COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ROUNDABOUT CAPACITIES … · 2016-12-15 · Assistant Professor,...

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 335 [email protected]

International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET) Volume 7, Issue 6, November-December 2016, pp. 335–347, Article ID: IJCIET_07_06_036

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=7&IType=6

ISSN Print: 0976-6308 and ISSN Online: 0976-6316

© IAEME Publication

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ROUNDABOUT

CAPACITIES UNDER HETEROGENEOUS TRAFFIC

CONDITIONS AT PATEL CHOWK AND RACE

COURCE IN DELHI, INDIA (A CASE STUDY)

Yogesh Kumar, Bhanu Pratap Singh, Amit Ashish

Assistant Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, SRM University, NCR Campus,

Modinagar (Ghaziabad), India,

ABSTRACT

This paper addresses the MIXED TRAFFIC CAPACITY and the analysis of GEOMETRICAL

PARAMETERS of roundabouts at PATEL CHOWK (Raundabout-1 or R.D1) and RACE COURSE

(Raundabout-1or R.D2) present in the heart of DELHI. The entry of mixed traffic of vehicle in peak

hour was observed for one hour at both roundabouts termed as Circulating Flow Capacity or

Volume Capacity (Qc) noted down in terms of passenger car unit per hour (pcu/hr) or vehicle per

hour (veh/hr). The geometrical parameters of both the roundabouts are noted down, through which

the Entry Capacity or Practical Capacity (Qe or Qp) of the roundabouts is determined using U.K

CAPACITY MODEL and IRC CAPACITY MODEL. The ratio of Circulating Flow Capacity by

Entry capacity is called as DEGREE OF SATURATION (DOS) which should be less than 0.85, for

the smooth flow of traffic without any congestion to avoid queue of traffic and delay in time.

During the analysis it was found that most of the legs of both roundabouts are in good shape and

are in under control i.e. their Circulating Flow Capacity (Qc) is less than Entry Capacity (Qe) and

their degree of saturation is less than 0.85 except few legs, for north leg of R.D1 the Qc >Qe {

Qc=2452 veh/hr & Qe=1617 veh/hr } and DOS=1.51, also for east leg of R.D2 Qc is very close to

Qe { Qc= 1536 veh/hr & Qe=1550 veh/hr } and DOS=0.94. Rest all other legs, six out of eight legs

of the roundabouts are in control. Also at R.D2 for north leg, entry width (e1) & approach half

width (v) is coming out to be very less compared to entry width of other legs. {e1=6.1m v=5.8m}.

Also for R.D1 for leg north, east & south length of weaving section (L) > four times the width of

weaving section (4W). {Leg N, L=60.5m > 4W=57.36m .Leg E, L=59.54m > 4W=57.64m. Leg S,

L=60.19m > 4W=55.64m} will cause road accident because greater length of weaving section

causes over speed. Rest all other geometrical parameters of the roundabouts are in good shape and

are in permissible limits. Overall performance of both the roundabouts under mixed traffic is good

and geometrical parameters are within permissible limits. Further future study is required for

analysis of capacity by Gap Acceptance Model which is based on driver behavior and depend on

queue length & delay time of traffic.

Key words: Entry capacity, Circulating flow, Volume, Weaving length, Degree of saturation

Yogesh Kumar, Bhanu Pratap Singh and Amit Ashish


Cite this Article: Yogesh Kumar, Bhanu Pratap Singh and Amit Ashish, Comparative Evaluation

of Roundabout Capacities Under Heterogeneous Traffic Conditions at Patel Chowk and Race

Cource in Delhi, India (A Case Study). International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,

7(6), 2016, pp.335–347.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/issues.asp?JType=IJCIET&VType=7&IType=6

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. General

A roundabout is a type of circular intersection or junction in which road traffic flows almost continuously in

one direction around a central island. So-called "modern" roundabouts require entering traffic to give way

to traffic already in the circle and optimally observe various design rules to increase safety. Compared to

stop signs, traffic signals, and earlier forms of roundabouts, modern roundabouts reduce the likelihood and

severity of collisions by reducing traffic speeds and minimizing T-bone and head-on collisions. Variations

on the basic concept include integration with tram and/or train lines, two-way flow, higher speeds and

many others.

1.2. Types of Roundabout

There are generally five types of roundabouts and these are:

a) Conventional Roundabout- which is composed of a circular or asymmetrically large central island

usually more than 25 meter diameter around which there is a one-way carriageway with weaving sections.

The carriageway may or may not have flared approaches.

b) Small Roundabout: With a one-way circulatory carriage-way round a small central island less than 25

meter diameter with flared approaches.

c) Mini Roundabout: This is a roundabout with one way carriage way around a flush or slightly raised

circular island less than four meters diameter with or without flared approaches.

d) Double Roundabout: An individual junction with two small or mini roundabouts either contiguous or

connected by a short link road.

e) Multi Roundabout: An individual junction with three or more small or mini roundabouts either

contiguous or inter connected by short link roads.

1.3. Elements of Roundabouts

Comparative Evaluation of Roundabout Capacities Under Heterogeneous Traffic Conditions at Patel Chowk and

Race Cource in Delhi, India (A Case Study)


• Inscribed circle diameter

• Entry width

• Circulatory roadway width

• Central island

• Entry curves

• Exit curves

• Pedestrian crossing location and treatments

• Splitter islands

• Stopping sight distance

• Intersection sight distance

• Vertical considerations

1.4. Objectives

The specific objectives of this research are as follows:

• To find the capacity of a roundabout.

• To visualize the physical and geometric parameters.

• To check the Degree of Saturation.

2. STUDY AREA AND DATA COLLECTION

2.1. Study Area

New Delhi is a capital city. This city contains more population and more traffic problems so we can reduce

traffic flow with increase capacity of roundabouts. The essential geometric and peak hour traffic data are

collected at roundabouts. That roundabouts are chosen based on the principle of possible representative of

the target population of roundabouts regarding size and numbers. New Delhi has many roundabouts and

the chosen roundabouts have three four legs in order to fully represent the size of the roundabouts.

Actually, most of these roundabouts were built 20 years ago when rotary and traffic circles were popular

but now the drivers have to operate in accordance to modern roundabout traffic rules. The traffic system

and volume has substantially changed since then. Various construction works have been done in the

vicinity, some for commercial purposes and others for infrastructure purposes. Thus the efficiency of the

roundabouts has consequently changed. Two such major roundabouts were chosen in the city and the

traffic data during peak hours was collected. Then the geometric features of the roundabout were also

measured using various possible measuring methods.

2.2. Data Collection

Roundabouts Date of video taking Time of day

Race Course 08/04/2016 09:00am to 10:00am

Patel Chowk 09/04/2016 09:00am to 10:00am



2.3. Total Number of Vehicles

Roundabout

Heavy

Vehicles

Light Vehicles

Total number

of vehicles

Total

Traffic(PCU)

Percentage of

Heavy

Vehicles

Cars/

Autos

Bikes Total

Race Course 152 2886 1019 3905 4057 3851.5 4 %

Patel Chowk 212 3724 1580 5304 5516 4726 4 %

The table clearly shows the maximum number of vehicle entering the roundabouts during the peak

hour of 09:00am to 10:00am. The Patel Chowk roundabout was seen facing a greater number of vehicles

while the Race Course roundabout was handling comparatively fewer vehicles. This result is consistent

with the locality and the size of the roundabouts.

3. STUDY METHODOLOGY

Two different methods (models) for analysis of roundabouts in terms of their efficiencies have been used

as the study methodology for this study. This project involves analysis of roundabouts and comparing the

different empirical capacity values obtained from the UK Model and the Indian Congress of Roads Method

to the practical values obtained from the videography of the corresponding roundabout. The traffic at a

roundabout is characterized by various elements such as delay, lag, critical gap etc.

3.1. UK Capacity Model

The UK has used roundabouts as an effective means of traffic control in the modern high traffic density era

for some 25 years or more. The key decision was to change to giving circulating traffic priority. From this

moment, heavy traffic loads could no longer cause a roundabout to lock up, provided the exits could accept

all the traffic passed to them. Substantial research program undertaken by the UK Government over a

period of some 10-12 years which resulted in the establishment of robust, dependable relationships both for

the capacity and the likely accident record of roundabouts. The whole purpose of the research program was

to produce information that the traffic engineer could use to design roundabouts that would meet his

operational requirements; there was no intention to produce theoretically pleasing equations that explained

the processes involved, just to give practical links between geometry, capacity/delay and accidents.

Kimber developed a set of equations for urban single-lane and two-lane roundabouts for estimating

entry capacities (Qe). The set of equations is based on roundabout geometric parameters.

Qe= {K (F−fc⋅Qc)}, fc⋅Qc≤F

Qe = 0 fc.Qc>F

Where, K=1−0.00347 (φ−30) −0.978 (1/r – 0.05)

F = 303.x2

fc = 0.210td(1+0.2x2)

td = 1+ 0.5 / [1+exp{(D-60)/10}]

X2 = v + (e-v) / (1+2S)

S = 1.6(e-v) / l’

Where Qe, is the entry capacity, veh/h, Qc is the circulating flow, veh/h, e is the entry width (m), v is

the approach half width (m), l′ is the effective flare length (m), S is the sharpness of flare(m/m), D is the

inscribed circle diameter (m), φ is the entry angle(°), and r is the entry radius(m).




47

22

17

21

Traffic Volume at Patel

Chowk (%)

North Leg

West Leg

East Leg

South Leg

3.2. The Indian Road Congress Method (IRC 65-1976)

In this method, the practical capacity of a roundabout is considered as similar to that of the capacity of the

weaving section of the roundabout which is as follows

Qp={280w(1+e/w)(1−p/3)}

(1+w/l)

Where Qp is the practical capacity of the weaving section in pcu/h, w is the width of weaving section

in meters (within the range of 6–18 m), w= (e1+e2 ) /2 + 3.5 , w=(e1+e2)/2+3.5, e is the average entry

width in meters (e=(e1+e2)/2), e/w to be within the range of 0.4–1, l is the length in meters of the weaving

section between the ends of the channelizing islands (w/l to be within the range of 0.12–0.4), p is the

proportion of weaving traffic, i.e., ratio of sum of crossing streams to the total traffic on the weaving

section, given by p = (b+c)/(a+b+c+d) , the range of p being 0.4–1. The parameters a, b, c, d for a weaving

section between two legs of a roundabout are given in the table , where W ij represents weaving section

between leg i and leg j and T ij represents vehicle turning movement counts from leg i to leg j. Legs are

numbered in clock wise direction as shown in the figure.

4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Leg Wise Traffic Share

Roundabout

Leg Name

Entry Traffic

Flow(PCU)

Percentage of Traffic share

Race Course N

W

E

S

714.5

1104

1407

626

18%

28%

36%

16%

Patel Chowk N

W

E

S

2222

1069.5

831.5

1025.5

47%

22%

17%

21%

Traffic Volume at Race Course Traffic Volume at Patel Chowk

18

2836

16

Traffic Volume at Race

Course (%)

North Leg

West Leg

East Leg

South Leg



55%25%

4% 16%

Categorial traffic volume at

Race Course

Cars

Bikes

Bus/Truck

Auto

47%

28%

4%

21%

Categorial traffic volume at

Patel Chowk

Cars

Bikes

Bus/Truck

Auto

Categorial Traffic Volume

Leg

Name

Race Course Patel Chowk

N

W

E

S

Cars Bikes Bus/Truck Auto Cars Bikes Bus/Truc

k

Auto

411

668

946

198

185

304

378

152

36

20

30

66

103

224

182

154

1112

556

315

594

684

298

187

411

56

54

90

12

600

204

153

190

Total 2223 1019 152 663 2577 1580 212 1147

Categorial Traffic Volume Categorial Traffic Volume

Leg Wise Traffic Volume

Roundabout

Leg

Name

Vehicles

Total

LMV

Total

Vehicles

Total

Traffic

(CPU)

Light Vehicles Heavy Vehicles

Cars &

Autos

Bikes Buses / Trucks

Race Course N

W

E

S

514

892

1128

352

185

304

378

152

36

20

30

66

699

1196

1506

504

735

1216

1536

570

714.5

1104

1407

626

Patel Chowk N

W

E

S

1712

760

468

784

684

298

187

411

56

54

90

12

2396

1058

655

1195

2452

1112

745

1207

2222

1069.5

831.5

1025.5




2452

1112

745

1207

Legwise traffic volume at

Patel Chowk

North Leg

West Leg

East Leg

South Leg

BAR CHART

Leg wise Traffic Volume Leg wise Traffic Volume

5. PARAMETERS FOR IRC METHOD

Race Course

Leg Name e1 e2 e=(e1+e2)/2 w=(e1+e2)/2 + 3.5 l (l ≤4w)

North

West

East

South

5.1

8.5

8.2

8.1

13.48

10.40

9.26

9.30

9.29

9.45

8.73

8.7

12.79

12.95

12.23

12.2

28.13

35.64

39.66

23.26

Patel Chowk

Leg Name e1 e2 e=(e1+e2)/2 w=(e1+e2)/2 + 3.5 l (l ≤4w)

East

North

South

West

11.86

11.25

10.86

11.82

9.96

10.43

9.96

10.72

10.91

10.84

10.41

11.27

14.41

14.34

13.91

14.77

59.54

60.50

60.19

58.7

Here e1 = width of the entry leg

e2 = width of the exit leg

e = average entry width

w = width of the weaving section

l = length of the weaving section

6. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

The analysis of data includes determination of mixed traffic entry capacity of vehicles, geometric

parameter and weaving section of two different roundabouts. All the summarized data is taken in

consideration. We can proceed to the analysis using the IRC (INDIAN ROAD CONGRESS) method and

U.K (UNITED KINGDOM) method.

735

12161536

570

Legwise traffic volume at

Race Course

North Leg

West Leg

East Leg

South Leg



Patel Chowk( RD1 ) Race Course( RD2 )

7. ANALYSIS BY U.K METHOD

PATEL CHOWK (RD1)

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

INSCRIBED

CIRCLE

DIAMETER

(D)m

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e)m

APPROACH

HALF

WIDTH

(v)m

ENTRY

RADIUS

(r)m

EFFECTIVE

FLARE

LENGHTH

(L’)m

SHARPNESS

OF

FLARE

(S)

ENTRY

ANGLE

(φ)

N 82.36 11.25 7.2 39.6 37.1 0.10916 32

E 82.36 11.86 7.04 36.4 40.2 0.11990 32

W 82.36 11.82 7.1 38.42 36.1 0.13074 32

S 82.36 10.86 7.01 37.64 40.1 0.09600 32

*φ here is assumed to be 32 degrees

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

F

X2

K

td

fc

CIRCULATING

FLOW

(Qc)

Veh/hr

ENTRY

CAPACITY

(Qe)

Veh/hr

N 3188.832 10.5242 1.017 1.000139 0.651892 2452 1617

E 3311.093 10.9277 1.015 1.000139 0.669056 745 2854.83

W 3285.004 10.8416 1.016 1.000139 0.665439 1112 2585.75

S 3102.659 10.2398 1.015 1.000139 0.640160 1207 2364.93


http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp

0

1000

2000

3000

N E W S

2452

7451112 1207

1617

28542585

2364

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

F

N 1842.24

E 2396.73

W 2517.93

S 2648.22

BAR CHART

(RD1)

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

INSCRIBED

CIRCLE

DIAMETER

(D)m

N 47.78

E 47.78

W 47.78

S 47.78



http://www.iaeme.com/IJCIET/index.asp 343

Qc

2364

Qc

Qe

RACE COURSE (RD2)

X2

K

td

fc CIRCULATING

FLOW

(Qc)

Veh/hr

6.08 0.991 1.00438 0.46739 735

7.91 0.944 1.00438 0.54459 1536

8.31 0.998 1.00438 0.35054 1216

8.74 0.986 1.00438 0.57960 570

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e)m

APPROACH

HALF

WIDTH

(v)m

ENTRY

RADIUS

(r)m

EFFECTIVE

FLARE

LENGTH

(L’)m

6.1 5.8 19.5 10.72

8.2 6.8 20.4 11.09

8.5 7.2 17.6 15.5

8.1 8.5 18.1 12.1


[email protected]

CIRCULATING

FLOW

(Qc)

Veh/hr

ENTRY

CAPACITY

(Qe)

Veh/hr

735 1485

1536 1550

1216 2085

570 2306

(RD2)

SHARPNESS

OF

FLARE

(S)

ENTRY

ANGLE

(φ)

0.02798 32

0.12623 32

0.08387 32

0.03305 32

Yoge


8. ANALYSIS BY I.R.C ME

*P( proportioning ratio) is assumed to be 0.7.

BAR CHART

(RD1)

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e1)m

NON

WEAVING

SECTION

WIDTH

(e2)m

N 11.25 10.43

E 11.86 9.96

W 11.82 10.72

S 10.86 9.96

LEG

OF

ROUNDABOUT

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e1)m

NON

WEAVING

SECTION

WIDTH

(e2)m

N 6.1 9.38

E 8.2 9.26

W 8.5 10.40

S 8.1 9.30



ANALYSIS BY I.R.C METHOD

PATEL CHOWK (RD1)

RACE COURSE (RD2)

*P( proportioning ratio) is assumed to be 0.7.

(RD2

WEAVING

SECTION

WIDTH

AVERAGE

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e)m

WIDTH

OF

WEAVING

SECTION

(w)m

LENGTH

OF

WEAVING

SECTION

(L)m

10.43 10.84 14.34 60.50

10.91 14.41 59.54

10.72 11.27 14.77 59.7

10.41 13.91 60.19

WEAVING

ECTION

WIDTH

AVERAGE

ENTRY

WIDTH

(e)

WIDTH

OF

WEAVING

SECTION

(w)m

LENGTH

OF

WEAVING

SECTION

(L)m

7.74 11.24 28.13

8.73 12.23 39.66

.40 9.45 12.95 35.64

8.7 12.2 23.26

sh Kumar, Bhanu Pratap Singh and Amit Ashish

[email protected]

(RD2)

CIRCULATING

FLOW

(Qc)

pcu/hr

PRACTICAL

CAPACITY

(Qp)

pcu/hr

2222 4369

831 4375

1069 4480

1025 4240

CIRCULATING

FLOW

(Qc)

pcu/hr

PRACTICAL

CAPACITY

(Qp)

pcu/hr

714 2911

1407 3439

1104 3526

626 2942



DEGREE OF SATURATION (DOS)

the leg of the roundabouts, which should be less than 0.85. If the v/c > 0.85 than the volume of traffic

become greater than capacity of roundabouts.

9. DEGREE OF SATURATION

DOS FOR PATEL CHOWK

RACE COURSE

(RD2)

N

E

W

S

DOS FOR RACE COURSE

BAR CHART

DEGREE OF SATURATION (RD1)

1.51

0.26

0.43

0.51

0.85

0.85

0.85

0.85

0 1 2

N

E

w

S

PATEL CHOWK

(RD1)

N

E

W

S




DEGREE OF SATURATION (DOS) Degree of saturation is directly proportional to

which should be less than 0.85. If the v/c > 0.85 than the volume of traffic

become greater than capacity of roundabouts.

DEGREE OF SATURATION DOS FOR U.K MODEL

DOS FOR PATEL CHOWK (U.K MODEL)

VOLUME

(V)

CAPACITY

(C)

DEGREE OF

SATURATION

735 1485

1536 1550

1216 2085

570 2306

DOS FOR RACE COURSE (U.K MODEL)

DEGREE OF SATURATION (RD1) DEGREE OF SATURATION (RD2)

v/c = 0.85

v/c

VOLUME

(V)

CAPACITY

(C)

DEGREE OF

SATURATION

2452 1617

745 2854

1112 2585

1207 2364


[email protected]

gree of saturation is directly proportional to the capacity at

which should be less than 0.85. If the v/c > 0.85 than the volume of traffic

DEGREE OF

SATURATION

(V/C)

0.49

0.94

0.58

0.24

DEGREE OF SATURATION (RD2)

DEGREE OF

SATURATION

(V/C)

1.51

0.26

0.43

0.51



10. DEGREE OF SATURATION DOS FOR IRC MODEL

DOS FOR PATEL CHOWK (IRC MODEL)

DOS FOR RACE COURSE (IRC MODEL)

11. CONCLUSION

Based on the literature, different countries have their own methods for capacity analysis, which are made

by different researchers. But here we have used the method which depends on the geometrical parameters

i.e. U.K METHOD and IRC METHOD. The U.K method completely depends on the geometric parameters

such as entry width, approach width, flare length, entry radius, and entry angle. Whereas, the IRC method

is mainly depends on the weaving section of the roundabouts and other geometric parameters such as entry

width & exit width.

PATEL CHOWK and RACE COURSE roundabouts capacity analysis results indicate that, the few

legs of roundabouts are in serious problems. Also the traffic volume is within the limit of entry capacity at

most of the legs of the roundabouts.

These roundabouts were built 1950-1970, since that time traffic congestion has increased and many

construction activities has under gone, at RACE COURSE roundabout due to the METRO STATION

construction work has caused serious damage to the entry width & approach width of roundabout of the leg

N, entry width is reduced to only 6.1m & the approach half width 5.8m.

At PATEL CHOWK roundabout the weaving length which should be less than four times weaving

section is coming out to be more than the desired value in leg N, leg E & leg S as shown below. The

greater weaving length will cause over speeding of vehicle and can lead to accidents while merging and

diverging of traffic.

RACE COURSE

(RD2)

VOLUME

(V)

CAPACITY

(C)

DEGREE OF SATURATION

(V/C)

N 714 2911 0.24

E 1407 3439 0.40

W 1104 3526 0.31

S 626 2942 0.21

PATEL CHOWK

(RD1)

VOLUME

(V)

CAPACITY

(C)

DEGREE OF SATURATION

(V/C)

N 2222 4369 0.50

E 831 4375 0.18

W 1069 4465 0.23

S 1025 4240 0.24



At RACE COURSE roundabout for leg E vehicle capacity (Qc = 1536 veh/hr) is coming out to be very

close to entry capacity (Qe = 1550 veh/hr)

vehicle capacity (Qc = 2452 veh/hr) is coming out to be m

DOS=1.51. This will cause congestion of traffic during merging and diverging of traffic.

REFERENCE

[1] IRC 65-1976: Recommended Practice for Traffic Rotaries, 1976,

[2] J.MOD. TRANSPORT 2015, Comparative Evaluation of

Traffic Conditions.

[3] Wu.N.(1997); "An Universal Formula for Calculating Capacity at Roundabout', A

Institute for Traffic Engineering. No.13, Ruhr

[4] Polus, A and S Shmueli (2011), “Analysis and Evaluation of the Capacity of Roundabouts”,

[5] Transportation Research Board, No. 1572, pp.99

[6] NCHRP 672: Roundabouts: An informational Guide, Second Edition, Transpor

2010

[7] MdDiah, J, Mohd Y A. Rahman, M A. Adnan, and K. Hooi Ling(2011), “Modeling the Relationship

between Geometric Design and Weaving Section Flow Process of Conventional Roundabouts”, Journal

of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 137, No

[8] Kimber, R. (1980), “The Traffic Capacity of Roundabouts”, Laboratory Report 942, U.K. Transport and

Road Research Laboratory, Crow

[9] Ram Ranjan Sahu, Dr. Pramod Kumar Gupta b

Structures For Inward Inversion.

3(2), 2012, pp.251–264.

[10] Akcelik, R (2011), “Evaluating Roundabout Capacity, Level of Se

[11] Al-Masaeid, H.R., M.Z. Faddah (1997), “Capacity of Roundabouts in Jordan”, Transportation

[12] Research Record 1572, pp. 76

[13] Dr. L.R. Kadiyali (2012);” Traffic Engineering and Transportation Engineering”.

[14] Highway Enginnering (Khanna and Justo).

[15] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout

[16] https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1141028

[17] Transportation Research Recor

119–126

[18] Robinson, B. W and L. A. Rodegerdts (2000), “Capacity and Performance of Roundabouts: A Summary

of Recommendations in the FHWA Roundabout Guide”,

0

20

40

60

80

N

14.34

57.36




Weaving Length Values


close to entry capacity (Qe = 1550 veh/hr) & DOS=0.94 and at PATEL CHOWK roundabout for leg N

vehicle capacity (Qc = 2452 veh/hr) is coming out to be more than entry capacity (Qe = 1617 veh/hr)


1976: Recommended Practice for Traffic Rotaries, 1976, Indian Road Congress

J.MOD. TRANSPORT 2015, Comparative Evaluation of Roundabout Capacities

Wu.N.(1997); "An Universal Formula for Calculating Capacity at Roundabout', A

Traffic Engineering. No.13, Ruhr-University Bochum, March 1997

Polus, A and S Shmueli (2011), “Analysis and Evaluation of the Capacity of Roundabouts”,

Transportation Research Board, No. 1572, pp.99-105.

NCHRP 672: Roundabouts: An informational Guide, Second Edition, Transpor

MdDiah, J, Mohd Y A. Rahman, M A. Adnan, and K. Hooi Ling(2011), “Modeling the Relationship


of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 137, No. 12, December 1, 2011.

Kimber, R. (1980), “The Traffic Capacity of Roundabouts”, Laboratory Report 942, U.K. Transport and

Road Research Laboratory, Crow thorne, Berkshire, England, 1980

Ram Ranjan Sahu, Dr. Pramod Kumar Gupta b, Studies On Geometrical Featured Metallic Shell

Structures For Inward Inversion. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Tech

Akcelik, R (2011), “Evaluating Roundabout Capacity, Level of Service and Performance”

Masaeid, H.R., M.Z. Faddah (1997), “Capacity of Roundabouts in Jordan”, Transportation

Research Record 1572, pp. 76-85.

Dr. L.R. Kadiyali (2012);” Traffic Engineering and Transportation Engineering”.

(Khanna and Justo).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout

https://trid.trb.org/view.aspx?id=1141028

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1988, 2006, pp.

Robinson, B. W and L. A. Rodegerdts (2000), “Capacity and Performance of Roundabouts: A Summary

of Recommendations in the FHWA Roundabout Guide”,

E S

14.41 13.91

57.36 57.64 55.6460.5 59.54 60.19


[email protected]


& DOS=0.94 and at PATEL CHOWK roundabout for leg N

ore than entry capacity (Qe = 1617 veh/hr) &


Indian Road Congress

Roundabout Capacities under Heterogeneous

Wu.N.(1997); "An Universal Formula for Calculating Capacity at Roundabout', Arbeitsblaetter of

University Bochum, March 1997

Polus, A and S Shmueli (2011), “Analysis and Evaluation of the Capacity of Roundabouts”,

NCHRP 672: Roundabouts: An informational Guide, Second Edition, Transportation Research Board,

MdDiah, J, Mohd Y A. Rahman, M A. Adnan, and K. Hooi Ling(2011), “Modeling the Relationship


Kimber, R. (1980), “The Traffic Capacity of Roundabouts”, Laboratory Report 942, U.K. Transport and

, Studies On Geometrical Featured Metallic Shell

l of Civil Engineering and Technology (IJCIET),

rvice and Performance”

Masaeid, H.R., M.Z. Faddah (1997), “Capacity of Roundabouts in Jordan”, Transportation

Dr. L.R. Kadiyali (2012);” Traffic Engineering and Transportation Engineering”.

d: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1988, 2006, pp.

Robinson, B. W and L. A. Rodegerdts (2000), “Capacity and Performance of Roundabouts: A Summary

w

4w

L

COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ROUNDABOUT CAPACITIES … · 2016-12-15 · Assistant Professor,...

Documents

Transcript of COMPARATIVE EVALUATION OF ROUNDABOUT CAPACITIES … · 2016-12-15 · Assistant Professor,...