Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Signalized IntersectionsSignalized Intersections

Kelli Lee

S.S/Science

Todd BondsS.S/Science

Research Study Site: Intersection of

Martin Luther King Drive and Clifton Avenue

GOAL: Improve vehicular delay and CO emissions at signalized intersections.

Objectives:

•Identify relationship between vehicles’ delay and CO emission;

•Identify existing delay and CO emission;

•Propose solutions to minimize delay & CO emission.

Data Collection Data Collection

MethodologyMethodology

Delay and CO ResultsDelay and CO Results

•Correlated patterns on the peaks and valleys;•Delay has an obvious impact on the CO concentration.

Existing ConditionsExisting Conditions

•LOSs of the different movements are unbalanced

•Overall emitted CO is 44.97g/hr.

Movement Existing CondtionsLOS Delay

WB LT D 42.43WB T C 29.23

WB RT B 15.42EB LT C 29.52EB T B 17.42

EB RT A 9.47NB LT D 41.81NB T D 39.69

NB RT B 17.31SB LT F 101.80SB T D 39.15

SB RT B 16.83

Overall Average C 33.19

This is good!

This is

unacceptable!

Alternative Solution 1Alternative Solution 1

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6

G: 4.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 9.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 24.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s

G: 11.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 0.5sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 13.5sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s

Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4

G: 6.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 38.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s

G: 11.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s

G: 15.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s

Cycle length remains 90 seconds

Movement Existing Condtions Alternative One

LOS Delay LOS DelayWB LT D 42.43 D 38.62

WB T C 29.23 C 29.68

WB RT B 15.42 B 15.04

EB LT C 29.52 D 43.60EB T B 17.42 C 30.71

EB RT A 9.47 B 13.96

NB LT D 41.81 D 40.37

NB T D 39.69 D 43.32NB RT B 17.31 B 19.30

SB LT F 101.80 D 35.45

SB T D 39.15 C 32.39

SB RT B 16.83 B 13.00

Overall Average C 33.19 C 30.60

2.59s/veh better

Satisfactory (from “F”)

Alternative Solution 1Alternative Solution 1

More Balanced

Alternative Solution 2Alternative Solution 2

•Alternative Solution 1 +

Alternative Solution 2Alternative Solution 2Movement Existing Condtions Alternative One Alternative Two

LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS DelayWB LT D 42.43 D 38.62 C 26.69WB T C 29.23 C 29.68 C 25.18

WB RT B 15.42 B 15.04 B 12.04EB LT C 29.52 D 43.60 D 42.71EB T B 17.42 C 30.71 C 29.91

EB RT A 9.47 B 13.96 B 12.65NB LT D 41.81 D 40.37 D 43.41NB T D 39.69 D 43.32 D 41.88

NB RT B 17.31 B 19.30 B 19.66SB LT F 101.80 D 35.45 C 34.17SB T D 39.15 C 32.39 C 33.58

SB RT B 16.83 B 13.00 B 13.90

Overall Average C 33.19 C 30.60 C 28.32 BEST!

BEST!

ConclusionsConclusions

• Correlated patterns on the peaks and valleys

• Existing LOS unbalanced; Southbound left turn unacceptable LOS F.

• Alternative Solution 1: delay 7.78%, CO emission 4.26%,

• Alternative Solution 2: delay 14.68%, CO emission 9.68%,

• Recommendations:Alternative Solution 1 short-term solution

Alternative Solution 2 long-term plan

Questions???Questions???

THANK YOU!!

AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsLane Group Delay and LOS Rating

Andrea Burrows, RET Grant Coordinator

Dr. Anant Kukreti, RET Project Director

Dr. Heng, Wei, Associate Professor, Ph.D., P.E.

Zhixia Li, Ph.D. Student and Research Assistant

Zhuo Yao, Ph.D. Student, Research Assistant

Project RET is funded through NSF Grant # EEC-0808696