Skip to main content
Intended for healthcare professionals
Restricted access
Research article
First published online January 1, 2012

Effect of Pedestrian Impedance on Vehicular Capacity at Multilane Roundabouts with Consideration of Crossing Treatments

Abstract

Past research has documented that pedestrian crossings at modern roundabouts can result in an impedance effect on the available capacity of entering traffic. The magnitude of this impedance effect is intuitively linked to the allocation of rights-of-way at the crosswalk, where a greater likelihood of driver yielding is expected to affect capacity more severely. However, existing pedestrian impedance models in the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual and the FHWA Roundabout Guide are not sensitive to yielding rates. The principal objective of this paper is to quantify pedestrian impedance effects on the vehicular entry capacity at multi-lane roundabouts as a function of driver yielding behavior. A calibrated microsimulation model is used to develop the relationships and explore changes in volume and yielding parameters. Impedance models are further developed for the pedestrian hybrid beacon (PHB) treatment, which is gaining increasing attention at multi-lane roundabouts across the United States. The results confirm the expected effects that the pedestrian impedance is more severe with higher pedestrian flow rates but decreases in severity with greater conflicting flows. The results further show that the effect of varying yielding rates on the impedance effect is minimal for congested roundabout approaches, because the relative effect of yielding is small compared with that of pedestrian volumes and conflicting circulating flow. The analysis of the PHB treatment shows that the impedance effect of the same pedestrian flows is generally less than that for an unsignalized crossing environment.

Get full access to this article

View all access and purchase options for this article.

References

1. Highway Capacity Manual 2010. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
2. Rodegerdts L., Blogg M., Wemple E., Myers E., Kyte M., Dixon M.P., List G. F., Flannery A., Troutbeck R., Brilon W., Wu N., Persaud B.N., Lyon C., Harkey D. L., and Carter D. NCHRP Report 572: Roundabouts in the United States. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007.
3. Kyte M., Dixon M. P., List G., Flannery A., and Rodegerdts L. Data Collection and Extraction. In Transportation Research Circular E-C083: National Roundabout Conference: 2005 Proceedings, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005.
4. Akçelik R. A Roundabout Case Study Comparing Capacity Estimates from Alternative Analytical Models. Presented at 2nd Urban Street Symposium, Anaheim, Calif., July 2003.
5. Khatib Z. K. Multilane Roundabout Capacity. Proceedings of the 5th International Symposium on Highway Capacity and Quality of Service, Vol. 2, Technical papers, Oct. 2006.
6. Flannery A., and Datta T.K. Operational Performance Measures of American Roundabouts. In Transportation Research Record 1572, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 68–75.
7. Rodegerdts L., Bausen J., Tiesler C., Knudsen J., Myers E., Johnson M., Moule M., Persaud B., Lyon C., Hallmark S., Isebrands H., Crown R.B., Guichet B., and O'Brien A. NCHRP Report 672: Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, 2nd ed. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010.
8. Stuwe B. Untersuchung der Leistungsfaehigkeit und Verkehrssicherheit an deutschen Kreisverkehrsplaetzen. (Evaluation of Capacity and Safety at German Roundabouts). Schriftenreihe Lehrstuhl fuer Verkehrswesen. Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany, 1992.
9. Brilon W.B., Grossman M., and Blanke H. Verfahren fuer die Berechnung der Leistungsfaehigkeit und Qualitaet des Verkehrsablaufes auf Strassen (Method for Calculating Capacity and Quality of Service of Traffic Flow for Streets). Heft 669. Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany, 1994.
10. Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, 1st ed. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2000.
11. Public Rights of Way Accessibility Guidelines, rev. draft. United States Access Board, 2005.
12. Fitzpatrick K., Turner S. M., Brewer M., Carlson P. J., Ullman B., Trout N. D., Park E.S., Whitacre J., Lalani N., and Lord D. TCRP Report 112/NCHRP Report 562: Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized Crossings. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006.
13. Schroeder B.J., and Rouphail N.M. Mixed-Priority Pedestrian Delay Models at Single-Lane Roundabouts. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2128, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2010, pp. 129–138.
14. Bared J.G., and Edara P.K. Simulated Capacity of Roundabouts and Impact of Roundabout Within a Progressed Signalized Road. In Transportation Research Circular E-C083: National Roundabout Conference: 2005 Proceedings, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005.
15. Bared J.G., and Afshar A.M. Using Simulation to Plan Capacity Models by Lane for Two- and Three-Lane Roundabouts. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2096, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2009, pp. 8–15.
16. Ambadipudi R. P. Modeling High-Capacity Multilane Roundabouts. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
17. Schroeder B.J., and Rouphail N.M. A Framework for Evaluating Pedestrian–Vehicle Interactions at Unsignalized Crossing Facilities in a Microscopic Modeling Environment. Presented at 86th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2007.
18. Schroeder B.J., Rouphail N. M., and Hughes R. G. Toward Roundabout Accessibility—Exploring the Operational Impact of Pedestrian Signalization Options at Modern Roundabouts. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 134, No. 6, 2008.
19. U.S. Access Board. Revised Draft Guidelines for Accessible Public Rights-of-Way. 2006. http://www.access-board.gov/prowac/draft.htm. Accessed July 1, 2010.
20. Ashmead D., Guth D., Wall R., Long R., and Ponchillia P. Street Crossing by Sighted and Blind Pedestrians at a Modern Roundabout. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 11, 2005, pp. 812–821.
21. Guth D., Ashmead D., Long R., and Ponchillia P. Blind and Sighted Pedestrians’ Judgments of Gaps in Traffic at Roundabouts. Human Factors, Vol. 47, No. 2, 2005, pp. 314–342.
22. Institute of Transportation Research and Education. NCHRP Report 674: Crossing Solutions at Roundabouts and Channelized Turn Lanes for Pedestrians with Vision Disabilities. Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2011.
23. Fitzpatrick K., Chrysler S. T., Van Houten R., Hunter W. W., and Turner S. Evaluation of Pedestrian and Bicycle Engineering Countermeasures: Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons, HAWKs, Sharrows, Crosswalk Markings, and the Development of an Evaluation Methods Report. Report No. FHWA-HRT-11-039. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2011.
24. Fitzpatrick K., and Park E.S. Safety Effectiveness of the HAWK Pedestrian Crossing Treatment. Report No. FHWA-HRT-10-042. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2010.
25. FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). 2009. http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/kno_2009.htm. Accessed June 1, 2011.
26. U.S. Access Board. Proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Rights of Way. Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Released July 26, 2011. http://www.access-board.gov/prowac/nprm.htm. Accessed July 27, 2011.
27. VISSIM Users Guide. Software Release 5.30. PTV America, Portland, Ore., 2011.

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 online: January 1, 2012
Issue published: January 2012

Rights and permissions

© 2012 National Academy of Sciences.
Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Bastian Schroeder
Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Nagui M. Rouphail
Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Katayoun Salamati
Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.
Zachary Bugg
Institute for Transportation Research and Education, North Carolina State University, Campus Box 8601, Raleigh, NC 27695-8601.

Notes

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: 65

*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: 15

  1. Can turbo-roundabouts and restricted crossing U-Turn be effective solu...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  2. Developing Highway Capacity Manual Capacity Adjustment Factors for Con...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  3. Assessing the Environmental Performances of Urban Roundabouts Using th...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  4. Optimising total entry delay at roundabouts with unbalanced flow: a dy...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  5. Making Compact Two-Lane Roundabouts Effective for Vulnerable Road User...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  6. Multi‐level pedestrian signalisation atlarge four‐leg roundabouts
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  7. Cellular Automaton to Study the Impact of Changes in Traffic Rules in ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  8. The effect of a roundabout corridor's design on selecting the optimal ...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  9. The Use of Heterogeneous Cellular Automata to Study the Capacity of th...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  10. A Cellular Automaton Based System for Traffic Analyses on the Roundabo...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  11. Pedestrian and Cyclists Impacts on vehicular Capacity and Emissions at...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  12. Study of pedestrian hybrid beacon's effectiveness for motorists at mid...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  13. Influence of priority taking and abstaining at single-lane roundabouts...
    Go to citation Crossref Google Scholar
  14. Multicriteria Assessment of Crosswalk Location in Urban Roundabout Cor...
    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