1

CIVL 440 Transportation Engineering II

Signalized Intersection Capacity &

Level of Service
[Part 3 – Traffic Signal Analysis]
 2

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Purpose
 Webster’s method provides timing plans for the minimal possible
delay
 However,
• it does not provide a means of measuring the delay as a result of it’s
use
• it does not help determine if the delay is acceptable
 A more complete analysis of a signalized intersection requires the
use of a more complex model/method that can identify and assess
all the variables affecting its operation
 Most frequently used model/method for signalized intersection
analysis is contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
 3

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- LOS & Delay
 Level of Service (LOS) for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay
 Delay is a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost
travel time
 Control delay is the portion of the delay attributed to signal operations of an
intersection and consists of:
• initial deceleration delay
• queue move-up time
• stopped delay
• final acceleration delay
 The HCM model uses control delay as the measure of intersection LOS
(specifically, average stopped delay per veh. determined using 15 min. time periods such
as the peak 15 min. of the peak hour…however longer periods if v/c is high such as
>= 0.9)
 4

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- V/C Ratio…2
 V/C & LOS relationship
• For signalized intersections, factors that affect LOS are:
 v/c ratio for each lane group
 quality of progression (how and when vehicles arrive at the intersection)
 cycle length
 distribution of green time

LOS CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS (HCM 2000)

 5

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Lane Groups
 Capacity is defined for each lane group
 Lane Group
• One or more lanes on the same approach
• Traffic using these lanes moves during the same phase
 Capacity of a lane group is the maximum flow rate for the lane group
that can pass through the intersection under prevailing traffic, roadway
and signalization conditions
 Lane Group Capacity (for group i)

gi
Ci = S i ×
C
Si = saturation flow rate for lane group i
g i = effective green for lane group i
C = cycle length
 6

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- V/C Ratio…4
 V/C Ratio
• v/c ratio represented by the symbol “X” – sig. int.

V 
 
v Vi  S i
= Xi = =
c g gi
Si × i
C C
where :
Vi = traffic demand for lange group i
V
  = flow ratio for lane group i
S 
 i
gi
= green ratio for lane group i
C
 7

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Levels of Analysis
 HCM presents two levels of analysis for signalized intersections:
• Operational analysis
• Planning analysis

 Operational Analysis
• For existing intersections
• Detailed information on all prevailing traffic, roadway, signalization
conditions required
• Analysis enables determination of capacity and LOS of every lane group for
an intersection, and the LOS for the intersection as a whole
• Operational analysis can be used to:
 Solve for LOS, given the details of intersection flows, geometrics, & signalization
 Solve for allowable service flow rates for selected LOS, given details of
geometrics & signalization
 Solve for signal timing, given the desired LOS and details of flows and
geometrics
 Solve for basic geometrics (number of lanes) given the desired LOS and details
of flow and signalization
 8

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Levels of Analysis…2
 Planning Analysis
• Used to help plan future intersection
• Detailed and accurate data not available for this analysis
• Demand volumes used are forecasted volumes
• Only capacity is addressed as the detailed info required to estimate delay is
not available
• Only input data required are minimal intersection geometrics and
movement volumes
• Planning analysis then provides a basic assessment of whether or not
capacity is likely to be exceeded for a given set of demand volumes and
geometrics
 9

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Operational Analysis Procedure
 Methodology (HCM 2000)
 Modular procedure
• Input Module
• Volume Adjustment Module
(Lane Grouping & Demand
Flow Rate Module)
• Saturation Flow Rate Module
• Capacity Analysis Module
• Performance Module
 10

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Input Module
INPUT DATA NEEDS FOR EACH ANALYSIS LANE GROUP (HCM 2000)
 11

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Input Module
 12

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Arrival Types
 Arrival Types (HCM 2000)
 13

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Platoon Ratio
 Platoon Ratio

P
Rp =
gi
C
where :
P = proportion of al vehicles in movement
arriving during the green phase
C = cycle length
g i = effective green time for lane group i
 14

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Platoon Ratio
 Platoon Ratio
 15

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Volume Adjustment Module
 Three analytic functions:
• Establish lane groups for analysis
• Convert hourly demand volumes to peak 15-min flow rates
• Determine total lane group demand flow rates

 Lane Groupings
• Exclusive lanes should be designated as a separate lane group
• If a shared LT + TH lane is essentially acting as a LT lane (most
movements are LT) then the lane is a de facto LT lane - need to check for
this
 16

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Volume Adjustment Module …2
TYPICAL LANE GROUPS FOR ANALYSIS (HCM 2000)
 17

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Volume Adjustment Module…3
 Convert Demand Volumes to Flow Rate
• 3 approaches
 18

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Volume Adjustment Module…4
 PHF review
• PHF = hourly volume / max. rate of flow
= V / 4xVm15
• Ranges from 0.25 to 1.0
 Conversion of hourly demand volumes to flow rates

V
v=
PHF
v = demand flow rate, veh/hr
V = demand volume, veh/hr
 19

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Volume Adjustment Module…5
 Total lane group demand flow rates

v gi = ∑ v j
j

v gi = total demand flow rate for lane group i, veh/hr

v j = demand flow rate for movement j in lane group i, veh/hr
 20

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 Saturation Flow Rate modifications
• Base saturation flow rate modified by a series of multiplicative adjustment
factors
• Resulting in total saturation flow rate for each lane group under prevailing
conditions
• Most complex of the whole HCM model
• Saturation flow rate for a lane group, veh/hr:
s = so Nf w f HV f g f p f bb f a f LU f RT f LT f Rpb f Lpb
• so = base saturation flow rate, pc/hr/lane
• N = number of lanes in the lane group
• 11 adjustment factors (subscripts):
 w = lane width  a = area type
 HV = heavy vehicles  LU = lane utilization
 g = grade  RT = right turns
 p =parking  LT = left turns
 bb = local bus blockage  Rpb = ped/bike interference with RT
 Lpb = ped/bike interference with LT
 21

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 22

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 23

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 24

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 25

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Saturation Flow Rate Module
 26

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Capacity Analysis Module
 in the Volume Adjustment Module, lane groups and demand flow
rates were established
 in the Saturation Flow Rate Module, saturation flow rate for each
lane group was established
 Capacity Analysis Module is used to perform the following steps:
1. compute the v/s ratio for each lane group
2. relative v/s ratios used to identify the critical lane groups in the phase plan;
compute sum of critical lane group v/s ratios
3. compute lane group capacities [ci=si(gi/C)]
4. compute lane group v/c ratios [Xi=(v/s)i /(g/C)i]
5. compute critical v/c ratio for the intersection, Xc
v
∑i  s  v  C 
Xc = ci
= ∑  × 
 C − L  i   ci
s  − 
C L
 
 C  L=total lost time/cycle
 hClln\?~ A t", 0 Pho..te. 'Si ~t\...Q nM ~~\!\ f ..\-;. \. i.

lIv ~ ifet.\i", V/~ :: 0·4 ~ N-~ vI' ': H • o.tf\\\IM~

/;-"-1
f~ ~s~ h'Mi I phr,.~ At+. ..t\.'5 ~(. E~~,~ ~N. ~;,,\"4\\~ 0

·······························~·····1 o..cl~ ~tl ~ \\. ~ ,tUf\ \-\~

Xl, ~-
L (\lls)c,-t:L
~ /M,C\\IM""" t.ot1. ~\\.. (.0.." ~ <-oQ,u4Jtd ~j. "Xc, -: \. b

C fN\\'t\. :: L '" (. ":: ~ (,) -:. ~ t\ ~c..

')(c.. - 2(Y(~) c..' I -(0 -4-\- 0·\ )
~ VIc. 11\0 IIt.br.. \k" Q. '/) M ~itt~
C = '\ (Oo~) -:: 1z$"tC. ~ t() ~t
6·~-lo.A~O·3)

AcJ~ "Xt ~(yIS)t\ ~L

-:.

-: to·4 -\-CJ.~)l ~ )::- 0 o~

1-o-t\
d\ -:. Do 4 l to.
o·~
") -=- ~ ~ ¥( )co .. \1[5>
,----
~ 1. ": c:s (~ ) -: 2..~ ~tc. ~lc...
~ 0.<6
 27

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module
 Last step is the estimation of average individual delay for each
lane group:
• Average control delay per vehicle, sec./veh.:

d = d1PF + d2 + d3

where:
d1 = average uniform delay per vehicle, sec./veh.
PF = progression adjustment factor
d2 = average incremental delay per vehicle (account for non-uniform
arrivals), sec./veh.
d3 = additional delay per vehicle due to a preexisting queue, sec./veh.
 28

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…2
 Uniform Delay
• obtained by using Webster’s uniform delay equation in the following form:

2
  g 
0.5C 1 −  
d1 =   C 
  g 
1 − min(1, X ) ×  
  C 
where:
C = cycle length, sec.
g = effective green time for lane group, s
X = v/c ratio for lane group (max value = 1.000)
 29

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…3
 Progression Adjustment Factor
• Webster’s uniform delay equation assumes arrivals are uniform over time
• usually random and platooned as a result of coordinated signals
• quality of signal coordination or progression can have a monumental impact on delay
• Power of Progression:
 perfect progression = no delay for a given optimal platoon size VS.
 worst progression = full delay (entire red) forced on the same platoon
• Progression Adjustment Factor related to arrival types (defined in Input Module)
• use Progression Adjustment Factors table
• straight-line interpolate g/C to estimate PF to the nearest 0.001
• Arrival Type 3 is always 1.000 as it represents random arrivals
• Arrival Types 4,5 & 6 are favorable
• When progression is favorable a larger g/C ratio is beneficial, resulting in a
decreasing adjustment factor
 30

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…4
PROGRESSION ADJUSTMENT FACTOR FOR UNIFORM DELAY CALCULATION (HCM 2000)
 31

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…5
 Incremental Delay
• considers incremental delay from random arrivals as well as overflow delay when v/c
ratio > 1.00:

 
d 2 = 900T ( X − 1) + ( X − 1) +  8kIX
2

  cT  

where:
T = analysis time period, hr
X = v/c ratio for lane group
c = capacity of lane group, veh./hr
k = adjustment factor for type of controller
I = upstream filtering/metering adjustment factor
 32

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…6
k-VALUES TO ACCOUNT FOR CONTROLLER TYPE (HCM 2000)
 1

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…6
Recommended I values for lane groups with upstream signals (HCM 2000)
 33

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…7
 Initial Queue Delay
• When residual queue from a previous time period causes an initial queue to
form at the start of the analysis period (T), additional delay is experienced
by vehicles arriving in the period since the initial queue must first clear the
intersection
• 5 basic delay cases (refer to Appendix F of HCM 2000)
 Case 1: No initial queue, X <= 1.00
 Case 2: No initial queue, X > 1.00
 Case 3: Initial queue, X < 1.00, no residual queue at the end of analysis period
 Case 4: Initial queue, X < 1.00, residual queue exists at the end of analysis
period but is less than the size of the initial queue
 Case 5: Initial queue, X >= 1.00, residual queue exists at the end of analysis
period and is the same or larger than the size of the initial queue
 34

Capacity & LOS for Signalized Intersections

- Performance Module…8
 Aggregating
• the previous delays are used to determine the total control delay per vehicle for each
lane group known
• LOS is determined using the LOS for Signalized Intersections table (Exhibit 16-2 of
HCM 2000)
• lane group delays can be aggregated to approach delays and an overall intersection
delay:

dA =
∑ dv i i
dI =
∑ d vA A

∑v i ∑v A
where:
di = total control delay per vehicle, lane group i, sec/veh.
dA = total control delay per vehicle, approach A, sec/veh.
dI = total control delay per vehicle for the whole intersection, sec/veh.
vA = demand flow rate, approach A, veh/hr.
vi = demand flow rate, lane group i, veh/hr.
 35

Interpretation of Results

 The results of an operational analysis will yield two key results

that must be considered:
• The V/c ratios for each lane group and for the intersection as a
whole
• Average stopped-time delays for each group and approach, and
for the intersection as a whole and the levels of service that
correspond
 Any V/c ratio greater than 1.00 is an indication of actual or
potential breakdowns, and is a condition requiring amelioration
 Where the critical Vie ratio is less than 1.00 but some lane
groups have V Ic ratios greater than 1.00, the green time is
generally not appropriately apportioned, and a retiming using
the existing phasing should be attempted
 36

Interpretation of Results

 A critical V/c ratio greater than 1.0 indicates that the overall
signal and geometric design provides inadequate capacity for
the existing or projected flows. In this situation, any or all of the
following improvements may be considered:
• Basic changes in intersection geometry (number and use of lanes)
• Increases in the signal cycle length if it is determined to be too short
• Changes in the signal phase plan
 As delays can be high even when V/c ratios are low, a careful
examination of signal progression, cycle length, or both is
generally appropriate
 37

Suggestions for Specifying Design Elements..2

 An exclusive right-turn lane should be considered when the

right-turn volume also exceeds 300 veh/hr.
 Where lane widths are unknown, the 12-ft standard lane width
should be assumed, unless known restrictions prevent this.
 Parking conditions should be assumed to be consistent with
local practice in the area, For analysis purposes, where no
information exists, no curb parking and no local buses should
be assumed.