Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published January 1996

Saturation Flow and Capacity of Shared Lanes: Comparative Evaluation of Estimation Methods

Abstract

The operation of shared lanes, especially in the case of permitted phasing control, is still considered a complicated task and one for which many procedures and methods have been introduced. Dealt with here is the complexity when left- or right-turn movements or both are made during the unsaturated part of the opposing traffic flow. Three main methods used for estimating the shared lane's saturation flow rate and capacity values—that used in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and the Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) and the Canadian methods—were analyzed and evaluated. The methodology for the comparative evaluation was based on two main approaches. In the first approach, example 1 of Chapter 9 of the HCM was used as a case study in which left through and left through right shared lanes exist in permitted phase control. In this case several computer runs were performed using the programs SIDRA and SINTRAL to estimate saturation flow and capacity values of the shared lanes opposed by different traffic volumes of the conflicting movements. Results of this approach showed that the 1985 HCM and ARRB methods are fairly close in estimating saturation flow and capacity, whereas the Canadian method gave considerably different results. Analysis showed that the sensitivity of the Canadian method to estimate saturation flow rates of the shared lane in cases of different levels of opposing traffic was an average of 10 times higher than the average of the two other methods, which were very close in their estimation of levels of opposing traffic volumes. In the second approach, field measurements of saturation flow rate values of shared lanes at different locations and operational conditions were compared with the values estimated by the three methods under the same conditions. Results, based on field observations, revealed that the Canadian method estimates of saturation flow were always lower than the measured values. At low saturation flow values, HCM estimates were slightly higher than the observed values; however, at higher saturation flow rate values. HCM estimates closely matched the observed ones. The ARRB method estimates were quite close to the observed saturation flow values under all of the different conditions considered in the field observation task.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Akçelik R. Opposed Turns at Signalised Intersections: The Australian Method. ITE Journal, Vol. 59, No. 6, 1989, pp. 21–27.
2. Akçelik R. Capacity of a Shared Lane. Proc., 14th ARRB Conference, Vol. 14, No. 2, 1988, pp. 228–241.
3. Special Report 209: Highway Capacity Manual. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985.
4. Richardson D., Schenablegger J., Stephenson B., and Teply S. Canadian Capacity Guide for Signalised Intersections, 1st ed. ITE, District 7; University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada, Feb. 1984.
5. Teply S. Highlights on the Canadian Capacity Guide for Signalised Intersections. In Transportation Research Record 1005. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1985.
6. Akçelik R. SIDRA (Signalised Intersection Design and Research Aid) User's Manual 1994.
7. Teply S., and Stephenson B. Micro-Sintral User's Manual. ITE, District 7, Aug. 1990.
8. Giannopoulos G., and Papaioannou P. Calculation of Saturation Flow Rate Value. In Urban Traffic Network of Thessaloniki, Research Report 3/93, Laboratory of Transport Engineering, University of Thessaloniki, Greece, 1993.

Cite article

Cite article

Cite article

OR

Download to reference manager

If you have citation software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice

Share options

Share

Share this article

Share with email
EMAIL ARTICLE LINK
Share on social media

Share access to this article

Sharing links are not relevant where the article is open access and not available if you do not have a subscription.

For more information view the Sage Journals article sharing page.

Information, rights and permissions

Information

Published In

Article first published: January 1996
Issue published: January 1996

Rights and permissions

© 1996 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

G. A. Glannopoulos
Laboratory of Transport Engineering, University of Thessaloniki, GR-540 06 Thessaloniki, Greece
Muhammad A. S. Mustafa
Trans-european Consulting Unit of Thessaloniki (TRUTh) S.A., 18 Navarinou Square, GR-546 22 Thessaloniki, Greece.

Metrics and citations

Metrics

Journals metrics

This article was published in Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board.

VIEW ALL JOURNAL METRICS

Article usage*

Total views and downloads: 2

*Article usage tracking started in December 2016


Altmetric

See the impact this article is making through the number of times it’s been read, and the Altmetric Score.
Learn more about the Altmetric Scores



Articles citing this one

Receive email alerts when this article is cited

Web of Science: 0

Crossref: 1

  1. Saturation Flow Model for Signalized Intersection under Mixed Traffic ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar

Figures and tables

Figures & Media

Tables

View Options

Get access

Access options

If you have access to journal content via a personal subscription, university, library, employer or society, select from the options below:


Alternatively, view purchase options below:

Purchase 24 hour online access to view and download content.

Access journal content via a DeepDyve subscription or find out more about this option.

View options

PDF/ePub

View PDF/ePub