 1 m),
as well as a progressive transition lane (clothoid);
a circular arc of adequate length15 and with a radius of at least 40 m (inside edge of
the lane), but less than 75 m, if possible16;
a parallel merge lane with an acceleration section at least 70 m long and a tapered
area of 70 m.
The lane should be 4 m wide, from the straight exit transition to the entrance of the
merge lane. It includes a 2.00 m paved shoulder on the right, and a 0.50 m paved shoulder
on the left.
R 40 m
L i = 70 m
70 m
R.P.
L b = 80m
D42b TYPE 1
si L b = 80m
ou
D42b TYPE 2
si L b > 80 m
15
The condition that must be assured is Lcl 0.017xRxa, whereby Lcl is the length of the easement, R is the
radius of the circular arc, and a is the overall angle variation (in degrees).
16
It is not recommended to design trajectories that would be so easy and direct that they would encourage
excessive speeds by vehicles on the way out that should be attentive to the right of way of vehicles exiting the
roundabout.
88
Figure 85: Example of a difficult approach with landscaped central median and two
inflexions
30 m
60 m
3 m
6 m
R=100 m
R=200 m
Figure 96: Example of a difficult approach treated with an elongated splitter island
~2 m
The installation of slowing devices (such as rumble strips) on the braking areas is
generally not recommended due to the loss of adhesion they may produce.
89
3. SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS
3.1. FACILITIES FOR SPECIFIC USERS
3.1.1. PEDESTRIANS
For the sake of pedestrian safety, wide and rapid entrances (and exits) should be
avoided. Furthermore, the intersection should be designed compact in size in order to reduce
out-of-direction travel.
It may be desirable, especially in suburban areas, to bring special attention to the
crosswalks on one or several of the legs of a roundabout. In this case, the crosswalks are
placed 4 m upstream from the transverse "YIELD" lines. At the entrance of the crosswalks,
the sidewalk curb should be lowered and a refuge should be designed on the splitter islands
involved. The crosswalk markings end at the splitter island; there are no markings at the
splitter island. No signs or special lights for the crosswalks are required.
on the entry lane (on the roadway), immediately upstream from the crosswalk, if traffic
is moderate and stops are short in duration. This design cannot be used if there are
two entry lanes (a vehicle cannot be allowed to overtake a stopped bus);
90
As a general rule, stops right in the circulating roadway should be avoided; however,
on the largest roundabouts in existence, a complete bus pullout can be considered in the
periphery of the circulating roadway, as long as no disruptions are generated (such as by
pedestrians crossing the circulating roadway).
Figure 10: Two possible bus stop locations
3 m
10 m
20 m
10 m
1 m
1 m
20 m
2,50 m
4 m
4 m
By their very definition, special convoys exceed the regulatory limits defined in the
Vehicular Code. Through a special exemption,17 convoys are authorized to travel over
predetermined itineraries, that can "handle" their special features.
The presence of roundabouts can cause problems on the itineraries of special
convoys. All roundabout facilities should be preceded by in-depth research (needs
assessment, turn movement templates, special operating procedures). However, Category 1
convoys can generally negotiate the standard roundabouts described in this document, even
the smallest ones: Rg radii of 15 m, circulating roadway of 8 m, and traversable width of 1.50
m. For Categories 2 and 3 convoys, direct or right-turn movements rarely cause problems as
long as certain features are modified (creation of appropriate traversable zones) and special
precautions are taken with respect to vertical devices.
17
Regulated under the terms of the Memorandum No. 97-48 of May 30, 1997.
91
Finally, for left-turns, when the convoys are escorted, traveling against the flow of
traffic can be considered; in this case, the convoys slightly overlap the traversable splitter
islands (which will therefore require removable amenities).
Due to safety considerations, long convoys should be kept away from large
roundabouts that do not provide trajectories that are any better than those of small
roundabouts unless they feature a large entrance radius and a wide circulating roadway-these provisions would allow regular traffic to travel at high speeds.
The construction of a "pierced" roundabout cannot be excluded, closed off through the
use of removable equipment, which represents, in some instances, an attractive solution for
direct movements. In this case however, the passage should be (a) sufficiently slanted in
relation to the axis of the legs,18 in order to prevent a poor perception of the facility upon
approach, and (b) without any hazardous devices or obstacles on the central island (See
2.1.4.).
b) Method
There is no standard approach for taking into account the traffic constraints caused by
special convoys. The facilities have to be designed on a case by case basis, according to the
characteristics of the convoys, the turn movements, the configuration of the intersection, etc.
However, the following method can be applied:
1.
chart a roundabout that meets the facility's requirements and conforms to standard
design practices, without concern for special convoys;
2.
identify the technical features of the convoys that follow the particular itinerary, by
going beyond their administrative classification in order to inquire about their sizes,
their turn radii, etc, as well as the turns executed in the intersection;19
3.
represent the trajectories of special convoys and the areas covered by the wheels and
the overlapping sections (turn movement template);
4.
include traversable areas on the central island, the entrance and exit splitter islands,
and the edges;
5.
identify areas without elevated equipment or removable components for the areas
covered by the overlapping sections.
on the central island, a slope tilted to the outside of the circulating roadway, at a grade
between 4% & 6%;
a counter-slope, at the level of the traversable areas at the edges (as the case may
be);
a raising of the extra-wide areas above the roadway (not to exceed 3 cm);
18
In this case, convoys pass on the left of the entrance splitter island and on the right of the exit splitter
island.
19
A useful resource is "Transports exceptionnels - Dfinition des convois-types et rgles pour la vrification
des ouvrages d'art" (SETRA - DR; October 1983).
92
a rough surface that provides a noticeable contrast, by day and by night, against the
circulating roadway;
separation of these areas from the circulating roadway via regular, retroreflective
markings.
The traversable area of the central island need not be circular; lenticular shapes, for
example, can be considered.
Figure 11: Example of the treatment of the circular island and the edges in order to
facilitate the turns of special convoys moving directly or executing turns.
Traversable extra-wide
areas on the edges
Traversable section of
the central island
Non-traversable area
of the central island
3.2. MAINTENANCE
Due to the fundamental role of maintenance (upkeep of the appurtenances,
enhancement of safety and comfort, preservation of the vegetation and planted areas, etc),
this aspect must already be included at the design stage.
Since the rules governing maintenance remain basically the same as those for the
rest of the path, the reader should refer to the ARP and to the specialized literature. However,
the central islands of roundabouts, which are often landscaped, do invite special comments.
Safety and accessibility problems are tied to the maintenance of these central islands
(in addition to the induced costs and limitations). Everything should therefore be done to
reduce and optimize the tasks involved (grass-cutting, watering, pruning, etc). In this regard,
plant species that are similar in appearance, slow growing, rustic and sober looking should be
chosen. Furthermore, one should bear in mind that the maintenance of a grassy area
requires regular cutting (in particular to meet the visibility requirements stated in 1.3.2.).
When the landscaping requires regular watering, automatic sprinklers should be included, as
well as a system to dispose of excess water. A treatment in stone of the central island can
be considered.
Furthermore, the durability and the sustainability of the landscaped areas must be
ensured, to prevent changes in their functions (safety, embellishment, etc) over time or at
certain periods of the year (in the winter).
93
Finally, during maintenance work, steps must be taken to ensure access to the central
island by maintenance vehicles and protect the safety of the workers. Potential stoppage
areas reserved on central islands reserved for maintenance vehicles must take into account
visibility at time of pull-out and should not be located facing entrances.
The type of pavement used for the circulating roadway and the entrance and exit legs
should be chosen according to the types of demands exerted upon it. The
juxtaposition of different types of pavement should be avoided.
The upper layer should be at least 4 cm thick: its formulation should be suited to the
demands: stability and tear resistance should be top priorities.
Note:
Research laboratories in the area should be consulted in order to determine the best
technical solutions (base and wearing surface), based specifically on local conditions.
Plans should be made for the disposal of the water used on the plants of the central
island (as necessary).
Plans to limit tangential efforts should not lead to the increase of other parameters
(entry radius, inscribed radius of the central island, etc.); such measures would
reduce safety and could increase the cost of the facility. The aforementioned
precautions are generally adequate and do not produce negative effects. However, by
choosing a connecting geometry in accordance with standard designs (radial
alignment, no " reverse curves," etc), one can reduce some of demands made on the
facility.
Moreover, the slope must be regular and moderate (1.5 to 2%).
20
21
This rule should be applied only if possible on existing roads. Construction work in [[text missing]...
doesn't always make it possible.
94
4.1. SIGNING
4.1.1. RIGHT OF WAY
A roundabout intersection is announced by A2523 signs (ROUNDABOUT
INTERSECTION) located at approximately 150 m from the intersection, on each of its legs.
The addition of the M9 sign with the statement "YOU DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY"
was a temporary measure; it is no longer required.
Although not required by current regulations, the placement on each access lane of an
AB3a sign (YIELD) and the marking of its transverse line--T'2 type, 50 cm--is strongly
recommended. The AB3a signs are only repeated on the splitter islands if the entrances
include 2 lanes. We remind the readers that adding blinking lights to the AB3a signs is not
allowed.
On major traffic roads, the placement of an AB7 sign (END OF THROUGH ROAD)
upstream from the roundabout is unnecessary. However, this does not prevent one from
placing AB6 signs (THROUGH ROAD) downstream from the roundabout, on the legs leading
to the major transit route.
22
The strong interdependence between geometry and the proximate or interchange amenities often requires
special studies on signing (road signs, pavement markings and directional signs) and amenities, concurrently
with the general trajectory studies.
23
95
On the central island, the only regulatory sign that must be placed in front of each
entrance is the B21-1 sign (MANDATORY DIRECTION), to the exclusion of any other sign
(J4, B1, B21f, etc). The B21-1 sign is placed on the axis of the direction of the entry lane at
approximately 20 m from the YIELD line (See Figure 19).
The B1 sign (WRONG WAY) is only useful on legs made up of one single entrance
(such as a roundabout as part of an interchange).
Figure 19: Placement guidelines for signs and markings
AB3a+ M9c : YIELD
A25
B21-1
J5
Between 100 et 150m
AB6 (as needed)
D42b (green)
E42
D21A (green)
D21A (white)
D61 (green)
+
D 61 (white)
96
E42
The diagram should attempt to provide the best possible representation of the layout
of the intersection. If there are more than four legs, or if they are very irregularly arranged
around the circulating roadway, the legs of the diagram should be separated by 45 angles or
by multiples of 45.
Around the circulating roadway, exits should be announced by D21 signs. These
signs are placed on posts located on the splitter islands. The positions of connecting roads
should not be mentioned (indications such as "OTHER DIRECTIONS" are prohibited).
Furthermore, the position of direct right-turn lanes is indicated via a D31 sign.
4.1.4. DELINEATORS
The splitter islands are announced by J5 delineators, located at the center of the
island heads. The use of any other warning device (such as J4 delineators, delineations, J11
delineators, etc) could reduce the intersection's comprehensibility. These devices should not
be used on new facilities.
T2 (0,50 m)
Continuous (3u)
L/2=58,50 m
Continuous
(3 u)
T3 (3 u)
L = 117 m
(for V85 = 90 km/h)
97
98
Safety barriers should never be placed on the central island and the splitter islands: they are very hazardous due to the almost completely
trajectories
likely
to
be
followed
by
out-of-control
vehicles.
24
Safety Barrier is the term employed in French to designate all restraining devices.
25
4.3. ILLUMINATION
In general, roundabout intersections in rural areas do not require illumination (similarly
to other at-grade intersections). Indeed, except when illuminated areas are in the immediate
vicinity, illumination has not made any positive impact on the nighttime safety of roundabouts.
In fact, illumination has some drawbacks:
-
the investment costs can be high (varying according to the chosen solution, the size
of the roundabout and the proximity of a power source);
maintenance and power costs are high (over 15 years, these add up to between 1 and
1.5 times the initial investment costs);26
poles are obstacles that are both hazardous and difficult to isolate (See 4.2.).
However, the roundabout must be illuminated if at least one of its legs is illuminated or
if a brightly lit area is near the roundabout.
If the goal is to improve the roundabout's nighttime visibility, one can consider a
"staging" of the facility (indirect lighting of the approaches or, most often, of the central
island).27
In any event, lighting poles located on the central islands of roundabout intersections
should be avoided (just like any other hazardous obstacle or device). If, however, for some
special reason, the lighting cannot be placed on the outside of the circulating roadway, a
central pole may be considered,28 as long as the radius of the central island (Ri ) is at least 10
m.29 This arrangement is also discouraged for Ri values greater than 20 m (poles too high,
requiring excessive illumination power). Furthermore, luminaires should never be placed on
the edges of the central island or on the splitter islands.
26
For costs, please refer to "The Illumination of Roundabout Intersections" SETRA - CETUR; 1991
27
In case of doubt, a wise and safe thing to do is to make room, at the construction stage, for conduits to
accommodate possible inside lighting from the central island.
28
Sometimes, the placement of a central pole causes fewer problems than several luminaires around the
circulating roadway, so close to the road that they would have to be protected by safety barriers (See 4.2.).
29
99
GLOSSARY
This glossary provides simplified definitions of the main technical terms used in this
guide. It is not intended to be exhaustive and, for the sake of clarity, it has been limited to the
specific meanings of the terms found in this publication. These definitions are aimed mostly
at eliminating all ambiguities due to terminology, and pertain essentially to terms related to the
design of intersections.
Acceleration lane
At-grade intersection
Capacity
Center Lane
Channelization island
Channelization (divergence)The splitting of two flows coming from the same direction into
two separate directions.
Conflict
Convergence
Corridor
Criss-crossing
Criss-crossing accident
Curb
1
Within an interurban at-grade intersection, a traffic corridor generally only includes one traffic lane and
therefore becomes undistinguishable from it.
100
Deceleration lane
Delay time
Displacement
The radius of the arc of the circle connecting the outside curbs
of the entry/exit lane of a secondary leg and the roadway of the
main axis.3
Entry lane
101
Exit lane
Four-way intersection
Geometric delay
Grade-separated intersection
or interchange
An intersection where the exchanges are separated
from each other and processed away from the main axes (in
order to reduce conflicts along intersecting paths).
Graded shoulder
Interchange
Intersection
Intersection
Island tip
102
Island tip
Leg
Legibility
Main road
Marks (u.v.p.)
Median strip
Moving mask
Partial intersection
103
Peak thirtieth hour traffic The thirtieth highest hourly flow observed over a period of one
year. This flow is oftentimes used to calculate the size needed
for an intersection's components.
Point of exchange
Reserved capacity
Ring Road
Ring
Roadway width
Roundabout intersection
Secondary road
Shy distance
Sight triangle
Signalized intersection
Splitter island
104
Staggered T intersection An at-grade intersection with four legs, but whose two
secondary legs are offset (but still close enough to operate as a single
facility) in such a way that the direct movements of the secondary road
are transformed into two consecutive, reverse turns (to the right and to
the left, or the opposite).
Storage Capacity
Storage lane
T-shaped intersection
Through traffic
Traffic flow
Transition lane
105
Vehicle off-tracking
Y-shaped intersection
106
107
BIBLIOGRAPHY
GENERAL DESIGN AND GEOMETRY
C.1.
SETRA, October
C.2.
Traitement des tourne--gauche; les amnagements faible cot. Note d'information , srie
"circulation-scurit-exploitation", n 70. SETRA, novembre 1989.
(The treatment of left turns: Low-cost facilities. Memorandum in the series "Traffic-Safety-Operation,"
No. 70 SETRA, November 1989.)
C.6.
INVESTMENT EVALUATIONS
1.1.
Instruction relative aux mthodes d'valuation des investissements routiers en rase campagne et
en milieu urbain. D.R., juillet 1995.
(Guideline regarding the methods of evaluation of roadwork investments in rural and in urban areas.
D.R., July 1995.)
108
Les dispositifs de retenue- o les mettre? Note d'information srie " circulation-scuritexploitation" n 04. SETRA, fvrier 1986.
(Restraining devices - Where to put them? Memorandum in the series "Traffic-Safety-Operation," No. 04
SETRA, February 1986.)
E.4.
Instruction relative l'agrment et aux conditions d'emploi des dispositifs de retenue des
vhicules contre les sorties accidentelles de chausse. D.S.C.R. ; mai 1988
(Guideline regarding the upgrade and conditions of use of safety barriers to protect vehicles against
accidental exiting of the roadway. D.S.C.R. May 1988.)
E.5.
L'clairage des carrefours sens giratoire . Guide technique . SETRA - CETUR; 1991.
(The Illumination of Roundabout Intersections. A Technical Guide. SETRA - CETUR, 1991.)
E.6.
Guide de l'quipement des routes interurbaines. SETRA ( paratre)
(Guide to amenities for interurban roads. SETRA (upcoming).)
u
ROADWAY
Ch.1. Nf P 98-302. Chausses. bordures et caniveaux prfabriqus en bton. AFNOR, juin 1992.
(NF P 98-302. Roadways. Curbs and prefabricated concrete gutters. AFNOR, June 1982.)
u CROSSINGS
U.1.
I.C.T.A.V.R.U.: Instruction sur les conditions Techniques d'Amnagement des Voies Rapides
Urbaines. CETUR, 1990.
(I.C.T.A.V.R.U.: Instructions on the Technical Conditions for the Construction or Urban Thoroughfares.
CETUR, 1990.)
U.2.
Ville plus sre, quartier sans accidents. Savoir-faire et techniques. CETUR, 1990.
(A safer city, accident-free neighborhoods. Know-how and technologies. CETUR, 1990.)
U.3.
Guide technique des carrefours urbains. CERTU ( paratre).
(Technical guide on urban intersections. CERTU (upcoming).)
u CITY
D.1.
BYPASSES
u TRAFFIC
T.1.
Temps d'attente et longueur de queues en carrefour interurbain sans feux ( le logiciel OCTAVE.
Note d'information srie "circulation-scurit-exploitation" n 44. SETRA, septembre 1986.
(Wait times and queue lengths at interurban non-signalized intersections (with the OCTAVE Software).
Memorandum in the series "Traffic-Safety-Operation," No. 21 SETRA, September 1986.)
T.2.
Capacit des carrefours giratoires interurbains, premier resultants. Note d'information srie
"circulation-scurit-exploitation" n 44. SETRA., aot 1987.
(The capacity of interurban roundabouts, preliminary data. Memorandum in the series "Traffic-Safety-
109
AND VISIBILITY
V.1.
Vitesse pratique et gomtrie de la route. Note d'information srie "circulation-scuritexploitation" n 10. SETRA, avril 1986.
(Traveling speed and road geometry. Memorandum in the series "Traffic-Safety-Operation," No. 10
SETRA, April 1986.)
V.2.
Mesures de vitesse et ses applications . Guide. SETRA, 1997.
(Speed measurements and their applications. Technical guide. SETRA, 1997)
V.3.
u SAFETY
S.1.
Scurit des routes et des rues. SETRA- CETUR, septembre 1992.
(The safety of roads and streets. SETRA-CETUR, September 1992.)
S.2.
La scurit des giratoires en rase campagne. Club d'changes d'exprience sur les routes
dpartementales rgion Normandie, dcembre 1995.
(The safety of rural roundabouts. Discussion club on departmental roads - Normandy Region, December
1995.)
S.7.
110
Transports exceptionnels Dfinition des convoies types et rgles pour la verification des
ouvrages d'art. SETRA DR, octobre 1982.
(Special convoys: definition of convoys. Types and verification guidelines for projects. SETRA - DR,
October 1982.)
111
APPENDICES
112
113
APPENDIX
1:
THE SAFETY OF
INTERSECTIONS
AT-GRADE
Roundabout intersections
N = J. 0.15 10-5.QTE.F c
where:
where:
J
Ts
Tp
F bra =
F voie =
Fc
J
QTE
Fc
The values of the annual ratios for the calculation of Fc are as follows (in accidents/108 v.km):
1991: 18.8; 1992:17.9; 1993:17.0; 1994: 15.9; 1995: 15.0; 1996: 14.1
For more information on this issue, refer to "Road and Street Safety" (SETRA, CETUR, 1992).
See the SETRA Memorandum (Traffic/Safety/Operations Series) "Accidents at intersections: the use of
models to predict average accidents rates" (to be published in 1998), whose results are excerpted from the
INRETS report No. 185 (T. Brenac; 1994).
3
In the absence of any other formula, its use can be admitted (as a first approximation) for a wider range:
between 2,000 and 40,000 v/d on the main axis, and 0 to 13,000 on the secondary axis.
4
There is no adjustment coefficient available in relation to a studied time frame specific to a roundabout.
The coefficient used for standard at-grade intersections can however be used: this will result in an excessive
approximation of the number of predictable accidents.
114
Seriousness of Accidents
Fatalities:
Fatalities:
Serious injuries:
Serious injuries:
Light injuries:
Light injuries:
115
A left turn refuge (possibly very short in length) is a very effective solution to reduce
rear collisions. In the case of T-shaped intersections or their accesses, the shoulder on the
opposite side of the secondary leg can be used by the vehicle coming from the rear, that was
surprised to see the vehicle making the left turn, to make an emergency avoidance maneuver
by shifting to the right.
However, this should only be seen as a partial solution, less effective than a
dedicated left-turn slip lane.
Raised islands (with traversable curbs, painted in white and featuring the J5 marker at
the front, but usually unlit) provide greater safety than merely painted islands, by offering an
improved perception of the intersection and a real protection to left-turning vehicles. These
types of accidents can thus be reduced by 50 to 80%. Collisions with raised islands are still
very rare.
3. ROUNDABOUT INTERSECTIONS
In general, roundabouts are quite safe (See 1.). However, some configurations can markedly
reduce their safety levels. This is the case for oblong roundabouts, or pseudo-roundabouts
and, to a lesser degree, for roundabouts made more complicated by the addition of transition
lanes. Furthermore, large roundabouts are not as safe as smaller roundabouts.
As a general rule, the inclusion of medium width entries producing trajectory
constraints5 will improve safety by reducing speeds upon entering and on the circulating
roadway.
The major types of accidents that occur on roundabouts involve entering vehicles
losing control, landing on the central island, collisions at the entries and, to a lesser extent,
losses of control on the circulating roadway.
Losses of control
Loss of control upon entering a roundabout is the most common and by far the
most lethal type of accident occurring on roundabouts outside of urban areas. Among the
contributing factors to these accidents we often find a poor perception of the approach to the
facility (strong reversing curve, for example), high approach speeds, as well as other factors,
such as the absence of a clear break in the outline of the path of the road (i.e., an impression
of continuity produced by trees or luminaires aligned on one the roundabout's legs). Most of
these losses of control only cause property damage, but the consequences are always more
serious if the central island features hazardous obstacles or devices.
Most roundabouts experience these types of accidents. Risks are increased in rural
areas, at night--although there apparently aren't more nighttime accidents on unlit
roundabouts than on illuminated roundabouts--and especially during the first few months after
the commissioning of a new facility.
5
This constraint must be located at the leg's termination onto the circulating roadway, and not upstream:
otherwise, arrangements such as "reversing curves" will often reduce safety.
116
criss-crossing accidents at the exits, mostly on 2-lane exits where the amount of
traffic does not justify such a wide size;
frontal collisions on the circulating roadway (with a vehicle traveling the wrong way).
Although deliberate violations are hard to prevent, these types of accidents are often
caused by the misunderstandings generated by highly complex facilities (inclusion of
special lanes, for example).
117
Out of concern for creating a facility that is suited to the existing traffic, and not as part of a cost evaluation,
which is supposed to the add up all the lost times in all directions over an entire year.
118
3. ROUNDABOUT INTERSECTIONS
3.1. FACTORS IMPACTING CAPACITY
The geometric design of a roundabout will have an impact on the capacity of its
various legs. Some geometric features can be mutually combined, positively or negatively.
These are the most important features:
-
the width of the entry (le) (and not the number of entry lanes); the impact of a widening
of the entrance is however restricted by the width of the circulating roadway (la);
the width of the circulating roadway (la), that must be restricted out of safety concerns;
the width of the splitter island (li ), which influences the friction caused by the outgoing
traffic from the leg with the island;
the radius of the central island (Ri ), which can impact capacity positively or negatively,
particularly when the values are small.
119
The impact on capacity produced by the angle and the radius of the entry (Re) is
generally negligible if one remains within acceptable safety limits. Moreover, the size of a
roundabout only has a minimal impact on the capacity of its entries.
To summarize, the only frequently applicable parameters to increase the capacity of
an entry are its width and, to a lesser extent, the width of the splitter island (li ).
Determine the entering flows Qe, the exiting flows Qs, and the turning flows Qt, based
on the origin-destination matrix (in uvp/h, applying a coefficient of 2 for trucks, and of
0.5 for two-wheel vehicles);
2.
Determine the corresponding exiting flow Qs' according to the width of the splitter
island:
Qs' = Qs (15 - li )/15, where Qs' = 0 if li > 15 m;
3.
Determine the Qs obstructing traffic, based on Qt, Qs' and the width of the circulating
roadway (la);
Qg = (Qt + 2/3 Qs') (1 - 0.085 [la - 8]);
4.
5.
120
121
APPENDIX
3:
GEOMETRIC
DELAY
INTERSECTIONS
AT
Table 2 -- Estimate of the geometric delay according to the type of intersection and maneuvers,
light vehicles.
Standard
at-grade
Intersection
Roundabout Intersection
Maneuver:
direct
left turn
right turn
main road
12s
7s
main road
15s
11s
Geometric delays for trucks should be increased by 75% compared to the figures for
light vehicles.
These values should be understood as orders of magnitude. For two intersections
belonging to the same category, the average geometric delay will vary considerably
depending on the approach speed, the design of the intersection, the right of way hierarchy on
the secondary road, as well as the context and the types of movements, etc.
To calculate the aggregate geometric delay (RGC) over a period of one year, the
following simplified formulas can be applied:
for a roundabout intersection:
where:
- RGC is expressed in hours;
- traffic flows are expressed in u.v.p. with a coefficient of 1.75 for a truck;
- Qs is the TMJA (both directions combined) on the secondary axis;
- Qech is the exchange TMJA between the two axes, defined as the sum of the turning
traffic directions;
- QTE is the roundabout's overall entering daily traffic.
122
123
APPENDIX
4:
ESTIMATE OF THE
PERCENTILE) SPEED
V85
(85
"In order to take into account the actual traveling speeds of users, and
in accordance with international standards, the V85 speed is generally applied,
namely the speed under which 85% of all users drive, under fluid (unimpeded)
traffic conditions. This speed can be estimated on the basis on the functions
or the nomographs below, which translate the results of studies on the relations
between geometry and speed. The "DIAVI" software can also be used to
estimate the traveling speeds at each position of a facility."
Excerpted from the ARP document.
Figure 1 -- The V85 speed as a function of the radius.
V(km/h)
V(m/s)
120
V 85=120/(1+346/R
1,5
2x2v
30
3v et 2v (6 et 7m)
100
1,5
V 85 =102/(1+346/R
25
2v (6 m )
80
V 85 = 92/(1+346/R
1,5
20
)
60
15
40
10
20
R(m)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
Figure 2 -- The V85 speed as a function of the ramp (> 250 m).
V(km/h)
V(m/s)
140
35
120
30
V85 =
92 - 0,31p
100
2x2v
25
3v et 2v
(6 et 7m)
80
20
2v (5m)
60
15
40
10
20
P(%)
0
124
10
125
APPENDIX 5:
This method can be applied quite easily--all it requires is an operator and a stopwatch-and be completed quite rapidly (seldom more than 3 to 15 minutes per intersection, if the
traffic on the main axis is low).
PRACTICAL CONDITIONS
While observing, the operator can refrain from measuring times if the conditions of
visibility are clearly adequate (visibility of more than 300 m, for example) or inadequate
(visibility of less than 100 m).
Whenever t3 is less than t for one of the sight triangles, the intersection can be found
not to meet the visibility requirement; the operator can therefore limit himself to the most
unfavorable measurement if he is able to measure it a priori. Moreover, from a practical
standpoint, the measurement of the visibility times can be stopped after the third insufficient
time.
If the visibility is satisfactory at the point of observation (at 4 or 15 m), one must
ensure that, as one approaches the line, no visual obstacle will markedly disrupt the sight
triangle that was created.
The measurement must be sufficiently discrete to avoid producing major changes in
the behaviors of drivers on the main axis.
126
127
0,10
0,20
0,10
0,07
0,07
h v 0,06
h v =0,03
0,18
0,20
0,18
Curb
Roadway
Curb
Roadway
For a small island on a very secondary leg (See Chapter 2.3.4.), this height should not exceed 3 cm.
128
Embedded curbs (Type 12 or 14, for example) are preferred on splitter islands,
because they are more resistant to the possible demands made by turning trucks. Grouted
or extruded curbs could be used, as long as they are not too high to the eye (hv) (See above).
EDGE CURBS
For standard at-grade intersections, the inclusion of edge markings is generally
unnecessary (except when the continuity of a sidewalk must be ensured); stabilized lateral
stripes which may be coated over a width of 1 m9 are enough.
The placement of edge
curbs therefore pertains mostly to rural roundabouts. Although not always necessary, edge
curbs are generally recommended. One should be sure to:
-
maintain, as the case may be, the continuity of crosswalks by implementing the
sidewalk via T type curbs (which are normally reserved for these types of cases).
They should be lowered at a perpendicular angle if there are marked crosswalks on
the road;
maintain the integrity of the shoulder10 (to prevent the digging of ruts by trucks) by
including, if there is no curb, a lowered coated strip 2 m wide, in connection with a
widening of the structure at the entrances and exits. When the curbs are (semi)traversable, these arrangements can also be useful;
avoid interrupting the curb around the circulating roadway, due to the short distance
between one entry and the exit of the next leg (for standard sized roundabouts);
limit their height to a maximum of 14 cm, although less hazardous shoulder curbs, of
which only 6 cm are visible, are preferable;
take into account water drainage, by creating a gutter or, if there is no curb, a swale
between the pavement and the shoulder;
take into account (in parts of the country where this may apply) constraints connected
with wintertime practicability, by limiting the height of the curbs, to avoid impeding
snowplows.
At the entries of the roundabout, it is recommended to have the edge curbs begin (as
applicable):
-
in normal cases: at the H distance (height of the construction triangle of the splitter
island = Rg) of the YIELD line;
in the case of a leg with 2X2 lanes, at the front of the splitter island (widening of public
transit lines and end of the railings);
when the entry includes inflected trajectories (See Chapter 3.2.7.): at the end of the
alignment to the right.
Up to 2 m, for some entry and exit lanes of divided intersections on 2X2 lane roads.
10
Experience shows that in some areas, curbs feature tire marks or signs of unintentional crossings.
129
Furthermore, the starting point of the curbs at the entries should be lowered or offset.
Edge curbs at the exits are generally interrupted at the same point as the entry edge
curbs, but it is unnecessary to extend them beyond H.
130
131
NOTES
technical guide for designing grade intersections on main roads outside urban
areas.
It follows the more general guidelines given in the document "Main
Road Development" and provides further principles to be taken in account
when developing projects for new infrastructure or the improvement of the
existing network, together with the method to be used for selecting the
junction type. It makes recommendations for defining the geometric aspects
of the projected developments and improvements.