University of Anbar

College of Engineering
Civil Engineering Department

Assessing Drivers' Compliance with Traffic Rules at

Roundabouts

A Project Report Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Bachelor’s Degree in Civil Engineering

By

Fatima Mohammed Hameed

Rehab Hiatham obead

Rania Ahmed Ali

Supervisor

Dr. Hameed Aswad Mohammed

January, 2023
i
 DECLARATION STATEMENT

We, the undersigned students, hereby declare that the project work entitled “Assessing
Drivers' Compliance with Traffic Rules at Roundabouts” submitted to university of
Anbar, is entirely our own work and has not been copied from any other source. Any material
that has been used from other sources has been properly cited and acknowledged in the report.

We are fully aware that any copying or improper citation of references/sources used in this
report will be considered plagiarism, which is a clear violation of the ethics code of university
of Anbar.

Signature: Signature:
StudentName:Fatima StudentName:
Mohammed Hameed Rania Ahmed Ali
Student ID: Student ID:

Date: Date:

Signature:
Student Name:Rehab Hiatham Obead
Student ID:
Date:

ii
 CERTIFICATION

Approved by:

Signature:
Supervisor Name: Dr. Hameed Aswad Mohammed
Department: Civil Engineering
Date:

Signature:
Format Adherence Committee
Department:
Date:

iii
 ABSTRACT

In recent years, roundabouts have been increasingly popular in Anbar cities, Iraq, particularly
in Ramadi city, as they have been considered as a solution of traffic congestion and safety
concerns. Roundabouts are considered an integral part of roadway design because of their
great importance in solving capacity and safety problems.

This research focuses on the study of driver behavior at roundabout and the influencing
factors, especially the behavior of giving priority right. Usually, the priority right is for
vehicles inside the roundabout, while the vehicles on the roads leading to it have to wait and
look for accepted gap. It was noted that a large proportion of drivers in the approaching traffic
does not give priority to the circulating flow and in many cases, circulating flow is forced to
stop and wait for a gap to move; where this behavior affects the performance of the
roundabout.

The main objectives of the study are to identify the percent of drivers who are familiar with
traffic law at the roundabout especially priority right rule, as well as the percent of the driver’s
real application of the priority rule and analyse the reasons behind that. The study also aims to
develop solutions and recommendations may lead to increase awareness and improve the
behavior of drivers at roundabouts.

To achieve these goals, two main roundabouts in Ramadi city were selected for the study (Al-
Alam and Al-Saa), and a questionnaire will use to get data about driver behavior at
roundabouts. This questionnaire also aim to know the factors affecting the driver behavior and
the best ways to improve the awareness and the traffic culture of drivers. At the same time,
video will record by a cameras placed in a suitable locations near the roundabouts to monitor
the real driver behavior and to find out his/her application extent for the priority right rule.
Several driver characteristics (such as age, gender, monthly income, level of education, years
of experience - etc.) were linked to the knowledge of the driver about traffic laws and his/her
behavior at roundabouts to determine the possible impact of that factors on drivers familiarity
with traffic laws and their behavior.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

v
 Table of Contents

List of Figures............................................................................................................................vi

List of Tables............................................................................................................................vii

List of Abbreviations...............................................................................................................viii

Chapter 1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................1

1.1 Background ..........................................................................................................................1

1.2 Objectives.............................................................................................................................4

1.3 Rationale...............................................................................................................................6

1.4 Limitations of Study..............................................................................................................7

Chapter 2 Literature Review.....................................................................................................10

2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................10

2.2 Xxxxxxxxxxx .....................................................................................................................11

Chapter 3 Materials and Methods …………………………………........................................29

Chapter 4 Results and Discussion …………………………………........................................45

Chapter 5 Conclusions and Recommendations …………………………................................60

vi
 List of Figures

Figure 2-1: Flexible pavement distress types ....................................................................12

vii
 List of Tables

Table 2-1: Pavement condition index (PCI) calculation procedure …................................... 21

viii
 List of Abbreviations

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

AASHTO American Association of State Highway Officials
PMS Pavement Management System

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background
At the beginning of the last century, the problems of traffic were not obvious, but at the end of
it, many problems start to appear, like capacity, safety, and accidents. This occurs because of
the increasing of road users, which results from high population in Ramadi city. Some of
traffic problems occur as a result of poor dealing with roundabouts, the driver's behavior at
roundabouts is considered as one of the main factors that the roundabout performance and
capacity depend on.

A roundabout can be defined as a circular intersection in which the traffic flows in a counter-
clockwise direction around a circular island at the center. In other words, roundabouts are
junctions with a circular carriageway around a central island where the circulating vehicles
have the priority over the approaching one. It is noteworthy that a roundabout may not be in a
perfect circular shape, but might come at different shapes like oval, In addition, it is not
limited to four-legs; it might have three-legs or even six-legs depending on the traffic
conditions, capacity and requirements of the area. Although there are different types, shapes
and sizes of roundabouts, they all share the same fundamental characteristics (Lively et.al.
2006).

Two fundamental elements are distinguishing roundabouts from other intersections. The first
one is the yield-at-entry for the entering vehicles, which does not require a complete stop. The
driver must wait for an acceptable gap before merging with the circulating stream. The second
element is that no traffic lights are needed near the round- about to control traffic movements.
However, metering signals may be used at roundabouts in the case of heavy volumes at peak
hours instead of using fully signalized intersections. The basic philosophy of having a
roundabout in an area is to increase capacity, minimize delay and keep a safe flow of traffic
(Lively et.al. 2006).

Vehicles entering the circulating roadway must yield to vehicles already circulating.
Roundabouts have specific design elements that require vehicles to approach and proceed
through the intersection at slow speeds, increasing safety and efficiency". (Lively et.al. 2006).
The main types of roundabouts are Mini, Grade Separated, Compact, Normal, Signalized, and

1
Double Roundabouts (the last being a combination of Mini, Compact or Normal
Roundabouts).

1.2 Problem Statement

The traffic capacity of the roundabout depends on several factors, which include the geometry
of the roundabout, the diversity of vehicles, and driver behavior. Usually, the priority of
movement at roundabouts is for the circulating flows; therefore, the approaching traffic must
wait and look for a gap in the circulating flow. In some Iraqi cities such as Ramadi, the driver
behavior is different. Driver is more aggressive so that gap acceptance behavior is rather
uncommon. It is observed that a big percentage of drivers in the approaching traffic do not
give priority to the circulating flows. In many cases, drivers who are already on the
roundabout are forced to stop and look for a gap to move. This behavior affects the traffic
performance at the roundabout.

Some drivers got a driving license before the construction of the new roundabouts in Ramadi
city, so they probably did not receive enough practice on roundabouts. Other drivers who
received practice on roundabouts do not fully comply with traffic laws, and this might be
because of the absence of strict measures taken by traffic police against violators.

1.3 Research Objectives

The main aim of this research is to study the driver behavior at roundabouts in Ramadi city
and the influencing factors. The objectives of this study are summarized as follows:

1. To specify the percentage of drivers who know the laws of using roundabouts.

2. To determine the percent of real application of the priority rule at roundabout.

3. To analyse reasons behind that and make drivers not to follow the priority rule.

4. To propose solutions and recommendations that might lead to increase traffic awareness
and improve the behavior of drivers.

1.4 Research Significance

1. Studying a realistic problem of traffic performance at roundabouts, which is very important
for efficient and safe performance.

2
2. Finding out the problems and mistakes committed by drivers at roundabouts, it is through
the knowledge of these wrong behaviors and problems, appropriate solutions will be
developed, and thus improve the behavior of drivers and the roundabouts traffic performance.

1.5 Research Methodology

There are seven stages of work for this study as follows:

First Stage: conducting literature review on driver behavior at roundabout intersections and
the influencing factors. The literature review is to include case studies that have similar
conditions to our area and environment.

Second Stage: Selection of roundabouts that are similar in topographic and geometric design
properties in Ramadi city.

Third Stage: Making questionnaire design.

Fourth Stage: Data collection by recording videos to collect information about vehicles,
driver characteristics, their familiarity with traffic laws, and driver’s behavior during crossing
the roundabout.

Fifth Stage: Making analysis for data and information obtained and discussing the obtained
results.

Sixth Stage: Summarizing the main results and conclusions of the study.

Seventh Stage: proposing solutions and recommendations.

1.6 Report Organization

This report consists of five chapters as follows:

Chapter 1 represents the introduction, which includes background, problem definition,

objectives, significance of the study, and research methodology and report organization.

Chapter 2 reviews briefly the literature related to roundabouts, history, the beginning of
modern roundabouts, the difference between roundabouts and traffic circles, operational and
physical characteristics of roundabouts, appropriate sites for roundabouts, roundabouts
advantages, how to use roundabouts, driver behavior at roundabouts, and previous studies.

Chapter 3 describes the methodology and approach for the analysis of the results. It shows
the structure of the questionnaires for drivers.
3
Chapter 4 shows the results of the analysis of the questionnaires and videos as well as the
relations between driver's behavior and some factors.

Chapter 5 concludes the study with main findings, and how the objectives of the study have
been addressed. This chapter includes conclusions and recommendations.

4
 CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction
Roundabout is considered an integral part in the design of roads, where it is great importance
in solving the problems of capacity and safety. This chapter reviews briefly the literature
related to roundabouts. The literature reviewed in Section 2.2 includes history and evolution
of roundabouts. Section 2.3 shows the beginnings of the modern roundabout. Section 2.4
discusses the difference between roundabouts and traffic circle/ rotaries according to FHWA-
2000 information guide, roundabouts have five main characteristics that identify them when
compared to traffic circles. Section 2.5 illustrates operational and physical characteristics of
roundabouts, which can be summed up in yield at entry, deflection, and flare. Section 2.6
presents the appropriate sites for roundabouts and where to build roundabouts to have full
operational power. Section 2.7 shows roundabouts advantages, which focus on safety,
capacity, performance, and cost. Section 2.8 illustrates how to use roundabouts if you were a
driver and want to pass it. Section 2.9 summarizes driver behavior at roundabouts.

2.2 History and Evolution of Roundabouts

The history of roundabout and in particular its evolution from the old traffic circles and
rotaries built in the first half of the 20th century is summarized below:

 The idea of a one-way rotary system was first proposed in 1903 for Columbus Circle in
New York City by William Phelps Eno, "the father of traffic control". Other circular places
existed prior to 1903; however, they were built primarily as architectural features and
permitted two-way circulation around a central island. One-way circulation was implemented
around Columbus Circle in November 1904

 In 1906, Eugene Henard, the Architect for the City of Paris, proposed a gyratory traffic
scheme (one-way circulation around a central island) for some major intersections in Paris.

 In 1907, the Place de l‟Etoile became the first French gyratory, followed by several others
built in 1910. In general, the right-of-way rule was not too critical in the early days because
traffic volumes were fairly low.

5
 Wisconsin, in 1913, was the first state to adopt the “yield to right rule”, meaning entering
vehicles had the right-of-way. The yield sign, however, was unknown in the United States
until the early 1950s.

 In 1929, Eno pointed out the main drawback of the “yield to right rule” (i.e., that traffic
locks up at higher volumes) and recommended changing to the yield-to-left rule.

 In the 1950s, traffic circles fell out of favor in the United States largely because of the
locking problem. In many cases, they were replaced with signalized intersections, or signals
were simply added to the circle.

 Between 1950 and 1977, eight jurisdictions passed laws to reverse the right-ofway rules that
gave priority to the vehicles in the circle, but signals generally were not removed from traffic
circles. (NCHRP, 1998).

After that, roundabouts began to spread in many countries, when the benefits of roundabouts
started evident in solving many of traffic problems, the Anbar government had a share in the
presence of a number of roundabouts and Ramadi city has a good number of roundabouts,
such as (Al-Alam, Al-Saa, Al-dolfeen, Al-Frassan, etc. ...).

2.3 The Beginnings of the Modern Roundabout

Progress in roundabout design began early in Great Britain, where one-way streets and
gyratory systems had existed since the mid-1920s, partially as the result of the consulting
work by Eno. It was also in Great Britain where the term "roundabout" was officially adopted
in 1926 to replace the term "gyratory." In the 1950s, British traffic engineers started
questioning the American practice of large circles, arguing that long weaving sections,
combined with the higher speeds made possible with the larger radii, were detrimental to high
capacities. The American view that weaving volumes in excess of 1,500 hourly vehicles were
impractical was challenged in Great Britain, although British traffic engineers continued
analyzing roundabout capacity in terms of weaving capacity. The off-side priority rule was
officially adopted for roundabouts in Great Britain in 1966. From then on, roundabout design
changed from larger circles to smaller roundabouts where the driver’s task was to accept a gap
in the circulating flow. Capacities of large roundabouts were increased by 10 to 50 percent by
reducing the size of the central island, bringing the yield line closer to the center of the circle,
and widening the entries to the roundabout (NCHRP, 1998).

6
2.4 The Difference between Roundabouts and Traffic Circle/ Rotaries

Roundabouts are often confused with traffic circles or rotaries and it is important to be able to
distinguish between them. According to FHWA-2000 information guide, roundabouts have
five main characteristics that identify them when compared to traffic circles:

1. Traffic control: Yield control is used in all entries at roundabouts. The circulatory roadway
has no control.

2. Priority to circulating vehicles: Circulating vehicles have the right of way in roundabouts.
Some traffic circles require circulating traffic to yield to entering traffic.

3. Pedestrian access: Pedestrian access is allowed only across the legs of the roundabout,
behind the yield line. Some traffic circles allow pedestrian access to the central island.

4. Parking: No parking is allowed within the circulatory roadway or at the entries at

roundabout. Some traffic circles allow parking within the circulating roadway.

5. Direction of circulation: All vehicles circulate counter-clockwise and pass to the right of
the central island of the roundabout. Some neighbourhood traffic circles allow left-turning
vehicles to pass to the left of the central island (Solomon, 2007).

Roundabouts are increasingly popular due to their performance and advantages in terms of
safety, capacity, and cost. Roundabouts have the potential to reduce accident risks because of
low speeds and small angles of merging and diverging for traffic flows. Under certain
conditions, roundabouts also improve the flow of traffic at the intersection, compared to other
choices. Roundabout capacity depends on a number of factors, including the total traffic flow
rate from each approaching arm that can join the circulatory traffic during the analysis period,
geometry, vehicle mix, and driver behavior. Usually, the circulatory traffic has priority, while
the approaching traffic has to yield and look for an acceptable gap to enter the circulating
flow. The minimum accepted gap (critical gap) is different from driver to driver, since each
driver has his own considerations for safety, urgency, vehicle type, etc. (Kusuma and
Koutsopoulos, 2011).

7
2.5 Types of Roundabouts

Mini-roundabout in its place there is a flush or domed circular solid white road marking
more than 1 meter and less than 4 meter in diameter and does not have a curbed central island.
Capable of being driven over where unavoidable.

Grade separated roundabout has at least one approach coming from a road at a different
level. This type of roundabout is frequently employed at motorway junctions, but can also be
used to link underpasses, flyovers and other multiple level intersections.

Compact roundabout (Figure 2.1) has single lane entries and exits on each arm. The width of
the circulatory carriageway does not allow two cars to pass one another. On roads with a
speed limit of 40 mph (64.36 km/h) or less within 100 m of the give way line on all
approaches, Compact roundabouts may have low values of entry and exit radii in conjunction
with high values of entry deflection.

This design has less capacity than that of normal roundabouts, but is particularly suitable
where there is a need to accommodate the movement of pedestrians and cyclists. The non-
flared entries or exits give the designer flexibility in siting pedestrian crossings.

Figure 2.1: Compact roundabout in an urban area- Germany (FHWA, 2014)

8
Normal roundabout has a curbed central island at least 4 meters in diameter; this makes
difference between normal and mini roundabouts (Figure 2.2). Its approaches may be dual or
single carriageway roads. Usually, a normal roundabout has flared entries and exits to allow
two or three vehicles to enter or leave the roundabout on a given arm at the same time. If so,
its circulatory carriageway needs to be wide enough for two or three vehicles to travel
alongside each other on the roundabout itself. If a normal roundabout has more than four
arms, it becomes large with the probability that higher circulatory speeds will result; the
solution is double roundabout or a signalized roundabout in this case.

Figure 2.2: Normal roundabout (SCOTLAND TRANSPORT, 2007)

Signalized roundabout has traffic signals on one or more of the approaches and at the
corresponding point on the circulatory carriageway itself. Installing traffic signals, with either
continuous or part-time operation, at some or all of the entry points can be appropriate where
a roundabout does not naturally self regulate. This may be for a combination of reasons such
as:

a) A growth in traffic flow;

b) An overloading or an unbalanced flow at one or more entries;

9
c) High circulatory speeds;

d) Significantly different flows during peak hour operation.

Double roundabout is a junction consists of two roundabouts separated by a short link (see
Figure 2.3).The roundabouts may be mini, compact or normal roundabouts. Double
roundabouts can be particularly useful:

a) For improving an existing staggered junction where they avoid the need to realign one of
the approach roads and can achieve a considerable construction cost saving compared with a
larger, single island roundabout;

b) For joining two parallel routes separated by a feature such as a river, a railway line or a
motorway;

c) At overloaded single roundabouts where, by reducing the circulating flow past critical
entries, they increase capacity;

d) At junctions with more than four entries, where they may achieve better capacity and make
more efficient use of space with better safety characteristics compared with a large
roundabout which may generate high circulatory speeds which result in a loss of capacity and
safety.

10
 Figure 2.3: Double roundabout with central link (SCOTLAND TRANSPORT, 2007)

2.6 Operational and Physical Characteristics of Roundabouts

Modern roundabouts have a number of operational and physical characteristics that make
them unique, and functional as a traffic control device/ intersection configuration. Modern
roundabouts have three primary differences from the old style roundabout:

1. Yield at entry,

2. Deflection,

3. And flare.

Yield to circulating traffic: Modern roundabouts operate on the „yield to circulating traffic‟
rule. The old method of operation was for drivers in the roundabout to yield to vehicles on the
right. This resulted in traffic locking up the roundabout when volumes were heavy. By
operating under the „yield to circulating traffic‟ rule, vehicles only enter the circulating
stream when there is a suitable gap. This allows the modern roundabout to continue to flow
even at relatively high traffic volumes. Modern roundabouts also have properly designed
deflection of the entering traffic. The old designs treated roundabouts as weaving sections and
were built to facilitate high vehicle entry and circulating speeds.

Deflection: slows approaching vehicles down to a speed where the safety of the roundabout is
greatly enhanced. Operation speeds of modern roundabouts should be kept below 40
kilometres per hour (25 miles per hour). Adequate deflection through roundabouts is the most
important factor influencing their safe operation. The deflection through the roundabout is
created by both the diameter of the center island, and entrance angle created by the splitter
island.

Flare: Modern roundabouts can have flared approaches. The widening of the approach road
to allow for additional entrance lanes increases the flexibility of the operation for drivers and
enhances the capacity of modern roundabouts. Theoretically, the operation of a roundabout is
similar to a series of linked „T‟ intersections. As such, an approaching driver can check for
pedestrian/ bicycle traffic as they approach the intersection, then they have to deal with
conflicting traffic from only one direction' the left'. Once in the roundabout, the driver
continues around until making a right turn to exit the intersection.

11
Central island: The central island should be circular; however, other round shapes are
acceptable. In general, roundabout center islands should have a diameter of 5 to 30 meters (15
– 160 feet). Modern roundabouts often have beautified center islands; state guides for
roundabouts provide directions on how to safely landscape the center island so as not to
compromise visibility. The landscaping of the center island allows the roundabout to function
as an urban design element. When trucks need to be accommodated at a roundabout, the
design usually includes a truck apron; this is a part of the center island that is not fully raised
above the circulating roadway pavement. Rather it is raised 5 to 10 cm (2 – 4 in). Truck
aprons are most often constructed of a contrasting material to help differentiate them from the
circulating roadway. The purpose of a truck apron is to provide an area where the rear wheels
of a large vehicle can be accommodated while keeping the central island small (and therefore
maintaining the needed travel path deflection) (Russell, 2000).

Splitter islands: The splitter island is placed within the leg of a roundabout to separate
entering and exiting traffic and provide vehicle deflection prior to entering the roundabout.
They are generally raised median islands that serve many functions. While some older
roundabouts were constructed with painted splitter islands, non-raised, a splitter island
negates many of their advantages. Splitter islands guide vehicles into the circulating roadway
of the roundabout, initiating the vehicle’s deflection from the approach roadway. As such,
they should be designed in conjunction with the vehicles‟ curved. The path so that traversing
vehicles have a smooth path through the roundabout. Deflection curve establishes the
horizontal path of a vehicle going through the roundabout and defines the design speed of the
roundabout. Therefore, the tighter the deflection curve, the slower the design speed of the
roundabout. Splitter islands also serve to prevent wrong way movements; they create physical
barriers whereby a vehicle wishing to traverse the roundabout the wrong way would have to
travel over or through the splitter island. The approach ends of splitter islands can provide a
physical narrowing of the approach roadway prior to the flare area. This narrowing of the
approach road tends to slow vehicle approach speeds and alerts drivers to the upcoming
roundabout. Splitter islands have a tendency to change driver expectancy as they approach the
roundabout.

Finally, on arterial road roundabouts, the splitter island should be of sufficient size to shelter a
pedestrian (at least 2.4 meters wide) and be a reasonable target to be seen by approaching
traffic. A minimum total area of (8 to 10) m2 should be provided on arterial road approaches.
Therefore, the splitter islands also act as pedestrian refuge islands; this allows a pedestrian to

12
cross one direction of traffic, reach the splitter island, then cross the other. Separation of the
crossing movement enhances pedestrian safety at roundabouts. The use of splitter islands for
pedestrian refuge requires that they be designed to meet all applicable requirements relating to

pedestrian activity.

Figure (2.4): Physical characteristics of roundabouts

Truck apron: A truck apron is a traversable portion of the raised center island to
accommodate the wheel path of oversized vehicles.

Bypass lane: A bypass lane may be warranted for heavy right turn vehicles as it allows traffic
to bypass the roundabout. Approach width: The approach width refers to the width of the
entering lanes before flaring or any other influence from the roundabout.

Exit width: The exit width is the perpendicular distance from the right curb line of the exit to
the intersection of the left edge line and the inscribed circle.

Departure width: The departure width refers to the width of the lanes departing from the
roundabout at a point where the width is no longer influenced by the roundabout.

Effective flare length: A flare may be used to increase the entry width and capacity of a
roundabout by providing additional lanes at the entry. The effective flare length is equal to the
distance from the entry width to a point where the approach width is equal to half the sum of
the entry width and the approach traveled way width prior to influence from the roundabout.

13
Entry radius: The entry radius is the minimum radius of curvature for the compound curve
measured along the right curb at entry beginning before the yield line.

Approach stopping sight distance: The approach stopping sight distance is the minimum
stopping sight distance to the back of queue or yield line at the roundabout entry.

Circulating roadway width: The width of the circulatory roadway depends mainly on the
number of entry lanes and the radius of vehicle paths (Solomon, 2007).

2.7 Appropriate Sites for Roundabouts

1. Heavy delay on minor road.

2. Traffic signals result in greater delay.

3. Intersection with heavy left turning traffic.

4. Intersection with more than four legs or unusual geometry.

5. At rural intersections (including those in high-speed areas) at which there is an accident

involving crossing traffic.

6. Where major roads intersect at “Y” or “T” junctions.

7. At locations where traffic growth is expected to be high and where future traffic patterns
are uncertain or changeable.

8. At intersections where U-turns are desirable.

9. At Freeway Interchange Ramps. 10. High accident intersection where right angle accidents
are prominent (DOT, 2014).

2.8 Roundabouts Advantages

Using the roundabout has several advantages.

1. It has less traffic conflicts, Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3 shows a comparison of the conflict
points between a conventional intersection and a modern roundabout. The lower number of
conflict points translates to less potential for accidents.

2. It has greater safety, primarily because of slower speeds and elimination of left turns when
using roundabouts, greater safety is achieved. Design elements of roundabouts cause drivers
to reduce their speeds.

14
3. It has efficient traffic flow; up to 50% increase in traffic capacity.

4. It reduces pollution and fuel usage because it causes fewer stops, shorter queues and no left
turn storage.

5. It saves money as no signal equipment is installed or maintained, plus savings in electricity

use, Furthermore it has community benefits due to traffic calming and enhancing aesthetics by
landscaping.

Figure (2.5): Conflict points comparison between roundabout and normal intersection
(FHWA, 2000)

15
Figure (2.6): Conflict points comparison between roundabout and T intersection (FHWA,
2000)

2.9 How to Use Roundabouts

To use roundabout, the next process of driving a car is followed:

1. Slow down as you approach the intersection;

2. Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the roadway;

3. Watch for signs and pavement markings.

4. Enter the roundabout if gap in traffic is sufficient;

5. Drive in a counter-clockwise direction around the roundabout until you reach your exit;

6. Do not stop or pass other vehicles.

7. If you miss your exit, continue around until you return to your exit. If you within a
roundabout when an emergency vehicle approaches, exit the roundabout and pull over to the
right. If you outside the roundabout, immediately pull over to the right. When driving a truck
or large vehicle, you may need to use the full width of the roadway, including the mountable
concrete truck apron around the central island. Take in consideration location of all other
users of the roundabouts. Proceed like any other vehicle (U.S.DOT, 2014).

2.10. Driver Behavior at Roundabouts

Drivers approaching roundabouts have two options to make: select the correct lane for their
intended destination, and yield to those who have priority of movement. Drivers must adjust
to the decisions that in roundabouts are generally more complex than for other intersection
types, mainly because drivers typically must yield and give priority to those who have the
right-of-way and the drivers may not always be able to see their exit or destination, possibly
disorienting or confusing the driver. The geometric design of roundabouts also has a positive
influence on driver behavior. As seen in Figure 2.7, roundabouts have many design features
that improve driver behavior. It forces drivers to operate at slower speeds, yield to oncoming
traffic and be aware enough to accept gaps in traffic large enough to enter the flow of traffic.

16
Figure 2.7: Roundabout safety features (McIntosh, 2011)

17
 CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1Introduction
This chapter presents the most important steps of the research mechanism since it includes
data collection process and the sites will be selected for the study. The main objective of this
research is to study the behavior of drivers at the roundabouts and their familiarity with the
principles of roundabouts, also to determine the extent of the driver real application to these
rules.

To achieve these goals, a questionnaire was utilized to drivers after crossing the roundabout.
At the same time, video was recorded by a camera placed in a suitable location near the
roundabout to monitor the real driver behavior and to find out his/her application and respect
for the priority right rule.

Several driver characteristics (such as age, gender, monthly income, level of education, years
of experience - etc.) were linked to the knowledge of the driver about traffic laws and his/her
behavior at roundabouts to determine the probability of a relationship between these factors
and the drivers familiarity with traffic law and the impact on their behavior.

18
Flowchart of Research Methodology

Design of Initial Questionnaire

Design of Final Questionnaire

Selection of Studay Site

Data collection by
Questionnaire and Recording
3.2 Stages of the Study Video

The study process has gone through several stages as

follows:
Analysis of Data
3.2.1 Design of Initial Questionnaire

The questionnaire should be designed to include

questions regarding vehicle Summarizing The main Results and driver characteristics,
also questions showing the and Findings experience and familiarity
of drivers with the traffic laws at roundabout and the
factors or variables that affect the driver behavior at
roundabout. In addition, it Proposing Solutions and includes advantages of
roundabouts compared with Recommendation other intersections, the
reasons of accidents at roundabout, the factors that

19
may influence driver behavior, and questions dealing with how to improve & increase the
driver awareness and knowledge in using the roundabout correctly and safely.

3.2.2 Design of Final Questionnaire

3.2.2.1 Driver Questionnaire

This phase includes the most important topics and an issue concerning the questionnaire,
which was developed in order to collect the data required for analysing the factors affecting
driver behavior at roundabouts and consisted of four parts as follows:

The First Part: The Knowledge of Traffic Laws at Roundabout

Questions regarding the extent of the driver's knowledge and familiarity with the laws of
traffic (giving priority at the roundabout, the best speed at the roundabout, the meaning of the
yield sign at the roundabout, the direction of movement inside the roundabout, the appropriate
lanes for turning right &left, the driver behavior when emergency vehicle is approaching, the
behavior when loosing the required exit ,pedestrian passing the roundabout, and changing
lanes on the circulating carriageway .... etc.).

The Third Part: Awareness and Satisfaction

Questions relating to educate drivers and the extent of their satisfaction with the roundabout
(the best way to raise awareness, practical and written exam license, the aesthetics of the
roundabout, satisfaction with the traffic police, compared the roundabout with traffic signal
and stop control in terms of safety and congestion, advantages of roundabouts compared with
other intersections, and the presence of sufficient signals at roundabout , .... etc.).

The Fourth Part: Questions about the Video

This phase also included the preparation of some questions showing the behavior of the driver
at the roundabout. These questions will be answered by the researcher after playing the video
recording which include the following:

1-Does the driver give priority to the vehicle on the circulating carriageway?

2- Does the driver slow down before entering the roundabout, or increase speed or keep it as it
is?

3-Does the driver use the suitable lane before entering the roundabout?
20
4- Does the driver change lane without need on the circulating carriageway?

3.2.3 Selection of Study Site

The choice of the site is an important element of the study because it must be appropriate to
the subject of the study. It must also contain features and specifications of roundabouts.

3.2.3.1General Criteria for selecting study site of roundabout:

A- Contains dynamic traffic size and relatively high to study and collect good data.

B- Connects between different intersections and should be near them in order to have high
traffic volume during the study.

C- Contains three or more arms as a minimum to have good results.

D- Achieves specifications of roundabouts, such as island diameter, lane width, and speed of
movement permitted inside the roundabout.

E- The existence of buildings are relatively high so that the camera can be placed on a high
place to monitor the roundabout.

After examining a number of roundabouts, AL-Alam and Al-Saa roundabouts in Ramadi City
have been chosen for the study, and are classified as main roundabouts. The two sites
achieved the required specifications to a large extent, and the traffic flow is high and dynamic.
At these sites, it was possible to monitor the movement of vehicles with high accuracy and
clear vision.

3.2.3.2 Site selection criteria

A crucial step is to select a suitable study location. As a result, many roundabouts throughout
Ramadi city were surveyed and visited. The study's roundabouts were chosen based on a
number of considerations, including whether or not they had sufficient traffic flow to capture
useful data. To make the observation easier, four-legged and three-legged roundabouts were
selected. Furthermore, the roundabouts were chosen because they were in busy regions with a
variety of vehicles passing through, ensuring that different behaviors were captured.

The study focused on two different roundabouts: Roundabout (A) in Al-Surah neighborhood
and Roundabout (B) in the Al-Qattana neighborhood close to center of Ramadi City. The first
location (A) is a busy intersection between residential and commercial areas. The second

21
location (B) was chosen due to its high traffic flow and location in a highly important
commercial sector. There are houses, shops, super markets, and offices in this residential,
educational, and commercial district. These roundabouts met the requirements for an
acceptable traffic volume, were positioned in key regions, with four legs, and varied
categories of drivers moving through.

3.2.3.3The selected roundabouts' characteristics

Roundabout (A): The first research area is located on 100th Street in Al-Surah neighborhood
close to the Ramadi's East Gate. It is named Al-Alam roundabout. There are four legs to the
roundabout, with two lanes for the circulating carriageway and two lanes for both approach
legs. Inscribed diameter: 60 m, circulation roadway width: 12 m, and entry/exit width: 9 m are
the geometric measurements. The location of the Al-Alam roundabout is shown in Figure 3.2.

Roundabout (B): The second research area is located in Al-Qattana neighborhood. It is

named AL-Saa Roundabout. It is situated at the crossroads of Medhat Pasha and Al-Awqaf
streets. It's a three-legged roundabout with two lanes on the circulating carriageway and two
lanes on each approach leg. It has an inscribed diameter of 20 meters, a circulatory roadway
width of 12 meters, and an entry/exit width of 8 meters. Figure 3.3 shows the location of the
Al-Saa roundabout.

22
Figure 3.2: Al-Alam roundabout located in Al-Surah neighborhood

23
 Figure 3.3: Al-Saa roundabout located in Al-Qattana neighborhood

3.2.4 Driver Questionnaire Data

3.2.4.1 Vehicle Variables

Vehicle variables will be linked to driver questionnaire data such as (vehicle type, type of
transmission, and manufacture year of vehicle).

24
3.2.4.2 Driver Characteristics

Questions especially for the driver characteristics which include (gender, age, experience of
driving, the profession, monthly income, year of obtaining the license, and level of
education .... etc.). This is the introduction of data analysis stage, where the most important
factors regarding driver characteristics were chosen to be linked to driver questionnaire data
(familiarity of driver with traffic laws and his/her behavior) in order to clarify the possible
impact of these characteristics on the driver behavior and his/her familiarity with traffic laws
at roundabout. The questionnaire data proposed to be linked to vehicles and driver
characteristics are:

1. Right of priority at roundabout.

2. The best speed on roundabout.

3. The direction of movement on roundabout.

4. Clockwise u- turn at the roundabout.

5. The Appropriate lane to turn right.

6. The Appropriate lane to turn left.

7. The driver behavior when an emergency vehicle was close to him/her.

8. Changing the lane on the roundabout.

9. Driver behavior when he/she misses the required exit.

3.2.4.3 Video Analysis

The recorded video will be analysed in order to answer the following questions:

1- Does the driver give priority to the vehicle on circulating of the roundabout?

2- Does the driver slow down before entering the roundabout, increase speed or keep it as it
is?

3- Does the driver change lane without need on circulating of the roundabout?

4- Does the driver use the suitable lane when entering the roundabout?

25
 CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

26
 CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

27
REFERENCES

28
APPENDIX

29