ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FOR HEAVY VEHICLES

AT SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS

By Shou-min Tsao l and Song-wei Chu 2

(Reviewed by the Urban Transportation Division)

ABSTRACT: The objective of this paper is to investigate the effects of heavy vehicles in
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

through lanes and in left-turn lanes. Headway samples of 1,320 passenger cars and 722
heavy vehicles were measured in the field. Average headways were calculated for traffic
flows of all passenger cars and all heavy vehicles in through lanes and left-turn lanes,
respectively. The results show that different adjustment factors should be applied for
through heavy vehicles and for left-turning heavy vehicles in calculating saturation flow
rates. The adjustment factors for left turns should also be differentiated in accordance
with the percent of heavy vehicles in traffic flow. Almost all estimated adjustment factors
were found to be less than the corresponding figures suggested by the 1985 "Highway
Capacity Manual." A revised procedure is recommended for evaluating traffic conditions
in Taipei. Similar studies may be desirable for cities in other parts of the world to verify
the validity of the current procedures.

INTRODUCTION
Saturation flow rate is a key factor in the capacity analysis of signalized intersections. The
current practice in estimating saturation flow rates of an intersection approach under prevailing
conditions is by applying adjustment factors for vehicle composition and turning movements to
ideal saturation flow rates. For example, the adjustment factor for heavy vehicles was used to
account for the effects of through heavy vehicles relative to through passenger cars. The ad-
justment factor for left turns was used to account for the effects of left-turning passenger cars
relative to through passenger cars.
In current practice, the effects of left-turning heavy vehicles were accounted for by multiplying
the adjustment factors for left turns and for heavy vehicles. This approach implies equal left-
turn adjustment factors between heavy vehicles and passenger cars, and equal heavy-vehicle
adjustment factors for vehicles in through and left-turn lanes. The objective of this study is to
investigate the effects of heavy vehicles in through and left-turn lanes in order to derive the
adjustment factors for left-turning heavy vehicles.

CURRENT PRACTICES
In estimating saturation flow rates, adjustment factors are applied to account for the effects
of roadway, vehicle composition, and turning percentages other than the saturation flow rates
under ideal conditions. According to the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation 1985),
the saturation flow rate of an approach of a signalized intersection can be calculated by the
following equation:

S = So x N x f w x f< x 1;, X f,,/> X f" X fRT X fn x f/lv (I)

where S = saturation flow rate for the subject lane group under prevailing conditions in vehicles
per hour of effective green time (VPHG); S" = ideal saturation flow rate in passenger cars per
hour of green time per lane (PCPHGPL); N = number of lanes in the lane group; = adjust- tw
ment factor for lane width; fg = adjustment factor for approach grade; 1;, = adjustment factor
for the existence of and the parking activities in a parking lane; fhl> = adjustment factor for the
blocking effect of local buses stopping within the intersection area; f" = adjustment factor for
area type; f~r = adjustment factor for right turns in the lane group; fLi = adjustment factor
for left turns in the lane group; and tHV = adjustment factor for heavy vehicles, where a heavy
vehicle was defined as any vehicle having more than four tires touching the pavement.
If all of the aforementioned factors except for fLT and fHV remain constant, (1) may be
simplified as shown in Table 1, in which SLi and SHY = adjusted saturation flow rates for left
turns and heavy vehicles, respectively. Thus, the same heavy-vehicle adjustment factor is used

'Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Nat. Taiwan Univ .. Taipei, Taiwan.
"PhD Candidate, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Nat. Taiwan Univ., Taipei. Taiwan.
Note. Discussion open until September 1, 1995. To extend the closing date one month, a written request must
be filed with the ASCE Manager of Journals. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and possible
publication on December 2R. 1993. This paper is part of the Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 121, No.
2. March/April, 1995. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-947X/95/0002-0150-0157/$2.00 + $.25 per page. Paper No. 75R6.

150 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 TABLE 1. Simplified Equations for Saturation Flow Rates

Traffic composition Through lane Left-turn lane

(1) (2) (3)
Passenger cars only 5 = 5' X j~H X fIT = 5' 5 = 5' X f~1I X fll = 5' X f~1
Mixed traffic 5 = 5' X fllv X fll = 5' X fm 5 = 5' x fill X f~ I

= Sill' X fll
= 5 11 X f~1I

TABLE 2 Adjustment Factors for Saturation Flow Rate

United United
Factor States Kingdom Australia Sweden Japan Canada Taiwan
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

Road width Yes
Lane width Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Grade Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Heavy vehicles Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Right turns Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Left turns Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Bus stopping Yes Yes
Pedestrians Yes Yes Yes Yes
Parking Yes Yes Yes Yes
Site location Yes Yes Yes
Peak hour
Weather Yes
Signal Yes

TABLE 3 Through Car Equivalents (tcu/veh) for Different Types of Vehicle and Turn (Australian Method)

Unopposed Turn
Vehicle type Through Normal Restricted Opposed turn
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Car I 1 1.25 ell
Heavy vehicle 2 2 2.50 c" + I
Note: Source is Akeelik (1981).

for different types of traffic lane. The same left-turn adjustment factor is adopted for different
conditions of traffic composition.
In addition to the factors as considered in the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation
1985), other factors are being used in the United Kingdom (Webster and Cobbe 1966), Sweden
(Bang 1978), Japan (Japanese 1984), Canada (Teply and Jones 1991), and Taiwan (Highway
1990), as shown in Table 2. However, the effects of left-turning heavy vehicles are treated
similarly.
In Australia (Ackcelik 1981) the saturation flow rate is calculated by using the following
equation:
fw x fe
5 = -1.-,-' X 5" (2)

where 5 = estimated saturation flow rate in vehicles per hour; 5" basic saturation flow rate
in through car units per hour; fw = adjustment factor for lane width; f~ = adjustment factor
for approach gradient; and f, = through-car units (TCUs) per vehicle for a particular vehicle
type and turning traffic mix.
The factor j; is calculated by the following:
L c, x q,
1: = --- (3)
q

where q, = flow rate of ith vehicle type in vehicles per hour; q total flow rate in vehicles
per hour; and e, = through car unit of the ith vehicle type, as shown in Table 3.
The "normal" condition in column 3 of Table 3 refers to a site condition with a minimum
turning radius of not less than 15 m, and with no pedestrian disturbances. As with other countries,
the effects of left-turning heavy vehicles are not differentiated.

FIELD MEASUREMENTS
To compare the traffic-flow characteristics of through and left-turning heavy vehicles, two
intersections in Taipei were selected. Headways between successive vehicles in through and in

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 151

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 left-turn lanes were recorded by using a video camera. The selection of intersections for mea-
surement was based on the following criteria:

• Exclusive left-turn lane and protected signal phase for left turns
Grade-separated pedestrian facilities to minimize effects of pedestrians
• Significant proportion of heavy vehicles
• Significant proportion of left-turning vehicles
• Freedom from disturbances from cross streets in dissipating left-turning vehicles;
• No parking allowed
Insignificant disturbances from bus stops

The intersections were selected at Chengte Road and Minchuan West Road (Intersection A),
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

and at Hoping East Road and Hsinsheng South Road (Intersection B) in Taipei. The layouts
of the two intersections are shown in Fig. 1.
According to previous studies (Transportation 1985; Hsu 1982) on the traffic-flow character-
istics in Taipei and in the United States, the headways between vehicles stabilize from the fifth
discharged vehicle after the turn of green. Thus, only the headways after the fifth discharged
vehicle were considered valid and recorded.
The sampling periods were during morning and evening peak hours, when the intersections
were saturated with regular traffic and heavy vehicles. A sample of 2,042 headways, including
1,320 headways for passenger cars and 722 headways for heavy vehicles, were recorded.

HYPOTHESES TESTING
To determine how the collected samples may be grouped, two tests were performed.

1. A test to examine whether the vehicle type of the preceding vehicle would significantly
affect the average headway.
2. A test to examine whether the average headways collected from the two intersections
are significantly different.

Effects of Type of Preceding Vehicles

The test of effects of the type of the preceding vehicles were performed for the following:
Case 1: the average headways between a passenger car preceded by a passenger car or by a
heavy vehicle, as shown in Fig. 2;
Case 2: the average headways between a heavy vehicle preceded by a passenger car or by a
heavy vehicle, as shown in Fig. 3.
Table 4 shows the average headway, variance, and the results of statistical tests. It shows that
the effects of the type of preceding vehicles are insignificant, regardless of a passenger car or
a heavy vehicle.

Effects of Locations of Measurements

Table 5 shows the average headways and variance, and Table 6 shows the results of statistical
tests performed for the passenger cars and heavy vehicles measured at Intersections A and B.
The results show that there is no significant difference between the data collected at the two
intersections. Thus, the measured headways may be grouped together for further analysis.

Hall lHll~
~
--
+--
+--
+--
....--
~
--
+--
+--
....--
~

-----
--+
--+
--+

11inr 11iiir
Intersection A Intersection B

FIG. 1. Layouts of Intersections

FIG. 2.
I-

D
plISSenger
C8I'
t~
Headway for Passenger Cars
,"",vy vehicle
nor
,"",vy vehicle
pusenger
C8I'
h

]1 ~
heIIvy vehicle

FIG. 3. Headway for Heavy Vehicles

'---"--
heIIvy vehicle

152 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 TABLE 4 Data and Results of Z-Test for Preceding Vehicles

THROUGH LEFT-TURNING
Case 1 Case 2 Case 1 Case 2

(1 )
h pp
(2) I
h pH
(3)
h HP
(4) I
(a) Intersection A
h HH
(5)
h pp
(6) I
h PH
(7)
h HP
(8) I h HH
(9)

Number of samples 40 40 40 40
Average headway 40
1.4623 I 1.4H33 40
2.5447 I 2.5H40 40
1.6720 I1.6H26 40
3.2170 I 3.2340
Variance 0.0193 0.01H4 0.0305 0.0204 0.0271 0.0311 0.0344 0.0403
Z-value O.6H 1.10 0.2H 0.44
1.96 1.96 1.% I. %
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Z,,··o_f):"i
Difference [Insignificant] [Insignificant] [Insignificant] [Insignificant]
(b) Intersection B
Number of samples
A verage headway 40
1.4647 I 40
1.4H20 40
2.5430 I 40
2.5H20 40
1.6643 I 40
1.6H 10 40
3.21H7 I 40
3.2330
Variance 0.0160 0.01H3 0.0300 0.0212 (l.()260 0.0313 0.03H4 0.0344
Z-value 0.59 1.09 0.31 0.32
Z.. _().05 1.96 1.96 1.% 1.96
Difference [Insignificant] [Insignificant] [Insignificant] II nsigni ficant]

TABLE 5. Data of Statistical Tests for Intersections

INTERSECTION A INTERSECTION B
Through Left-Turning Through Left-Turning
Passenger Heavy Passenger Heavy Passenger Heavy Passenger Heavy
car vehicle car vehicle car vehicle car vehicle
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9)
Number of samples 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40
Average headway 1.4623 2.5447 1.6720 3.2170 1.4647 2.5430 1.6643 3.21H7
Variance 0.0193 0.0305 0.0271 0.0399 0.0160 0.0300 (l.()260 0.03K4

TABLE 6. Results of Statistical Tests for Intersections

Passenger car Heavy vehicle Passenger car Heavy vehicle
(through) (through) (left-turning) (left-turning)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Z-value O.OHO 0.03H 0.045 0.033
2«(-0.0-" 1.960 1.960 1.460 1.460
Difference [Insignificant] [Insignificant] [Insignificant] [Insignificant]

TABLE 7. Average Headways for Through and Left-Turning Passenger Cars and Heavy Vehicles
Through Left-Turning
Passenger car Heavy vehicle Passenger car Heavy vehicle
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
Number of samples 500 201 500 201
Average headway (s) 1.46 2.54 1.64 3.22
Variance (l.04 0.01 0.07 0.07

STUDY RESULTS
Average Headways

Table 7 shows the average headway and variance for through and left-turning passenger cars
and heavy vehicles, respectively. The average headway for through passenger cars (1.46 s) is
11 % smaller than that for left-turning passenger cars (1.64 s). The average headway for through
heavy vehicles (2.54 s) is 22% smaller than for left-turning heavy vehicles (3.22 s). The differences
are caused by the operating characteristics of through versus left-turning vehicles.
On the other hand. the average headway between through heavy vehicles (2.54 s) is equal to
that between through passenger cars (1.46 s) multiplied by a factor of 1.74, and the average
headway between left-turning heavy vehicles (3.22 s) is equal to that between left-turning pas-
senger cars (1.64 s) multiplied by a factor of 1.96. The differences are caused by the different
operating characteristics between types of vehicles.
The average headways as measured in Taipei are generally smaller than those as measured
in the United States. This is probably because the drivers in Taipei are generally more aggressive

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 153

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 than those in the United States. However, similar considerations may be valid for the left-turning
heavy vehicles in the United States.

Adjustment Factors for Heavy Vehicles

The saturation flow rates for a traffic lane exclusively used for passenger cars or heavy vehicles
can be derived by 3,600 s divided by their respective average headway. Under mixed-traffic
conditions, however, the average headway is a function of the percent of heavy vehicles, as
follows:
(100 - a) x hI' + a x hI/V
h" = 100 (4)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

where h a = average headway under mixed traffic conditions in seconds; hi' = average headway
for exclusive lane for passenger cars in seconds; hI/V = average headway for exclusive lane for
heavy vehicles in seconds; and a = percent of heavy vehicles (%).
Table 8 shows the average headways for through and left-turning traffic under various percent
of heavy vehicles. As expected, the average headways increase with increasing percent of heavy
vehicles. This implies a decreasing saturation flow rate with increasing percent of heavy vehicles.
The adjustment factors for heavy vehicles in through lanes can be derived by the following
equation:

SaT S _ 3,600
II/VT = S-, for T- and (5)
PT II haT
where IHvl = adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in through lanes; Sal = saturation flow rate
in through traffic lane with a% of heavy vehicles in vehicles per hour of green time per lane
(VPHGPL); SI'I = saturation flow rate in through traffic lane exclusively used by passenger
cars in PCPHGPL; hal = average headway in through traffic lane with a% of heavy vehicles
in seconds; and hl'l = average headway in through traffic lane exclusively used by passenger
cars in seconds.
Thus, (5) can be transformed into the following:

hPJ
Il/vT = ~/'
a
(6)

Similarly, the adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in left-turn lanes can be calculated by the
following equation:

(7)

where IHvL = adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in left-turn lanes; haL average headway
in a left-turn lane with a% of heavy vehicles in seconds; hl'L = average headway in a left-turn
lane exclusively used by passenger cars in seconds.
Table 9 shows the adjustment factors for heavy vehicles in through and left-turn lanes under
various percent of heavy vehicles. It indicates that the adjustment required for through heavy
vehicles is less than that for left-turning heavy vehicles. The differences between these two
factors increase with increasing percent of heavy vehicles. This is because of the difficulties in
maneuvering a left-turning heavy vehicle.

TABLE 8 Average Headways for Through and Left-Turning Traffic

HV Percent (%)
Average headway 0 2 4 6 8 10 15 20 25 30
(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 )
Through 1.46 1.48 1.50 1.52 1.55 1.57 1.62 1.68 1.73 1.78
Left-turning 1.64 1.67 1.70 1.73 1.77 1.80 1.88 1.96 2.04 2.11

TABLE 9 Adjustment Factor for Heavy Vehicles

HV Percent (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10 15 20 25 30
(1 ) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 )
Through lanes 1.0 0.99 0.97 0.96 0.94 0.93 0.90 0.87 0.84 0.82
Left-turn lane 1.0 0.98 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.91 0.87 0.84 0.81 0.78
Highway Capacity
Manual (1985) 1.0 0.99 0.98 0.97 0.96 0.95 0.93 0.91 0.8') 0.87

154 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 TABLE 10. Adjustment Factor for Left Turns
HV Percent (%)
0 2 4 6 8 10 15 20 25 30
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11 )

III 0.890 0.886 0.882 0.878 0.875 0.872 0.862 0.857 0.848 0.843
Highway Capacity
Manual (1985) 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95

TABLE 11 Comparisons among Different Procedures

HV Percent (%)
Proce- Adjustment
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

dure factor 0 2 4 6 8 10 15 20 25 30
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) (12)
I III x II/V 0.890 0.881 0.863 0.854 0.837 0.828 0.801 0.774 0.748 0.730
2 IIIP x II/VI. 0.890 0.872 0.854 0.846 0.828 0.810 0.774 0.748 0.721 0.694
3 j;/vr x lUI/ 0.890 (J.877 0.856 0.843 0.823 0.811 0.746 0.746 0.712 0.691

Table 9 also shows that the adjustment factors are systematicalJy smalJer than those calculated
in the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation 1985). It indicates that the effects of heavy
vehicles in Taipei on saturation flow rates are greater than those in the United States. This may
be attributed to the relatively high weight-to-power ratio of heavy vehicles in Taipei.

Adjustment Factors for Left Turns

The adjustment factors for left turns can be derived by the folJowing equation:
3,600. S _ 3,600
for SaT = -h- and aL - h (8)
fiT al_

where fUN = adjustment factor for left turns with passenger cars and heavy vehicles; Sar
saturation flow rate in through traffic lane, with a% of heavy vehicles in VPHGPL; 5,,/.
saturation flow rate in left-turn lane, with a% of heavy vehicles in VPHGPL.
Thus, (8) can be transformed into

(9)

Table 10 shows the adjustment factor for protected left turns in exclusive left-turn lanes under
various percent of heavy vehicles. The adjustment factor in the "Highway Capacity Manual"
(Transportation 1985) is also shown. It indicates that the adjustment factor for left turns decreases
with increasing percent of heavy vehicles. It also shows that the adjustment factors for left turns,
as established in this study, are much smalJer than those suggested by the "Highway Capacity
Manual" (Transportation 1985).

REVISED PROCEDURE
The previous sections demonstrate the folJowing:

1. The heavy vehicle adjustment factors for through and left-turn lanes should be differ-
entiated.
2. The left-turn adjustment factors for passenger cars and heavy vehicles may not be equal
to each other, and should also be differentiated.

Thus, (1), as adopted in the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation 1985), may be
refined as folJows:
S = S" x N x fw x f. x 1;, x j;,,, x f, X fur X fup X FIV/ ( 10)
or

S = S" x N x fw x f. x 1;, X fh" X f, x j;" x fl/VI x filII (II)

where fUI' = adjustment factor for left turns for a traffic stream with passenger cars only; j~.m
= adjustment factor for left turns under mixed traffic conditions; fl/VI = adjustment factor for
heavy vehicles in through traffic lanes; and fliv/. = adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in left-
turn lanes. 5, 5", N,fw,[<, 1;" f"", f,,, and fRr are defined as in (1).
The adjustment factors for heavy vehicles in left-turn lanes as derived from the original
procedure and the revised procedure are compared in Table II. In Table II, the original

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 155

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 procedure is denoted by procedure 1, while the revised procedure is denoted by procedures 2
and 3. In procedure 2, saturation flow rates of passenger cars are adjusted for left turns prior
to heavy vehicles, as shown in (10). In procedure 3, saturation flow rates of passenger cars are
adjusted for heavy vehicles prior to left turns, as shown in (11).
The following case illustrates the derivation of adjustment factor for left-turning heavy ve-
hicles. If the proportion of heavy vehicles in a left-turn lane is 10%, fHy, f~IVI' f,IVI, fu, f~.n"
and f~11/ can be adopted from Tables 9 and 10 as follows. From Table 9, fHv = 0.93; f~1V1 =
0.91; and fHvl = 0.93. From Table IO,fu = 0.89; fup = 0.89; and fUff = 0.872. Therefore,
f~1 x fl/v = 0.89 x 0.930 = 0.828; fUI> x fHvL = 0.89 x 0.910 = 0.810; and f~1V1 x fUll
= 0.93 x 0.872 = O.81\.
As shown in Table 11, the differences between procedures 2 and 3 are insignificant. Therefore,
either procedure may be used for estimating saturation flow rates. The differences between the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

original and the revised procedures generally increase as the percent of heavy vehicles increases.

CONCLUSIONS
This investigation leads to the following conclusions.
In current practices, the adjustment factors for heavy vehicles were established by making
references to through passenger cars. There lies a basic assumption that the left-turn adjustment
factors for passenger cars and heavy vehicles are the same. It also assumes that the heavy vehicle
adjustment factors for through and left-turn movements are the same. In other words, the
interactions between vehicle types and vehicular movements are neglected.
In mixed traffic, the average headways for passenger cars and heavy vehicles are indifferent
to the type of the vehicles immediately ahead.
Two intersections in Taipei were selected for measuring average headways between vehicles.
The samples collected in the two sites are not statistically different from one another. Therefore,
the samples were pooled for further analyses.
The average headways for passenger cars and heavy vehicles in through traffic lanes were
found to be 1.46 sand 2.54 s, respectively, a ratio of 0.57. Those in the left-turn lane were
found to be \.64 sand 3.22 s, a ratio of O.5l. This indicates that different adjustment factors
for heavy vehicles should be used for through and left-turn lanes.
As shown in Table 9, the adjustment required for heavy vehicles in through lanes is system-
atically less than the adjustment required in left-turn lanes. The differences increase with in-
creasing percent of heavy vehicles.
Based on the field measurements in Taipei, the adjustment required for heavy vehicles is
greater than the adjustment suggested in the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation 1985).
As shown in Table 10, the adjustment factor for left turns decreases with the increase of the
percent of heavy vehicles. Thus, the left-turn adjustment factor should not be considered as
constant under various traffic composition conditions.
The field measurements in Taipei indicate that the adjustment factors for left turns are smaller
than the suggested values in the "Highway Capacity Manual" (Transportation 1985). A revised
procedure is recommended for analyzing capacities at signalized intersections in Taiwan.
Similar studies are desirable for intersections in other parts of the world to verify the validity
of the current practices.

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES
Akcclik. R. (19tH). "Traffic signals: Capacity and timing analysis." Australian Res. Rec. (AAR) No. 123. Aus-
tralian Road Res. Board. Australia.
Bang. K. (197R). "Swedish capacity manual-Capacity of signalized intersections." Transp. Res. Rec. 667. Trans-
portation Research Board. Washington. D.C.. 11-21.
Highway Capacity Manual for Highways in Taiwan Area. (1990). Institute of Transport. Ministry of the Republic
of China. Taiwan. R.O.C.
Hsu. T. P. (19R2). "Development of Critical Flow Analysis at Signalized Intersection:' MS thesis. National
Taiwan University. Taipei. Taiwan. R.O.c.
Transportation Research Board. (I9RO). "Interim materials on highway capacity." Transp. Circular No. 212.
Washington. D.C .. 5-35.
Transportation Research Board. (I9R5). "Highway capacity manuaL" Spec. Rep. 209. Washington. D.C.
Japanese Capacity Manual. (19R4). Japanese Road Res. Board. Japan.
Teply. S.. and Jones. A. M. (1991). "Saturation flow: Do we speak the same language'?" TrallSp. Res. Rec. 1320.
Transportation Research Board. Washington. D.C.. 144-153.
Webster. F. Y .. and Cobbe. B. M. (1966). "Traffic Signals." Ministry of Transport. Road Research TechnicaL
No. 56. Her Majesty's Stationery Office (HMSO). London. England.

APPENDIX 11. NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

a - percent of heavy vehicles (%);

e, TCU of ith vehicle type;

156 JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.

 f;, adjustment factor for area type;
f;,,, adjustment factor for blocking effect of local buses stopping within intersection area;
f TCUs per vehicle for particular vehicle type and turning traffic mix;
f~ adjustment factor for approach grade;
f;,v adjustment factor for heavy vehicles, where heavy vehicle was defined as any vehicle having
more than four tires touching pavement;
f;,v, adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in left-turn lanes;
f;/vT adjustment factor for heavy vehicles in through lanes;
f;, adjustment factor for left turns in lane group;
fUll adjustment factor for left turns under mixed traffic conditions;
f;TI> adjustment factor for left turns for traffic stream with passenger cars only;
f;, adjustment factor for existence of and parking activities in parking lane;
f;a adjustment factor for right turns in lane group;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by US CIVILIAN RESEARCH AND on 12/03/12. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

fw adjustment factor for lane width;

h" average headway under mixed traffic conditions;
h", average headway in left-turn lane with a% of heavy vehicles;
h"T average headway in through-traffic lane with a% of heavy vehicles;
h", average headway for exclusive lane for heavy vehicles;
h/' average headway for exclusive lane for passenger cars;
h/'l average headway in left-turn lane exclusively used by passenger cars;
h/'T average headway in through-traffic lane exclusively used by passenger cars;
N number of lanes in lane group;
q total flow rate;
qj flow rate of ith vehicle type;
S saturation flow rate for subject lane group under prevailing conditions;
S", saturation flow rate in through-traffic lane with a% of heavy vehicles;
S" basic saturation flow rate;
So ideal saturation flow rate per lane; and
S/'T saturation flow rate in through-traffic lane exclusively used by passenger cars.

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING 157

J. Transp. Eng. 1995.121:150-157.