# ZAMAN University

Civil Engineering Department
Transportation Engineering - CE 451

Field Work Report

Intersection
Performance
Analysis

Submitted by: Makara SOY
Mengheng LIM
Monichot SAMRETH
Nararoth Theng
Phearum Bol
Submitted to: Maksat Omarov
December 29th, 2015

Content
Page

1

Introduction:.................................................................................................2

2

Location.........................................................................................................3

3

Goal and Objectives.....................................................................................4

4

Procedure......................................................................................................4

5

Calculations:.................................................................................................5
5.1 The critical Volume..........................................................5
5.2 The Average Delay:..........................................................8
5.3 Optimal cycle length......................................................12

6

Proposed new system design......................................................................15

7

Errors and Conclusion...............................................................................17

8

Reference.....................................................................................................18

1 | Page

2 LOCATION Phase C Phase B Phase A Phase D Figure 1: Location of intersection between Russia Blvd and Monivong Blvd (Map View) Figure 2: Location of intersection between Russia Blvd and Monivong Blvd (Aerial View) 3 | Page .

In morning on weekend. The observation points are at the entrance of the vehicles entering each phase. so the counting must also count the turning left vehicles. Therefore. so the best strategy to get the data is to divided into two parts for each boulevards.3 GOAL AND OBJECTIVES Our goals for this field work are to determine:  The Level of Service (LOS) of the intersection  Optimum cycle length for the intersection In order to achieve these goals. The rate of the arrival is counted in every 4 minutes for 5 times. we have decided to do this fieldwork at 8:00am on Saturday. Throughout what we have been to this intersection many time. we must set our objectives as below: o Primary objective is to measure the vehicles arrival rate for each phase. time allowed for vehicle for go straight and turn right is different from turning left. o Secondary objective is to measure the vehicle headway for each phase. 4 | Page . Therefore we able to count the critical volume in nonpeak hour. This fieldwork have conducted around one hour. period for red. The headway is measure when the traffic light turns green and the vehicles start to move. On the Monivong Blvd. 26th. there were not many vehicles used this intersection. Lastly. red and yellow) 4 PROCEDURE Since the intersection serve between only two boulevards. o Lastly is to measure the cycle length of each phase (green. we observed that we faced the peak critical volume every time. the period between the front vehicles to the arrival of the next vehicle is counted as headway. yellow and green in different phases are determined. 2015. Monivong Blvd and Russian Blvd.

5 | Page .

this result in queuing blocking the path for vehicle that desire to turn right.2 TH (veh /4min) 25 28 24 25 23 25 Phase C RT (veh /4min) 40 39 45 45 49 43. We want to clarify that many people want to turn right while using this road. However. One other reason that we have observed that phase A experience a lot of vehicle wanting to go through whether it is peak hour or not. we divide the Phase C into 3 columns.5 CALCULATIONS: 5.6 LT (veh /4min) 13 10 8 9 11 10.4 5 3 2 4 1 3 Phase B LT+TH +RT1 (veh /4min) 23 28 52 32 41 35. compare to Phase A there are intersection road which able the driver to turn right without waiting to traffic-light.1 THE CRITICAL VOLUME Table 1: Survey from field in Regular Hour from 08:00 to 09:00 (Count per 4min) N0 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Phase A LT+TH RT (veh (veh /4min) /4min) 81 78 73 75 80 77. there are not many vehicle trying to turn-right. Throughout what we have gone to the filed.6 13 13 10 13 10 11.right and turn-left. 1 TH= Go through LT= Left-Turn RT= Right-Turn 6 | Page .8 Table 2: Survey from field in Regular Hour from 08:00 to 09:00 (Convert to vehicle per hour) N0 1 2 3 4 5 Av g Phase A LT+TH RT (veh/h) (veh/h) 1215 1170 1095 1125 1200 1161 75 45 30 60 15 45 Phase B LT+TH +RT (veh/h) 345 420 780 480 615 528 TH (veh/h) 375 420 360 375 345 375 Phase C RT (veh/h) 600 585 675 675 735 654 LT (veh/h) 195 150 120 135 165 153 Phase D RT+TH LT (veh/h) (veh/h) 555 510 540 465 450 504 165 165 150 165 150 159 In table2. Those 3 columns represent the arrival rate of vehicle to go straight. turn.2 Phase D RT+TH L (veh (veh /4min) /4min) 37 34 36 31 30 33.

Figure 3: Arrival Rate for each phase From this figure.After us covert the arrival rate into vehicle per hour.  From field: 7 | Page . then we able to draw the diagram of the intersection with the number of vehicle do their maneuver on this intersection. we can able to calculate the maximum critical volume that the intersection can accommodate from survey at field.

61 4. given that the startup lost time (l1) is equal to 2s.6 2. the saturation headway is shown in the table 3 below.56 Phase D Headway (sec/veh) 4.87 2. Table 3: Headway survey from the field in Regular Hour.0 3. Determine the maximum sum of critical volumes that the intersection can accommodate. and the clearance lost time (l2) is equal to 2s.17 in the book: A signalized intersection having four phase has a cycle length equal to 149s.46 Phase C Headway (sec/veh) 5. we able to calculation the maximum sum of critical volume: 8 | Page .Time (08:00-09:00) N0 1 2 3 4 5 Average Phase A Headway (sec/veh) 4.31 2.12 3.09 2.07 3. In addition.4 2.3 1.8 2.87 2.03 Phase B Headway (sec/veh) 4.28 3.84 2.1 3.39 3.0 3.6 2. The maximum Critical Volume The maximum sum of critical lane volumes that a signalized intersection can accommodate can be regarded as a measure for the intersection capacity which expressed as From Equation 4.9 3.84 Calculation: From the equation above.3 3.

2 THE AVERAGE DELAY: For isolated intersection. 9 | Page . However. each time have 4 minutes. therefore we can able to determining the level of service (LOS) according to table 4. We can conclude that the signalized intersection cannot accommodate the amount of vehicle. Moreover. Therefore. After the calculating the average delay of the different traffic movement at a signalized intersection. delay is commonly the measure of effectiveness used to characterize how well the intersection is performing. 5.95 veh/h).4 in the book. LOS A B C D E F Control Delay (s/veh) 0-10 10-20 20-35 35-55 55-80 >80 Table 4: LOS for Signalized Intersections (From table 4.Compare these two result. the approach need the arrival rate of vehicle and total saturation flow rate in hourly. This result in congestion both in normal and peak hours. The arrival rate of vehicle need to include all vehicles is trying to go-straight. Those parameter is given in the table below. But if we want more accurate result we need to observe it not by minutes but by hourly or at least one time 15 minutes. in order to get the total saturation flow rate. we have to multiply saturation flow rate per lane with the number of lane in each phase. we can see that the maximum critical volume from survey at field (VC =3579 veh/h) is larger than the maximum critical volume from formula (V C = 997. this is the result of this experiment have been done five time. turn-right and turn-left.4 in the book) Before we able to compute the average delay. the saturation flow rate we calculate is the flow rate per hour per lane.

6 345 420 780 480 615 528 780 820 1087 1254 1698 1127.2 veh/h /lane) 720 675 690 630 600 663 878 1090 2000 1500 1384 1370. Since the vehicle that have turned right does not affect the intersection.8 570 570 480 510 510 528 ( veh/h /lane) 720 1000 1241 1090 1200 1050.Table 4: The total arrival rate and saturation flow rate per lane from field in regular hour (08:00-09:00) N0 1 2 3 4 5 Avg Phase A *Arrival Saturation Phase B Arrival Saturation Phase C *Arrival Saturatio Phase D Arrival Saturation Rate Flow rate Rate Flow rate Rate n Flow Rate Flow rate ( (veh/h) (veh/h /lane) (veh/h) (veh/h /lane) (veh/h) rate (veh/h) 884 1165 1254 1267 1578 1229. 10 | P a g e .4 1215 1170 1095 1125 1200 1161 *Note: The arrival rate phase A and C does not take into account the Right-Turn rate.

 Determine the average delay in s/veh for an intersection approach in each phase and also determine the corresponding LOS  Phase A  Phase B: 11 | P a g e .

 Phase C:  Phase D: 12 | P a g e .

Signalized intersection Design The intersection has four phases which phase A serves west-east left.6 veh/h Phase B= 1127. though. Phase C serves north-south through and right traffic while phase D left turn only.2 veh/h Phase D= 1370. and right movement. Assume the start-up lost time (l1) is equal to 2s.5. Phase B serves east-west and follow the same as Phase A movement. and the clearance lost time (l 2) is equal to 2s.8 veh/h Phase C= 1050. Using the Webster model. therefore the total lost times is 4s/phase. determine the optimal cycle length for the intersection and determine the effective green time each phase.4 veh/h 13 | P a g e . the optimal cycle length can be calculated by using the Webster formula. Number of Saturation flow rate per lane: Phase A= 1229.3 OPTIMAL CYCLE LENGTH Based on minimizing the approach delay at signalized intersection. and the following saturation flows and arrival rate is shown below. The yellow interval in this intersection is 3s.

Throughout the intersection.08 159 2100 0. Therefore.25 Phase C 375 2100 0.18 Phase D 504 2100 0. we get the average arrival rate is Phase A: V (TH+LT) = 1161veh/h Phase B: V (RT+TH+LT) =528 veh/h Phase C: V (TH) = 375veh/h V (LT) = 153veh/h Phase D: V (RT+TH) =504veh/h V (LT) = 159veh/h Vij Sj Vij/Sj Phase A 1161 4900 0. there are different lane in each phase.8 x 2 = 2250 veh/h Phase C= 1050.08 14 | P a g e .6 x 4 =4900 veh/h Phase B= 1127.25 Phase B 528 2250 0.4 x 2 = 2740 veh/h The minimum saturation flow rate between Phase C and Phase D is chosen to be used of 2100veh/h From Table 2.25 153 2100 0. the total saturation flow rate in each phase is: Phase A= 1229.2 x 2 = 2100 veh/h Phase D= 1370.

6 PROPOSED NEW SYSTEM DESIGN 15 | P a g e .

Since the previous cycle length is not very efficient and is cause congestion during normal and peak hour alike. for location C and D (turn-right and go through) green time is 40 seconds and finally for location C and D (left-turn) the green time is 20 seconds. location B (from the Canadia building) green time is 50 seconds. In total the cycle new cycle length is 180 seconds including the yellow time is 3 seconds and clearance time is 2 seconds each. 16 | P a g e . The propose green time for a new system are: for location A (from the government building) green time is 50 seconds.

These errors are some factors that we have chosen to ignore such as motorbikes 17 | P a g e . at the end of the day there are still errors cause by us and the behavior of the drivers alike.Figure 4: New proposed design system 7 ERRORS AND CONCLUSION However.

and tuk-tuks. in which the preferable time are 15 minutes or hourly). Since the level of service of this intersections are mostly D and E we have proposed a new design above to improve the traffic situation. the traffic could greatly become better. the vehicle operators that violate the traffic rules and drivers that used the wrong lane for wrong purposes (ex. Last but not least. he decided to use the go through lane casing the delay for other vehicle) this factor also affects the volume and the headway. One more point that have caused errors are the intersection near the Former Buddha Stupa which has two intersections that causes the unnecessary delay for the vehicles wanting to go further. we just focus on cars and trucks. They have caused changes in vehicles headway and volume discharge rate. One thing that could improve the situation is that people should obey the traffic rules and have better understanding on how their actions will affect other people and the condition of the traffic flow. we noticed that their presence on the road have affected the traffic flow significantly. 18 | P a g e . On the other hand. calculated and later on proposed a new design is not very accurate due to errors that we have shown above and the time that we have work on the field (which is only 4 minutes 5 times. which resulted in the fluctuated number of data we have collected. We did not take into account for them. The driver intended to turn right but as he was in a hurry. Moreover. the data that we have taken from the field.

J. A. Garber N. Cengage 2011 19 | P a g e .8 REFERENCE “Transportation Infrastructure Engineering: A Multimodal Integration" by Hoel L... W. SI Edition. Sadek A..