Reliability-Based Design of Horizontal
Curves on Two-Lane Rural Highways
Bashar Dhahir and Yasser Hassan
Current design guides adopt a deterministic approach to the design of
horizontal curves; each factor included in the design is represented by
the near-worst-case value. In the context of horizontal curve design, the
design procedure is based only on the driver comfort criterion, and data
correspond to experiments conducted in the 1930s. Furthermore, current
horizontal curve design procedures lack a quantitative evaluation for
safety. To overcome those shortcomings, a new design framework is pro-
posed to design horizontal curves; a probabilistic approach is adopted
and two criteria are considered: vehicle dynamic stability and driver
comfort. Reliability analysis was used to provide a quantitative evalua-
tion for the design in regard to the probability of failure, probability of
noncompliance, and reliability index. Outputs of simulation runs in a
vehicle dynamics model were used to estimate demand lateral friction
and lateral acceleration depending on the geometric characteristics of
horizontal curves. In addition, data of an instrumented vehicle experi-
ment were used to develop driver-level models for the distribution of
the curve speed and driver comfort threshold. The first-order reliability
method was used to estimate the probability of failure, probability of
noncompliance, and reliability index. The proposed design framework
and developed models were applied in an example to design a horizontal
curve for a specific design speed.
The high rate of collisions on horizontal curves compared with the
rate on other roadway elements makes them one of the most critical
elements in the transportation network (1). In that regard, the current
practice followed to design horizontal alignment needs to be reviewed.
The current design guides adopt a driver comfort criterion to design
horizontal curves. That is, horizontal curves are designed to be below
a driver’s comfort threshold of lateral acceleration, which depends
on the drivers’ sensation of the forces pushing them to the outside
of the curve, or kinaesthesia. Such a threshold is a human factors
issue and was determined on the basis of experiments and research
conducted between 1920 and 1952 (2). Many developments have
since been introduced to the vehicle design to improve safety and ride
comfort, and driver behavior has likely evolved as well. In a recent
driving experiment using an instrumented vehicle, it was found
that drivers tend to accept higher levels of lateral acceleration to
maintain their speed and minimize reduction in speed while nego-
tiating horizontal curves (3). These developments would influence
drivers’ decisions to select appropriate and comfortable speeds on
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Carleton University,
3432 Mackenzie, 1125 Colonel By Drive, Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6, Canada.
Corresponding author: Y. Hassan, yasser_hassan@carleton.ca.
Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board,
No. 2588, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2016, pp. 22–31.
DOI: 10.3141/2588-03
22
horizontal curves according to their own perception rather than the
designer’s perception (4).
Also, the ability to evaluate the trade-offs between cost and level
of safety establishes the need for a quantitative method to evaluate
the safety of the design. Unfortunately, the current design guides
cannot address this need because horizontal curve safety is included
only implicitly in the design. Furthermore, the design guides adopt
a deterministic design approach that does not consider the distribu-
tion of design parameters and instead is based on a near-worst-case
scenario for each design parameter. In that respect, reliability analy-
sis should be used because it accounts for the variability of design
parameters and provides reliability measures that can be quantitatively
related to safety.
Horizontal Curve Design
The horizontal alignment of a roadway generally consists of three
components: tangent sections, horizontal curves, and, in some cases,
transitional spiral curves. The geometric design of the horizontal
alignment should provide specifications and dimensions for the
circular curves, spiral curves, and the development of superelevation.
Many factors control the design, such as the safety of road users,
design speed, topography, climatic conditions, traffic volumes, and
the existence of major utilities (5).
To design a horizontal alignment, several design criteria and
requirements have been established to produce a safe and comfort-
able horizontal curve for road users. The AASHTO design policy
known as the Green Book (6) and the Canadian design guide (5)
adopt a driver comfort criterion to design horizontal curves. Accord-
ingly, the comfort of most drivers is used to determine the maximum
lateral friction factors in the design, which is commonly known as
the comfort threshold. The minimum radius is then calculated with
the point mass model as follows (6):
V2
Rmin = (1)
127 ( 0.01emax + fmax )
where
Rmin = minimum radius (m),
V = vehicle speed (km/h),
emax = maximum superelevation rate, and
fmax = maximum lateral friction factor.
This procedure for determining the minimum radius of a horizontal
curve is based on several assumptions. First, vehicles are assumed
to travel at a constant speed on a circular path of a constant radius. Sec-
ond, the comfort threshold is assumed to be lower than the skidding
Dhahir and Hassan 23

limits. Third, the vehicle is reduced to a point mass. Consequently, the fort threshold at the curve level, new models were developed in this
following issues can be highlighted: paper to predict the distributions of vehicle speeds and driver comfort
threshold on curves at the individual vehicle or driver level.
• Because of developments in vehicle design, pavement materials, The third task was to propose a new framework to design horizon-
and driver behavior, the lateral friction factors might be outdated and tal curves capable of providing a quantitative evaluation for safety.
may not accurately reflect current driver behavior, vehicle design, and Reliability analysis was implemented to evaluate two criteria on
pavement characteristics (1). For instance, it is found that these values horizontal curves: vehicle dynamic stability and driver comfort. The
need to be revised, especially for sharp curves (3). system performance functions were established for the two criteria
• Vehicle dynamic stability may be questionable especially dur- according to the difference between available and demanded lateral
ing adverse weather conditions. In other words, the available lateral friction and the difference between comfort threshold and actual
friction factor might be close to or less than the comfort threshold. lateral acceleration, respectively.
• The effect of vehicle characteristics on lateral friction demand
is mostly overlooked.
• Vehicles most likely decelerate while negotiating horizontal Variables for the Vehicle Dynamic
curves; however, the effect of utilized friction in the longitudinal direc- Stability Criterion
tion is not considered in analyzing vehicle stability on the horizontal
curve. Available Lateral Friction
• The current practice lacks a quantitative evaluation of safety,
which is considered only implicitly. Therefore, the margin of safety The available lateral friction distribution used in this study is based
is unknown especially when radii other than the recommended values on data collected by Himes (10). The pavement friction was measured
are used. with the dynamic friction tester, which is controlled mainly by the
microtexture of the pavement surface. The circular texture meter
was used to measure the pavement macrotexture in regard to mean
profile depth. An equation provided by Olson et al. was used to estimate
Objectives
peak values of longitudinal friction as follows (11):
This study aims at overcoming some of the problems associated
with the current horizontal curve design approach. First, the design f x,max = 0.2 + 1.12 f x,skidding (2)
of horizontal curves is proposed on the basis of two criteria: vehicle
dynamic stability and driver comfort. Then, a probabilistic approach where fx,max is the peak longitudinal friction and fx,skidding is the
is used in place of the deterministic approach; the factors included longitudinal friction at skidding.
in the design are represented by a distribution of values for each factor. The peak values of available lateral friction were calculated with
Reliability analysis is implemented in a design procedure to pro- a reduction factor of 0.925 for the measured friction as suggested by
vide a quantitative evaluation for the margin of safety in relation to Lamm et al. (12). For the purpose of this research, and as explained
the reliability measures: probability of failure (POF), probability of by Dhahir and Hassan (13), the values shown in Table 1 were inter-
noncompliance (PNC), and reliability index (β). Although the POF polated from the results by Himes (10) to correspond to 10-km/h
and PNC terms are used in the literature to refer to the probability increments with the cubic spline interpolation in MATLAB. This
of a system’s failure when demand exceeds supply or capacity, POF distribution of available lateral friction corresponds to wet pave-
is used in this paper if the system failure leads to a collision. PNC, ment conditions and therefore would correspond only to a specific
however, is used if the conditions of demand exceeding supply would weather condition.
not lead directly to a collision but would still increase the probability
of a collision.
TABLE 1   Lateral Friction Coefficients
for Different Curve Speeds (10)
Method
Curve Speed (km/h) Lateral Friction
To achieve the objectives of this paper, several tasks were completed.
The first task included improving the accuracy of estimating lateral Standard Standard
friction demand and actual lateral acceleration considering vehicle Mean Deviation Mean Deviation
characteristics with CarSIM. CarSIM is a software product developed
20 2.09 0.6294 0.1112
by Mechanical Simulation Corporation to accurately and efficiently
30 2.92 0.5550 0.0950
simulate the dynamic performance of cars, trucks, motorcycles, and
specialty vehicles (7). It was used to simulate various runs of sedan 40 3.62 0.4885 0.0773
and SUV passenger cars at different speeds on horizontal curves with 50 4.19 0.4296 0.0640
different geometric characteristics. The outputs of these runs were 60 4.61 0.3793 0.0551
used to establish new empirical models to estimate the distributions 70 4.90 0.3341 0.0489
of lateral friction demand and actual lateral acceleration. 80 5.06 0.2956 0.0461
The second task involved developing a new model to estimate the 90 5.07 0.2630 0.0437
comfort threshold and vehicle speed with the results of an instru- 100 4.95 0.2310 0.0429
ment vehicle experiment conducted at Carleton University in 2005 110 4.70 0.2058 0.0431
(8, 9). In contrast to the previous models developed on the basis 120 4.31 0.1771 0.0420
of the collected data to predict the 85th percentile speed and com-
24 Transportation Research Record 2588

Lateral Friction Demand cle (radius and offset from the path), accelerations (longitudinal and
lateral), and understeer gradient and stability factor. It was observed
When a vehicle negotiates a horizontal curve, it experiences a cen- that the lateral friction differs at each of the four vehicle tires, and for
tripetal acceleration that acts toward the center of curvature. This each tire a peak lateral friction is observed at the beginning of the
acceleration is sustained by the combination of a vehicle’s weight curve. Figure 1a shows an example of these two observations.
components produced by the roadway superelevation and a lateral On the basis of the analysis of the vehicle skidding threshold, the
friction force between the vehicle tires and the road surface. These failure point of the vehicle dynamic stability criterion was defined
two forces work together to counterbalance the centrifugal force as the point at which the peak lateral friction demand at one of the
and prevent the vehicle from sliding outward off the circular path front tires just exceeds the available friction (13). At that point, the
(14). Several models have been developed to estimate the frictional vehicle would significantly deviate from the circular path even if it
force demanded by the vehicle on horizontal curves. These models is not totally out of control.
differ in the level of accuracy and complexity and can be classified With the use of nonlinear regression in SPSS, two models were
into two categories: empirical or semiempirical models and analytical developed for each vehicle type. The first model estimates the peak
models. Although the empirical or semiempirical models provide lateral friction demand, which is located near the beginning of the
more accurate tire–road friction estimates, they are based on curve curve. The second model estimates the sustained lateral friction
fitting techniques. Therefore, these models do not explain the physical demand, which is located almost at the middle zone of the curve.
interaction between friction and the factors affecting it (15). Because On the basis of the definition of the failure point, only the models
this study seeks to estimate the demanded lateral friction with a high for peak lateral friction demand are presented in the following
level of accuracy without focusing on the physical interpretation, the equations:
empirical modeling approach is used.
Accordingly, the outputs of CarSIM simulations were used to Sedan:
develop models to estimate lateral friction demand. Simulation runs
were conducted for passenger cars (Sedan D Class with the follow-
0.014V 1.698
ing parameters: sprung mass 1,370 kg, unsprung mass 80 kg at each fDP = − 0.881e 0.642 + 0.075G
axle, wheelbase 2,780 mm, wheel center 1,550 mm, height of center R 0.775
of gravity 520 mm, and tire size 215/55 R17; and SUV D Class with coefficient of determination = 0.996 (3)
the following parameters: sprung mass 1,430 kg; unsprung mass
80 kg and 100 kg at front and rear axle, respectively; wheelbase
SUV:
2,600 mm; wheel center 1,550 mm, height of center of gravity 650 mm;
and tire size 255/75 R16) traversing horizontal curves designed for
speeds of 50, 70, and 90 km/h. The curves had the following geo- 0.014V 1.788
fDP = − 0.991e 0.939 + 0.110G
metric characteristics (the combinations of these characteristics are R 0.872
summarized in Table 2):
coefficient of determination = 0.992 (4)
• Superelevation rates (e) were 6%, 8%, and 10%.
• Curve radius (R) was the minimum radius for each combina- where
tion of design speed and superelevation rate according to the Green fDP = peak lateral friction demand,
Book criteria (6). V = vehicle speed (km/h),
• Vertical grades (G) were 0, ±3%, ±6%, and ±10%.
R = curve radius (m),
e = superelevation rate, and
To understand the dynamics of the vehicle, 39 variables were observed G = vertical grade.
at 0.1-s intervals. The variables included forces (longitudinal, lateral,
and normal), angles (slip, steering, yaw, and roll), location of the vehi-
Variables for Driver Comfort Criterion

TABLE 2   Summary of Geometric Characteristics of Modeling Comfort Threshold and Operating Speed
Horizontal Curves in Simulation Runs
Data were collected at Carleton University in Ottawa, Ontario,
Design G (%) Canada, in 2005 with a vehicle instrumented with equipment to
Speed record the vehicle path, speed, lateral and longitudinal accelerations,
(km/h) e (%) R (m) −10 −6 −3 0 3 6 10
steering angle, positions of the throttle and braking pedals, and front
50 10 68 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ and rear headways (3). Thirty volunteer drivers drove the vehicle
50 8 73 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ on a path that was about 110 km long covering 47 horizontal curves
50 6 79 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ on seven different roads of different classifications. The drivers were
70 10 154 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ in the midage group (20 to 50) with driving experience ranging from
70 8 168 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ 5 to more than 16 years. The drivers had different self-reported driving
70 6 184 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
behavior, ranging from slightly cautious to slightly aggressive. They
90 10 277 ✓ ✓ ✓ were mostly undergraduate and graduate students, friends of the team
90 8 304 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
90 6 336 ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ members, and professors. For this research, data were extracted for
the vehicle’s lateral acceleration and speed on horizontal curves of
Note: ✓ = applicable; blank cell = not applicable. two-lane rural highways. Table 3 presents a summary of the two-lane
Dhahir and Hassan 25

0.25
Speed 70 km/h
Radius 184 m
0.20 Superelevation Rate 6%

Lateral Friction
0.15

0.10

Front Left
0.05 Front Right
Rear Left
Rear Right
0.00
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance (m)
(a)

0.25
Total Lateral Acceleration (g)

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05 Speed 70 km/h

Radius 184 m
Superelevation Rate 6%
0.00
200 250 300 350 400 450 500
Distance (m)
(b)

FIGURE 1   Typical profile of (a) lateral friction and (b) total lateral acceleration
on horizontal curve.

TABLE 3   Summary of Two-Lane Rural Highway Horizontal Curves in Instrumented

Vehicle Experiment

Spiral Length (m)

Turning Number of
Curve ID R (m) LC (m) Δ (°) Direction Entry Exit Data Points

3C4 273.32 381.54 79.95 Right — — 28

3C5 239.17 224.95 53.87 Left 54.98 — 26
3C6 325.05 169.97 29.95 Left 35.00 — 27
3C7 180.17 39.99 12.71 Right 25.00 10.00 25
3C8 555.89 159.99 16.48 Right 30.00 — 27
3C9 203.35 70.97 19.99 Left 30.00 39.00 27
3C10 267.25 429.9 92.13 Right 34.99 — 28
3C11 255.94 369.94 82.78 Left — — 27
6C1 463.05 159.97 19.79 Right — — 28

Note: LC = length of horizontal curve; Δ = deflection angle; — = no spiral.

26 Transportation Research Record 2588

rural highway curves covered in the experiment and used in this
study. More details on the experiment and data collection can be found
elsewhere (3, 8).
For each case of a specific driver on a specific curve, speed and
lateral acceleration were found to fluctuate along the curve as shown
in Figure 2. Therefore, an average lateral acceleration and speed for
each driver on each curve were calculated after the extreme obser-
vations at the beginning and end of the curve were removed; these
observations were treated as statistical outliers at a 5% level of sig-
nificance. Each average value was taken as one data point; Table 3
shows the number of data points on each curve after data in which
the vehicle was traveling at a non-free-flow condition (time headway
less than 5 s) or the curve speed was higher than the approach tangent
speed were excluded. By considering only the data of vehicles travel-
ing at a free-flow condition and decelerating on the approach tan-
gent and curve, it is assumed that the measured speeds corresponded
to the drivers’ speed choices and the measured lateral accelerations
corresponded to the drivers’ comfort threshold. Therefore, regression
analysis was used to develop models to predict the individual vehicle
speed and comfort threshold on horizontal curves for two-lane rural
roadways. Unlike most regression models for operating speed on
horizontal curves, these models predict the mean value of speed or
comfort threshold for all drivers on a curve.
Examination of the data showed that the comfort threshold
was directly related to the vehicle speed at the approach tangent
and inversely related to the speed reduction (the difference between
speed at the approach tangent and speed on the curve). This find-
ing is opposite to the trend observed in previous studies, in which
models were developed at the curve level (2, 3). In these studies,
it was reported that drivers tended to have higher expectations and
thus a lower threshold as the approach speed (as a surrogate measure
for speed environment) increased, and drivers tended to trade off a
higher comfort threshold to decrease their speed reduction on the
curve. The difference in trend is possibly attributed to the fact that
at the driver level as a driver’s approach speed increases or as the
speed reduction decreases, the curve speed for this driver increases.
Hence, the measured lateral acceleration increases as well. Therefore,
the trade-offs are not easily observed at the driver level. It is also
noticed that drivers had higher comfort thresholds on right-turn com-
pared with left-turn curves and on curves without spirals compared
with curves with spirals. Based on different variables combinations,
several models were established to predict the comfort threshold at

0.25 0.006
Lateral Acceleration
Alignment 0.005
0.20
Lateral Acceleration (g)

0.004
0.15

1/R (1/m)
0.003
0.10
0.002

0.05
0.001

0.00 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Distance (m)
(a)

100 0.006
Speed
90
Alignment 0.005
80
70
0.004
Speed (km/h)

60
1/R (1/m)

50 0.003
40
0.002
30
20
0.001
10
0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Distance (m)
(b)

FIGURE 2   Example of (a) lateral acceleration and (b) speed profile for
driver traversing horizontal curve.
Dhahir and Hassan
the driver level with the use of linear regression analysis. The model
recommended in this paper is as follows:
25.521
aL = − 0.378 + 0.004VAT − 0.004 ∆V − + 0.001∆
R sedan and SUV passenger cars as shown in the following equations:
+ 0.070 I Dir + 0.020 I Sp
2
Radj = 0.856; VIF < 2.162; SEE = 0.0217 (5)
where
aL = driver comfort threshold,
IDir = dummy variable for curve direction (= 0 for left turn, = 1
for right turn),
R = radius (m),
VAT = driver’s maximum speed on approach tangent within 200 m
before beginning of curve (km/h),
ΔV = driver’s speed reduction between VAT and mean speed on
curve (km/h),
Δ = deflection angle (°),
ISp = dummy variable for spirals (0 if no spiral, 1 if curve with
spiral),
R 2adj = adjusted coefficient of determination,
VIF = variation inflation factor, and
SEE = standard error of the estimate.
Linear regression analysis was used to develop models also at the
driver level to predict the mean speed on the curve. The models
showed that the effect of the spiral curve at the entrance and exit of the
curve on the selection of vehicle speed on the curve is insignificant.
The model recommended in this paper is formulated as follows:
Vc = 22.835 + 0.008 R − 0.056 ∆ + 0.675VAT − 1.575I Dir
Ra2dj = 0.713; VIF < 1.191; SEE = 4.0405 (6)
The developed models suggest that vehicles turning left on a spe-
cific curve will have a higher mean speed than those turning right on
the same curve if the approach speed in the two cases is the same.
This observation confirms a finding by Misaghi and Hassan, who
reported that speed reduction on right-turn curves is higher than on
left-turn curves (16). In addition, the comfort threshold model shows
that drivers turning left experience and tolerate lower lateral acceler-
ation than those turning right on the same curve if the approach speed
and speed reduction are the same. Therefore, a left turn is expected to
yield a higher probability of drivers exceeding the comfort threshold
and is taken in this paper as the critical direction.
Actual Lateral Acceleration
The data set created by CarSIM simulation outputs mentioned earlier
was used to determine the actual lateral acceleration experienced by
a vehicle’s occupants. As shown in Figure 1b, the lateral accelera-
tion data showed a trend of initial peak similar to that observed in
the lateral friction data. Because a steady state of lateral acceleration
was quickly reached after the initial peak, it was relatively easy to
estimate an average value of this steady state. The simulation outputs
contained the total lateral acceleration, including the portion counter-
balanced by the weight component as a result of superelevation and
the portion felt by the vehicle occupants. Because of the effects of
27
vehicle body roll, this lateral acceleration is slightly different from the
theoretical value of v2/R, where v = vehicle speed on the curve (m/s)
and R = curve radius (m). Nonlinear regression analysis in SPSS soft-
ware was used to develop models for the total lateral acceleration for
Sedan:
0.007V 2.048
aTot = + 0.023e + 0.002G
R1.019
coefficient of determination = 0.995 (7)
SUV:
0.007V 1.997
aTot = − 0.021e 0.408 + 0.028G
R 0.953
coefficient of determination = 0.996 (8)
where aTot is the total lateral acceleration affecting the vehicle and
its occupants (g).
A linear relationship with the superelevation rate in the model for a
sedan vehicle was used after the nonlinear relationship had yielded an
insignificant regression parameter. Finally, the net lateral acceleration
affecting the vehicle occupants, aexp, can then be calculated as
aexp = aTot − e (9)
Reliability Analysis
The general definition of reliability is the probability of a product or
system performing as it is intended under specified circumstances
within a specific duration (17). This definition presents a probabilistic
approach to dealing with uncertainty rather than using the traditional
deterministic approach, which relies on the near-worst-case scenario
of a problem. In other words, relying only on a factor of safety might
lead to overdesign in some cases and not necessarily result in a higher
level of safety or reliability (18). Reliability analysis can be used to
estimate the POF of the system, also referred to in the transportation
engineering literature as the probability of noncompliance (PNC) or
the probability of hazard (POH), which is equal to the probability of
demand exceeding supply or the capacity of the system. As mentioned
earlier, it is proposed here to use all of these terms depending on the
consequences of demand exceeding capacity. Therefore, POF is used
for the vehicle dynamic stability criterion, while PNC is used for the
driver comfort criterion. Several methods have been developed to
obtain an approximate solution of the POF or PNC; they are the first-
order reliability method, second-order reliability method, and Monte
Carlo sampling. The first-order reliability method and the second-
order reliability method are similar except that the performance func-
tion in the latter is approximated to a second-order function.
Generally, reliability analysis requires setting up a performance
function based on the difference between supply and demand. The
performance functions used in the reliability analysis to design hori-
zontal curves in this study were established on the basis of vehicle
dynamic stability and driver comfort criteria. The performance
function GS for the vehicle dynamic stability criterion was established
as the difference between the available lateral friction fS and lateral
friction demand fD. The vehicle was stable and under control as long
28 Transportation Research Record 2588

as fS was greater than fD. The limit state situation occurred when fS was • Initial values are selected for the curve design parameters
equal to fD, and GS was formulated as follows: (R and e). Current design guides and practices can be used to complete
this step.
GS = f S − f D (10) • The distribution of curve speed (Vc) is determined with the
developed model in Equation 6, which determines the mean speed
On the basis of the models developed for peak lateral friction demand, of individual vehicles on the curve. The standard deviation σ is
the performance function for sedan and SUV passenger cars can be equal to the model’s SEE value. With the assumption of a normal
written as distribution, the 85th percentile speed on the curve can be estimated
as V85 = µ + 1.036σ.
• The distribution of available lateral friction ( fS) is estimated on
Sedan:
the basis of the 85th percentile speed in Table 1. The friction data
1.698
can also be used to establish the correlation coefficient between Vc
 0.014V  and fS.
GS = f S −  − 0.881e 0.642 + 0.075G  (11)
 R 0.775  • The distribution of the comfort threshold (aL) is estimated with
the developed model in Equation 5. Similarly, the standard deviation
SUV: is equal to the model’s SEE value. The instrumented vehicle data
can also be used to establish the correlation coefficient between Vc
 0.014V
1.788
 and aL.
GS = f S −  − 0.991e 0.939 + 0.110G  (12) • Depending on the vehicle type to be analyzed, reliability analysis
 R 0.872 
is performed to estimate the reliability measures (POF, PNC, and β) of
the design with the use of the performance functions in Equations 10
For the driver comfort criterion, the performance function Ga is to 15.
based on the difference between the comfort threshold aL and the • By evaluating the estimated reliability measures or safety per-
actual lateral acceleration affecting the vehicle’s occupants aexp.
formance functions based on these measures, the design is deemed
Thus, Ga can be written as
acceptable or a different radius, superelevation rate, or both are
selected and the procedure is repeated.
Ga = aL − aexp (13)

Again, according to the developed models for actual lateral accelera- Design Example
tion, the performance functions for sedan and SUV passenger cars are
To illustrate the new design procedure, it is applied to design a sim-
Sedan: ple horizontal curve (without spiral) for a two-lane highway with a
design speed of 90 km/h and a deflection angle of 50°. A flat vertical
2.048 grade (G = 0) is assumed. Only the models for the Sedan D Class
 0.007V 
Ga = aL −  + 0.023e + 0.002G − e (14) passenger car are applied in this example although the SUV models
 R1.019 
can also be applied.

SUV:
1.997
 0.007 V  curves had a mean of 83.36 km/h, standard deviation of 8.66 km/h,
Ga = aL −  − 0.021e 0.408 + 0.028G − e (15)
 R 0.953  and 85th percentile of 92.81 km/h.
For the purpose of this research, the first-order reliability method
was used to estimate POF, PNC, and β. The analysis was performed
with Rt software, which can handle correlated variables with the
Nataf transformation procedure (19). The distributions of available
lateral friction and operating speed on horizontal curves were taken
from Table 1. These distributions were tested and found to follow a
normal distribution (10).
Design Procedure
A new framework for horizontal curve design is proposed in this
paper following an iterative process as shown in Figure 3 and
summarized below:
• An initial design speed is selected for the horizontal curve.
• A distribution of approach tangent speeds (VAT) is assumed on
the basis of knowledge of the speed environment in the region.
• On the basis of the experiment data used in this paper, the dis-
tribution of all free-flow speeds on approach tangents of left-turn
• Assuming e equals 6%, an initial value of R according to the
Green Book is 336 m (6).
• With Equation 6, the predicted mean Vc is 79.08 km/h, σ is
4.04 km/h, and the 85th percentile speed is 83.26 km/h.
• For the 85th percentile speed of 83.26 km/h, mean and standard
deviation of fS are 0.2988 and 0.0463, respectively (cubic spline
interpolation of Table 1). According to the friction data, the correlation
coefficient between Vc and fS is −0.690.
• With Equation 5, mean and standard deviation aL are 0.1343 g
and 0.0217 g, respectively. According to the instrumented vehicle
data, the correlation coefficient between Vc and aL is 0.355.
• The estimated POF for the sedan passenger car for the above
inputs is 0.00202 (β = 2.875).
• The estimated PNC is 0.01188 (β = 2.261).
If these calculated values of POF, PNC, and β are not acceptable,
several measures can be taken to increase the reliability of the design;
measures include increasing the radius of the curve, adding a spiral
curve, or increasing the superelevation rate. In this example, increas-
Dhahir and Hassan 29

Select Initial Design Speed

Determine Speed Distribution at

Tangent (VAT)

Select Initial Values

R and e

Predict Speed Distribution on

Curve (Vc)

Reliability Analysis

Estimate Distribution of Available Estimate Distribution of Driver

Lateral Friction (fs) Comfort Threshold (aL)

Establish Vehicle Dynamic Stability Establish Driver Comfort Performance

Performance Function (Gs) Function (Ga)

FORM FORM

Estimate POF and β Estimate PNC and β

Safety Performance
Functions

No
Select Different Value Design
of R or e, or both Acceptable?

Yes

Final Design

FIGURE 3   Horizontal curve design framework.

ing the radius option was selected. For illustration purposes, the results
of the iterations for radii ranging from 250 to 450 m are shown in
Figure 4 and Table 4.
The outputs of the design iterations highlight the effect of radius on
the POF and PNC. Generally, the POF is much lower than the PNC,
which is a favorable trend because the consequences of failure of the
vehicle dynamic stability criterion are much more severe than those
of the failure of the driver comfort criterion.
Conclusions
The current practice followed to design horizontal curves suffers from
a number of shortcomings, including using outdated driver and vehi-
cle characteristics in a deterministic approach, neglecting a vehicle’s
characteristics in estimating the lateral friction demand, and lacking
a quantitative safety evaluation. A design framework was developed
in this paper to overcome such problems. This framework includes
30 Transportation Research Record 2588

0.18 5.00
β POF
0.16 4.50

0.14 3.79 4.00

3.44
3.50
0.12
3.01
3.00
0.10
2.49
POF 2.50

β
0.08
1.83 2.00
0.06
1.50
0.04 1.00
0.02 0.50
0.00 0.00
250 300 350 400 450
Radius (m)
(a)

0.18 5.00
β PNC
0.16 4.50

0.14 4.00

3.30 3.50
0.12
2.90 3.00
0.10
PNC

2.41 2.50

β
0.08
1.81 2.00
0.06
1.50
0.04 1.05
1.00
0.02 0.50
0.00 0.00
250 300 350 400 450
Radius (m)
(b)

FIGURE 4   POF, PNC, and b of horizontal curves with different radii:
(a) vehicle dynamic stability criterion and (b) driver comfort criterion.

TABLE 4   Design Outputs for Horizontal Curve

Vehicle Dynamic Driver Comfort

fS Stability Criterion Criterion
Mean Vc
R (m) (km/h) Mean SD Mean aL (g) POF β PNC β

250 78.36 0.3014 0.0465 0.1575 0.0338 1.8278 0.1459 1.0543

300 78.78 0.2999 0.0464 0.1422 0.0065 2.4858 0.0350 1.8123
336 79.08 0.2988 0.0463 0.1343 0.0020 2.8747 0.0119 2.2608
350 79.20 0.2984 0.0463 0.1317 0.0013 3.0091 0.0079 2.4145
400 79.62 0.2969 0.0462 0.1243 0.0003 3.4361 0.0019 2.9004
450 80.04 0.2955 0.0461 0.1189 0.0001 3.7933 0.0005 3.2951

Note: Design speed = 90 km/h; 85th percentile approach tangent speed = 92.81 km/h; e = 6%; R according to
Green Book = 336 m; SD = standard deviation.
Dhahir and Hassan
several steps to satisfy driver comfort and vehicle dynamic stabil-
ity. Reliability analysis was used to allow for safety evaluation in
relation to the probability of failure or the probability of noncompli-
ance. The accuracy of estimating lateral friction demand and lateral
acceleration was also improved by using a vehicle dynamics model,
which considers vehicle characteristics. Statistical models were then
developed to predict peak lateral friction demand and average lat-
eral acceleration on horizontal curves. A model for the driver comfort
threshold was developed according to a recent experiment. Reliability
analysis used these models to evaluate horizontal curve design on the
basis of vehicle dynamic stability and driver comfort. The proposed
framework and developed models were applied in a design example
in which reliability measures were calculated for horizontal curves
with different radii and for a specific design speed.
These reliability measures can be considered as surrogate mea-
sures of safety, in which collisions are expected to increase with the
increase of the POF of the vehicle dynamic stability or the increase
of the PNC of driver comfort. However, the proposed framework
focused only on the two criteria related to vehicle dynamics. Addi-
tional criteria should be considered by the designer; these criteria
include the POH resulting when the demanded stopping sight distance
on the curve exceeds the available value (20, 21). A system reliability
analysis can then be followed to evaluate the overall reliability of
the horizontal curve design (22).
Future work to enhance the proposed design framework should
focus on developing safety performance functions to relate collision
frequency to the aforementioned reliability measures. Furthermore,
the potential of the developed reliability measures (POF, PNC, POH,
and β) as design consistency measures should be explored. While
collision frequency on an individual horizontal curve is expected to
decrease as the POF, PNC, and POH decrease or as β increases, a
system evaluation of successive horizontal curves may favor consis-
tent values of these reliability measures. Finally, the models should
be expanded to consider other vehicle types and different weather
conditions, because speed distribution, friction demand, or both can
change considerably during different weather conditions and times
of day. Such models can help enhance the developed design frame-
work by estimating the POF, PNC, and POH for each vehicle type in
each set of conditions. An overall value of the POF, PNC, and POH
can then be estimated for a specific road segment depending on the
traffic volume for each set of conditions and the frequency at which
such conditions occur.
Acknowledgments
The authors are highly indebted to Scott Himes for providing the
necessary data to conduct the reliability analysis and to Ben Dupery
of the Mechanical Simulation Corporation for providing technical
assistance with CarSIM software. Financial support by the Natural
Sciences and Engineering Council is gratefully acknowledged.
References
1. Torbic, D. J., D. W. Harwood, D. K. Gilmore, R. Pfefer, T. R. Neuman,
K. L. Slack, and K. K. Hardy. NCHRP Report 500: Guidance for Imple-
mentation of the AASHTO Strategic Highway Safety Plan; Volume 7:
31
A Guide for Reducing Collisions on Horizontal Curves. Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004.
2. Bonneson, J. A. Controls for Horizontal Curve Design. In Transportation
Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1751,
TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 82–89.
3. Said, D., Y. Hassan, and A. O. Abd El Halim. Comfort Thresholds for
Horizontal Curve Design. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 36,
No. 9, 2009, pp. 1391–1402.
4. Mesaghi, P., and Y. Hassan. Modeling Operating Speed and Speed
Differential on Two-Lane Rural Roads. Journal of Transportation Engi-
neering, Vol. 131, No. 6, 2005, pp. 408–418.
5. Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads. Transportation Association
of Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, 1999.
6. A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 6th ed. AASHTO,
Washington, D.C., 2011.
7. Mechanical Simulation CarSIM. http://www.carsim.com/products/carsim
/index.php. Accessed March 13, 2014.
8. Said, D., Y. Hassan, and A. O. Abd El Halim. Methodology for Analys-
ing Vehicle Trajectory and Relation to Geometric Design of Highways.
International Journal of Advances in Transportation Studies, Vol. X,
2006, pp. 55–72.
9. Nie, B., and Y. Hassan. Modeling Driver Speed Behavior on Horizon-
tal Curves of Different Road Classifications. Presented at 86th Annual
Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2007.
10. Himes, S. C. Reliability Based Design of Horizontal Curves Consider-
ing the Effects of Grades. PhD thesis. Pennsylvania State University,
State College, 2013.
11. Olson, P. L., P. S. Fancher, and L. W. Schneider. NCHRP Report 274:
Parameters Affecting Stopping Sight Distance. TRB, National Research
Council, Washington, D.C., 1984.
12. Lamm, R., P. Basil, and M. Theodor. Highway Design and Traffic Safety
Engineering Handbook. McGraw–Hill Companies, Inc., New York, 1999.
13. Dhahir, B., and Y. Hassan. Using Vehicle Simulation in Reliability
Analysis of Horizontal Curves Based on Vehicle Stability and Driver
Comfort. Proc., 2015 Road and Safety Simulation Conference, Oct. 6–8,
Orlando, Fla.
14. Stergios, M., and P. Basil. Horizontal Curve Design to Accommodate
Tractive and Braking Forces and Lateral Load Transfer of Passenger
Cars and Two Axle Trucks. Proc., 2nd Transportation Specialty Confer-
ence, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, 1998, pp. 357–371.
15. Li, L., F. Y. Wang, and Q. Zhou. Integrated Longitudinal and Lateral
Tire/Road Friction Modeling and Monitoring for Vehicle Motion Control.
IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 7, No. 1,
2006, pp. 1–19.
16. Misaghi, P., and Y. Hassan. Modeling Operating Speeds and Speed
Differential on Two-Lane Rural Roads. Journal of Transportation Engi-
neering, Vol. 131, No. 6, 2005, pp. 408–418.
17. Leitch, R. D. Reliability Analysis for Engineers, an Introduction. Oxford
University Press, New York, 1995.
18. Singh, V. P., S. K. Jain, and A. Tyagi. Risk and Reliability Analysis:
A Handbook for Civil and Environmental Engineers. ASCE, Reston, Va.,
2007.
19. Mahsuli, M., and T. Haukaas. Computer Program for Multimodel
Reliability and Optimization Analysis. Journal of Computing in Civil
Engineering, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2013, pp. 87–98.
20. Sarhan, M., and Y. Hassan. Three-Dimensional, Probabilistic Highway
Design: Sight Distance Application. In Transportation Research Record:
Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2060, Transportation
Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008,
pp. 10–18.
21. Sarhan, M., and Y. Hassan. Reliability-Based Three-Dimensional
Design of Horizontal Lateral Clearance. Canadian Journal of Civil
Engineering, Vol. 38, No. 8, 2011, pp. 909–920.
22. Essa, M., T. Sayed, and M. Hussein. Application of System Reliability
Analysis in Geometric Design: A Case Study of Horizontal Curves on
the Sea to Sky Highway. Proc., 5th International Symposium on Highway
Geometric Design, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, June 22–24,
2015.
The Standing Committee on Geometric Design peer-reviewed this paper.