FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND GEOMATIC ENGINEERING
HIGHWAY LABORATORY
LAB REPORT BFC 32501 EXPERIMENT TITLE
SIGNALISED INTERSECTION CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE AND SPOT SPEED STUDY BFC 32501 3 MAY 2016 GROUP 10 1. SAIFOL BIN CHE AAFAN (CF140213) 2. MOHAMAD R OSLI BIN ABD RAHIM (CF140177) 3. MOHD AFIQ BIN MOHD ANUAR (CF140247) 4. NUR SYAMIMI BT ZAINOR ARIFFIN (CF140205) 5. NUR AMALINA BT MD ZAKI (CF140106) 6. 7.
COURSE CODE DATE GROUP NO. GROUP MEMBERS
LECTURER/ INSTRUCTOR/ TUTOR DATE OF REPORT SUBMISSION Criteria Attendance & Discipline Aim / Purpose
Materials
Procedure
Data
1
9 MAY 2016 2
SCR
WT
Student in laboratory just before laboratory start
Student in laboratory 10 minutes earlier
1
- Purpose is identified - Relevant variables are described
- Purpose is clearly identified - Relevant variables are described
1
Most lab materials included
All necessary lab materials included and listed
All necessary lab materials included and listed in an organized manner
1
Procedures are not listed
Procedures are listed but not in clear manner
All necessary lab materials included but not listed in any particular order Procedures are listed in clear steps but not numbered and/or complete sentences
- Procedures are listed in clear steps - Each steps is numbered and in a complete sentence
- Good representation of the data using tables or graphs - Less than 15% difference with accepted values - Precision is acceptable - Trends / patterns are logically analyzed for the most part - Questions are answered in complete sentences - Analysis is general A statement of the results of the lab indicates whether result support the hypothesis
- Accurate representation of the data using tables or graph - Data is fairly precise - Less than 10% difference with accepted values - Trends / patterns are logically analyzed - Question are answered in complete sentences - Analysis is thoughtful
- Procedures are listed in clear steps - Each step is numbered and in a complete sentence - Diagram are included to describe the set-up - Accurate representation of the data using tables or graphs - Graphs and tables are labeled and titled. - Data is precise with less than 5% difference with accepted values. - Trends / patterns are logically analyzed - Question are answered thoroughly and in complete sentences - Analysis is insightful
Did the job but did not appear to be very interested. Focus lost on several occasion Student can answer questions and begin to make connections between the experiment & application
Used time pretty well. Stayed focused on the experiment most of the time Student can explain the result in detail and the ways in which they relate to the research focus
- Trends / patterns are not analyzed - Questions are not answered - Analysis is not relevant
- Trends / patterns are not analyzed - Answer to questions are incomplete - Analysis is inconsistent
No discussion was included or shows little effort and reflection on the lab
A statement of the results is incomplete with little reflection on the lab
Participation (during experiment)
Student was hostile about participation
Participation was minimal
Interview or quiz
Student cannot answer questions about the experiment
Student can answer some questions
Total score
5
Student in laboratory within 10 to 30 minutes late - Purpose is identified - Relevant variables are described in somewhat unclear manner
- Data lacks precision - Greater than 20% difference with accepted values
Discussion
4
Student in laboratory within 30 minutes to 1 hour late - Purpose is somewhat vague - Relevant variable are not described
Data not represented or is not accurate
Analysis / Result
3
Student in laboratory more than 1 hour late - Purpose is not identified - Relevant variables are not described There is not a list of the necessary lab materials
- Accurate statement of the results of the lab indicates whether result support the hypothesis - Possible sources of error identified
- Accurate statement of the results of the lab indicates whether result support the hypothesis - Possible sources of error and what was learned from the lab discussed Showed interested, used time very well, guide other students and very focused on the experiment Student can explain the results in detail and the ways in which they relate to the research focus. Student can also evaluate the significance of the experiment to real situation
1
4
4
4
1
3
TSCR (%)
EXAMINER COMMENTS:
APPROVAL STAMP
STUDENT CODE OF ETHIC (SCE) DEPARTMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND GEOMATIC ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
I, hereby confess that I have prepared this report on my own effort. I also admit
not to receive or give any help during the preparation of this report and pledge that everything mentioned in the report is true.
____________________ Name: Saifol bin Che Aafan No.matrix: CF140213 Date: 9 May 2016
____________________ Name: Nur Amalina bt Md Zaki No.matrix: CF140106 Date: 9 May 2016
____________________ Name: Mohd Afiq bin Mohd Anuar No.matrix: CF140247 Date: 9 May 2016
____________________ Name: Mohamad Rosli bin Abd Rahim No.matrix: CF140177 Date: 9 May 2016
____________________ Name: Nur Syamimi Bt Zainor Ariffin No.matrix: CF140205 Date: 9 May 2016
1.0 INTRODUCTION The capacity of a street is related primarily to the signal timing and the geometric characteristics of the facility as well as to the compositon of traffic on the facility. Geometrics are a fixed characteristics of a facility. Thus, while trag]ffic composition may vary somewhat over time, the capability of a facility is generally a stable value that can be significantly improved only by initialing geometric improvements. At signalised intersections, the additional element of time allocation is introduced into the concept of capacity. A traffic signal essentially allocates time among conflicting traffic movements that seek to use the same space. The way in which time is allocated significantly affects the operation and the capacity of the intersection and its approaches. In analysing a signalised intersection, the physical unit of analysis is the lane group. A lane group consists of one or more lanes on an intersection approach. The outputs from application of the method in this manual are reported on the basic of each lane group. Capacity at intersections is defined for each lane group. The lane group capacity is the maximum hourly rate at which vehicles can reasonably be expected to pass through the intersection under prevailing traffic, roadway, and signalization conditions. Capacity is stated in vehicles per hour (veh/h). The level of service (LOS) at signalised intersections is expressed in terms of delay, which relate to control, geometrics, traffic and incidents. Stopped delay may be used to determine the LOS. It is defined as the time a vehicle waits at a traffic light. Stopped delay stated in seconds per vehicles (sec/veh).
2.0 OBJECTIVE To determine the capacity and level of service of the UTHM signalised intersections using JKR Arahan Teknik (Jalan) 13/87 procedure.
3.0 APPARATUS / EQUIPMENT 1. Measuring Tape / Odometer 2. Stopwatch 3. Analog Counter (optional) 4. Safety Vest 5. Safety Cones 6. Flags 4.0 PROCEDURES 1. A traffic movement been counted at each approach for one hour in segments of 15 minutes have been conducted. The data have been recorded in tables 1 – 6. 2. The lane width, W (in meter) had been measured for each approach and recorded in Table 7. 3. For each phase, the green time, g (sec) and cycle time, C (sec) have been measured. Then the data recorded in Table 8. 4. Traffic volumes that been recorded in Tables 1 – 6 to passenger car unit (p.c.u.) must be converted. This is taken as the design flow, q (pcu/hr) which will then be used in Table 7. 5. The saturation flow, S (pcu/hr) for each approach and transfer the values to Table 7 been determined. 6. By using Table 7, y have been computed, which is the ratio of design flow to saturation flow and the Y value is determined, which is the total value of y for each approach. 7. Then, the inter-green time is calculated, I (sec) and total lost time per cycle L (sec), 8. The practical capacity, Yprac and reserve capacity, RC of the intersection had been determined. 9. Then the average stopped delay per vehicle, d (sec) and level of service for each approach is determined.RESULT
5.0 DATA AND CALCULATION Table 1 Approach (Movement) : PARIT RAJA (RIGH-TURN) Day/ Date: Tuesday/3 May 2016 Time
Lane : 1 Weather : cloudy
Traffic Count Vehicle Class 1 5 5
5 5
5 5 5
2 5 5 5
3 5 5 1
4
4
15
5 5 1
5 5
5 5
5 5 5 4
5 5 5
5 5 5
5
1
1
30
5 5 5 5 3
5
5
5 5 4
5 5
5 5
5
1
1
5 5
5 2
5
5 5 5
5 5 1
5 5
5
2
1
45
60
Vehicle Class Class 1 (Motorcycles) Class 2 (Cars) Class 3 (Vans&Medium Truck) Class 4 (Heavy Truck&Buses) Total (PR1)
Traffic Volume (veh/hour) 106 160 23 5 294
Table 3
2
p.c.u Factor 0.33 1.00 1.75 2.25
p.c.u 34.98 160.00 40.25 11.25 246.48
Approach (Movement) : PARIT RAJA (THROUGH) Day/ Date: Tuesday/3 May 2016 Time
Lane : 3 Weather : cloudy
Traffic Count Vehicle Class 5 5 5
1 5 5 2
5 5 5
5 5 4
5 5
5 5 5
5 5 5
5 5 3
5
5
5
5 5
15
30
45
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5
3 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5
4 5
5 5 3
1
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5
5 5 5
5 5 1
5
5
4
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 5
5 5 5
5 5 4
5 5
5
5
1
5
5
5
5
4
5 5
60
5 5
5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Vehicle Class Class 1 (Motorcycles) Class 2 (Cars) Class 3 (Vans&Medium Truck) Class 4 (Heavy Truck&Buses) Total (PR1)
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5
Traffic Volume (veh/hour) 164 837 168 45 1214
Table 5
5 5
5 5
p.c.u Factor 0.33 1.00 1.75 2.25
p.c.u 54.12 837 294 101.25 1286.37
Approach (Movement) : UTHM (RIGH-TURN) Day/ Date: Tuesday/3 May 2016 Time
Lane : 1 Weather : cloudy
Traffic Count Vehicle Class 1 5 5
5 5
5 5 5 5
2 5 5 5 5
3
4
15
5 5 5
5 5
5 5
5 5 5
5 5 1
5 5
5
2
30
5 5 1 5 5 5 5
5 5 5
5 5 5
5 5 5 4
5 5 5 5 5 2 5 5 5 5 5 5
4
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 2
2
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
2
1
45
60
Vehicle Class Class 1 (Motorcycles) Class 2 (Cars) Class 3 (Vans&Medium Truck) Class 4 (Heavy Truck&Buses) Total (PR1)
5 5 5 5
1
1
Traffic Volume (veh/hour) 175 292 10 8 485
Table 7
p.c.u Factor 0.33 1.00 1.75 2.25
p.c.u 57.75 292 17.5 18.00 385.25
Approach (Movement) : BATU PAHAT (U-TURN) Day/ Date: 3 May 2016 Time
Lane : 1 Weather : cloudy
Traffic Count Vehicle Class 1 2
5 5 2
3
5 5
4
5
15
2 5 5
3
4
5 5
4
0
5 4
5
3
0
5 5
5 5
5
4
0
5 5
5 5
5 3
3
0
30
45
60
Vehicle Class
Class 1 (Motorcyles) Class 2 (Cars) Class 3 (Vans & Medium Tracks) Class 4 (Heavy Trucks & Buses) Total (BU1)
Traffic Volume (veh/hr) 17 109 14 0 140
Table 9
p.c.u Factor
p.c.u
0.33 1.00 1.75 2.25
5.61 109 24.5 0 139.11
Approach (Movement) : BATU PAHAT (THROUGH) Day/ Date: 3 May 2016 Time
Lane : 3 Weather : cloudy
Traffic Count Vehicle Class 1
2
3
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 4
5 5 5 5 5 1
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 1
5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 1
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5
45
5 5 4
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 4
5 5 5
5 5
60
5 5 3
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 4
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5
5 5 3
5 5
15
30
Vehicle Class
Class 1 (Motorcyles) Class 2 (Cars) Class 3 (Vans & Medium Tracks) Class 4 (Heavy Trucks & Buses) Total (BU1)
Traffic Volume (veh/hr) 122 905 98 63 1188
Table 11
4
5 5 5 5
5 5 5 3
5 5
5 2
5 5 1
5 5
5 4
5
p.c.u Factor
p.c.u
0.33 1.00 1.75 2.25
40.26 905 171.5 141.75 1258.51
Phase Movemen t W(m) S*(pcu/hr ) q(pcu/hr) y=q/S* y
I
II
PT2
BT3
PT2
PR1
PR1
4.2 1337.3
4.2 1337.3
4.2 1337.3
4.2 1337.3
4.2 1337.3
1287 0.96
1259 0.94
1287 0.96
0.94
247 0.18 0.96
247 0.18
III BU1 4.2 1337.3 139 0.10 0.18
KEY: P=Parit Raja Approach ;B= Batu Pahat Approach; U=UTHM Approach ;T=Through R=Right-turn; L=Left-Turn ;I =Lane 1 ; 2=Lane 2;3 = Lane 3; 4 = lane 4 Y
= y1 + y2 + y3 + y4 = 0.94 + 0.96 + 0.18 + 0.29 = 2.37
Amber time, a
= 3sec
All-red period, R
= 2sec
Intergreen time, I
=a+R =3+2 = 5sec
Drivers’ reaction time, l = 2sec Number of phases, n = 4 Total lost time, L
= n(l-a) + nl = 4(5-3) + 4(5) = 28 sec
Practical capacity, Y prac = 0.9 - 0.0075L = 0.9 – 0.0075(28) = 0.69 Reserve capacity, RC
= 100% x (Yprac - Y) / Y ¿ 100 x ( = 70%
2.37−0.69 ) 2.37
IV UR 4.2 1337.3 386 0.29 0.29
Sadj = S × Fg × Fr × Fl × Ft S= 2075 (W<4.25) Fg=1.0 *0% gradient Ft=0.90 Fr=0.77 Fi=0.93 Sadj = 2075× 1.0 × 0.77 × 0.93 × 0.9 = 1337.3 Phase Movement C (sec) g (sec) λ = g/C S (pcu/hr) q(pcu/hr) qs(pcu/sec) x = q/λS d(sec) LOS
d=
[
1
PT2
2
BT3
PT2
3
PR1
UR
41 82 2.00
64 16 0.25
74 37 0.5
74 37 0.5
74 37 0.5
1337.3 1287
1337.3 1259
1337.3 1287
1337.3 247
1337.3 247
1337.3 139
1337.3 386
0.36 0.49 29.86 D
0.35 1.2 17.9 C
0.36 0.49 28.03 D
0.07 0.8 39.8 D
0.07 0.38 24.5 C
0.04 0.22 10 B
0.11 0.15 9.1 B
2 9 C (1−λ) x2 + 10 2(1−λx ) 2 q s ( 1−x )
[
BU1
62 49 0.79
]
BT3 d=
PR1
41 82 2.00
]
62(1−0.79)2 9 1.22 + =17.9 10 2(1−0.79(1.2)) 2( 0.35) ( 1−1.2 )
SKETCH OF UTHM INTERSECTION
Sketch of Phase Diagram
Phase
Movemen t
I
PT2
II
BT3
PT2
III
PR1
PR1
IV
BU1
UR
6.0 DISCUSSION
After done this experiment, our group completely get the value of transportation that use infront UTHM which are from Parit Raja (Right-Turn), Parit Raja (Through), UTHM (Right-Turn), Batu Pahat (U-Turn) and Batu Pahat (Through). In each of the direction, our group has been recorded in 1 hour at the same time. From the data that has been collected at Parit Raja (Right-Turn) shows that, the volume for all vehicle class of traffic during 1 hour period is 294 and the value of p.c.u. (passenger car unit) is 246.48. Then, the traffic volume data from Parit Raja (Through) is 1214 and their p.c.u is 1286.37. Next is the traffic volume from UTHM (Right-Turn) 485 and the value of p.c.u is 385.25. other than that, the value of traffic volume of Batu Pahat (U-Turn) is 140 and the value of p.c.u is 139.11 and the last data of traffic volume of Batu Pahat (Through) is 1188 and the p.c.u value is 1258.51. From the data shows that the highest value is from Parit Raja (Through) which is 1214 and their p.c.u value is 1286.37. It shows that, during this period of time, the road users is greater compare to others direction. Besides, from this direction, our group think the value of traffic become highest because majority of road user has been done their matter for example their are many of facilities that have in Parit Raja likes school, factory, police station, clinic, bank and others. From that, certainly shows that, the road users are not stayed in this particular town. Secondly the data shows that, Batu Pahat (Through) is 1188 and the p.c.u value is 1258.51. From this two direction, mostly it become the busy road according to the data that has been collected. Thats why, this two direction provided 3 lane to road users. Next was the data from UTHM (Right-Turn) which is 485 and the value of p.c.u is 385.25. On this road, only students, staff and others people that has their business are used it. So, the value of traffic not become the high value. Parit Raja (Right-Turn) data shows that only 294 and the value of p.c.u. (passenger car unit) is 246.48 has been recorded. Its maybe only student and staff that uses in this period of time. Lastly is, data from Batu Pahat (U-Turn) which is 140 and the value of p.c.u is 139.11. This value become the lowest traffic volume in 1 hour period of time, and the reason why the data become the lowest is because the road user majority from Batu Pahat starting from “Kolej Kementerian Tinggi Mara” does not have the U-Turn space and only infront of UTHM the road users can do the U-Turn.
7.0 CONCLUSION This experiment contains a methodology for analyzing the capacity and level of service (LOS) of signalized intersctions. The analysis must consider a wide variety prevailing conditions, including the amount and distribution of traffic movements, traffic composition, geometric characteristics and details of intersection signalization. In this experiment, we know that level of service is the average control delay per vehicle that estimated for each lane group and aggregated for each approach and for the intersection as a whole. Level of Service (LOS) is directly related to the control delay value. This experiment also determining the capacity. Capacity at signalized intersections is based on the concept of saturation flow and saturation flow rate. And the control delays includes movement at slower speeds and stops on intersection approaches as vehicles move up in queue position or slow down upstream of an intersection. Many of the intersections analyzed in the study area operate at an acceptable level of service. Intersection LOS is directly related to the average control delay per vehicle. Once delay have been estimated for each lane group and aggregated for each approach and the intersection, the appropriate LOS is determined. This result have explained the volume capacity ratios for each lane group and for all the critical lane groups within the intersection as a whole, and average control delays for each lane group and approach for the intersection as a whole along with corresponding LOS.
8.0 REFERENCE
http://fib.bme.hu/proceedings/styevola.pdf http://atrf.info/papers/2009/2009_chaudry_ranjitkar.pdf http://www.ci.seatac.wa.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=11371 https://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/tvm/1111_nptel/574_SignalLos/plain/plain.html