Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
T ransportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

20th EURO Working Group on Transportation Meeting, EWGT 2017,

4-6 September 2017, Budapest, Hungary

Roundabout Capacity in Heterogeneous Traffic Condition:

Modification of HCM Equation and Calibration
Sonu Mathewa, Ashish Dhamaniya b*, S.S.Arkatkarc , Gaurang Joshid
a
Project Associate , Civil Engineering Department,Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology,Surat,Gujarat,India
b*
Assistant Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology,Surat,Gujarat,India
c
Assistant Professor , Civil Engineering Department, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology,Surat,Gujarat,India
d
Associate Professor, Civil Engineering Department, Sardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology,Surat,Gujarat,India

Abstract

The highway capacity manual (HCM -2010) is widely referred document around the globe for planning and design of
roads. However, the transferability of HCM recommendations for heterogenous traffic condition represents a significant research
issue as they are often not suitable to adequately explain the traffic complexities of a mixed-traffic state. This research
investigates the suitability of HCM equations for determining the entry capacity of a four-legged roundabout under mixed traffic
condition and proposes a methodology for validating and calibrating HCM equations for performance evaluation. Data
corresponding to traffic composition, traffic volume, critical gap and follow-up time have been extracted from the video records
collected at two roundabouts. The relationship between entry flow and circulatory flow has been plotted from the observed data
when there is a complete saturation in the approach leg and depicted that it follows a negative exponential behavior. It implies
that the entry capacity reduces exponentially with the increase in circulating flow. The critical gap has been estimated by various
methods such as M aximum Likelihood M ethod (M LM ), Root M ean Square (RM S) method and Probability Equilibrium M ethod
(PEM ). Further, a stream equivalent critical gap of 1.60 seconds and stream equivalent follow-up time of 1.24 seconds have been
derived due to the mixed traffic scenario at the study location. A multiplicative adjustment factor of 1.1 is suggested for the use of
HCM 2010 equation directly to estimate entry capacity under heterogeneous traffic condition. The study results may use for
planning and designing of roundabout under mixed-traffic flow condition.

© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under the responsibility of the Scientific Committee of EWGT2016.

Keywords: Roundabouts, Critical gap, Follow-up time, Entry capacity, Circulatory flow

Ashish Dhamaniya, Phone: +918347299976; Fax: Fax : +2612228394

adhamaniya@ced.svnit.ac.in

2214-241X © 2017 T he Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 20th EURO Working Group on Transportation Meeting.

2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 20th EURO Working Group on Transportation Meeting.
10.1016/j.trpro.2017.12.147
2 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

986 Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992

1. Introducti on

The HCM has defined various geometric features of an urban roadway facility. There are point, link and segment,
whereby the points may be an intersection or roundabout. The popularity of roundabouts is mainly due to the safety
benefits of the configurations. Under moderate traffic conditions, a roundabout may reduce delay and provide safer
movement in comparison with un-signalized intersections (Robinson, Bruce et al., 2000). Similarly, while comparing
conflict points, a roundabout may reduce conflicts significantly over the conve ntional intersection. It’s nearly
impossible to have a head-on or T-bone collision when using the roadways, and collisions that do occur or tend to
occur at much lower speeds. For the safe drive of the vehicles, it is indispensable to understand the operat ional
performance of the roundabout. Capacity is such an important measure which specifies the performance of a traffic
system. The capacity of a roundabout is defined as the maximum number of vehicles that can enter the roundabout in
unit time at a given entry leg for the flow in a circulating roadway. The capacity studies and evaluation of
roundabouts is divided into two main categories: the regression analysis model and the gap acceptance model
(Chandra, S. and Rastogi, R. 2012). The earlier model is typically established through the regression relationship
between the entry capacity and the conflict volume, relying on field data. Meanwhile, the latter model is built by
analyzing the entry capacity using gap acceptance theory. According to traffic rules, each major stream vehicle can
pass the roundabout without any delay. A minor street vehicle, however, can only enter the conflict area if the next
major vehicle is far enough away to allow the minor street vehicle safe passage of the whole conflict a rea (Werner
Brilon et al.,1999). The critical gap can be defined as the least possible time interval which can be taken up by an
entering vehicle so that it can safely merge into the circulating stream. Critical gap values of each individual vehicle
classes were found out and an equivalent stream critical gap was derived. In India, for planning and analysis of
roads, US Highway Capacity Manual (2010) is widely followed but their suitability in mixed traffic scenario has not
been studied well. The present study was taken up with the objective of determining entry capacity of an approach
leg under mixed traffic conditions. Further, an attempt has been made for the modification of HCM 2010 equation of
entry capacity at mixed traffic condition prevailing in Indian cit ies. The results of the present study may be useful to
provide some insight into the ongoing National-Level efforts for developing guidelines for Indo- Highway Capacity
Manual (INDO-HCM).

2. Background study

Major research on the capacity of roundabouts has been carried out in the context of developed countries
including the United States, Australia, United Kingdom, Germany and France (Chandra, S. and Rastogi, R. 2012, Al,
Masaeid and Faddah, 1997). Basic methods include: one group of methods are empirical and are based on the
geometry of intersections including entry width, entry angle, the number of lanes in entry and circulatory area etc.,
other methods are based on gap acceptance process. The Indian formula (IRC-65 1976) for estimation of capacity of
a roundabout is based on Wardrop’s equation, which is empirical in nature and takes into account the geometric
elements like entry or exit width, length and width of weaving section, and the proportion of weaving traffic with
respect to the total traffic in weaving section. The U.K. method is based on the formula proposed by Transport and
Road Research Laboratory (TRRL). Geometric parameters like entry width, flare length, sharpness of the flare, entry
bend radius, entry angle, inscribed circle diameter, etc. are mainly considered in UK method (Kimber 1980). The
Swiss method is similar to the U.K. method but considers the effect of existing traffic in the direction opposite to the
entering traffic (Bovy et al., 1991). According to HCM (2000), the capacity of a roundabout entry (Qe) was a
function of the one flow variable, circulating flow (Qc) in a negative exponential regression setting, while the HCM
(2010) proposes an analytical approach based on critical gap and follow-up time to determine the entry capacity of a
roundabout. Chandra and Rastogi (2012) carried out a comparative assessment of UK Method, German Method,
Swiss Method, US Method and IRC method of capacity estimation and reported that IRC method estimates a higher
value of capacity compared to other methods.
Akcelik, R. (2011) assessed the roundabout capacity model given in new Highway Capacity Manual 2010
(HCM-2010) with a focus on its use in the SIDRA INTERSECTION software. Yap et al., 2013 examined worldwide
 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 3

Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992 987

roundabout capacity modeling methodologies, covering the three main methodologies: fully-empirical, gap
acceptance and simulation. It was shown that due to their limitations, each of these methodologies on their own
cannot completely explain the complex behavioral and physical processe s involved in roundabout entries, hence all
the models require strong semi-empirical or fully-empirical basis using data obtained from their countries of origin.
Mahesh et al., 2015 examined the use of HCM 2010 equation to estimate the entry capacity of an approach leg at a
roundabout using field circulating flows, which resulted in queue formation in the approach. The negative
exponential relationship was observed between entry and circulating flow. The estimated entry capacity and field
entry flows were found to be higher than the HCM estimates. The analysis revealed that the critical gap and follow-
up time had reduced under heterogeneous traffic, and was much lower than the values used in HCM equation. A
multiplicative adjustment factor is suggested for use of HCM 2010 equation directly in the field to estimate entry
flow.
The parameters used in determining the entry capacity are critical gap and follow- up time (HCM-2010).
Troutbeck and Brilon (2001) defines critical gap as the minimum time gap in priority stream that a minor street
driver is ready to accept for crossing or entering the major stream conflict zone. They also defined the Follow -up
time as the time gap between two successive vehicles from the minor stream while entering the conflict area of the
intersection during the same major street gap. Brilon et al., 1999 gives an overview about some of the important
methods which are useful for the estimation of the critical gap. They have concluded that the maximum likelihood
method and the Hewitt method are best suited for practical applications.
In summary, most of the studies on estimating roundabout capacity have been carried out in developed
countries where traffic is homogeneous and rules of priorities as well as lane disciplines are voluntarily followed,
and the maximum likelihood method is found to be a suitable method for estimating roundabout capacity in
homogenous traffic conditions. The suitability of these methods for heterogeneous traffic conditions, where priority
rules are less honored and lane disciplines are more or less absent, is by and large unknown. A scientific research is
warranted to capture these driving behavior complexities, to test and compare potential capacity estimation
techniques, and to develop a proper methodology to estimate roundabout capacity under mixed traffic condition.

3. Objectives

The foremost objective of the present study is to develop a model for entry capacity of typical four-legged
roundabout in heterogeneous traffic scenario. To estimate the capacity of a roundabout, it is necessary to estimate
driver behavioral parameters such as critical gap and follow-up time. Present research also concerned with
estimating critical gap and follow-up time values for different vehicle categories such as motorized two-wheeler,
motorized three-wheeler, small car, big car, light commercial vehicle (LCV), bus and truck. This study also aimed to
develop most appropriate functional form relating entry capacity and circulating flow expressed in PCU/h.
Development of a model for entry capacity at heterogeneous traffic condition by modifying HCM 2010 equation
with the help of critical gap and follow-up time has also attempted in this study. 4. Study Methodology

4. Data Collection

Two typical four-legged roundabouts having a diameter in the range of 20 to 25 m have been considered in
the present study. Data collection was carried out in the city of Jaipur, in the northern part and Trivandrum in the
southern part of the country so as to capture the driver behavior in the different region. Data were collected on a
typical weekday covering off-peak as well as peak hours. The considerable queue formation was observed due to
which there was a significant delay to traffic streams in both the roundabouts. This aspect was focused o n getting
data on traffic operation at roundabouts over varying traffic conditions. Here, field surveys were carried out on the
selected locations using high-resolution video camera mounted at nearby high -rise buildings. Inventory survey was
also carried out for the selected study roundabouts to gather details on geometry are shown in Table 1.
4 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

988 Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992

T able 1. Inventory details of selected roundabouts

Chomu House Circle (Jaipur) Chakka roundabout (Trivandrum)

Inventory details
Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4 Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4
Entry Width (m) 8.5 11.2 9.4 11.6 8.5 8.5 8.5 8.5
Exit Width (m) 8.5 14 10.3 9.6 9.0 10.5 10 10.5
Approach Width (m) 6.25 10.5 5.3 10 6.5 7.0 6.5 7
Departure Width (m) 6.25 10.5 5.3 8.2 7.0 7.5 7.0 9.0

Circulating Roadway width (m) 14 10.5 10.2 12.3 9.5 9 10.2 9.5

Weaving Length (m) 34.8 24.8 24.8 30.6 17.5 21.9 18.20 22.10
Central Island Diameter (m) 24.9 23.4

5. Data Analysis

5.1 Traffic composition

Vehicles are classified comprising of smaller vehicles: motorized two-wheeler, motorized three- wheeler, Small
Car, Big Car and heavy vehicles: Light Commercial Vehicle (LCV), Bus and Truck. The proportion of truck at the
selected roundabouts is found to be relatively low. Hence, both bus and trucks are considere d as single vehicle
category for the purpose of estimation of PCU. It was found that proportion of two -wheelers in traffic composition is
observed to be having a maximum share at both the roundabouts. However, at Chomu house roundabout in Jaipur,
its contribution is 53% and while, in Chakka roundabout it is observed to be 31%. Small car share is observed as
22% and 27% at roundabouts in Chomu house and Chakka roundabout, respectively. The proportion of three -
wheeler is higher (19%) at the roundabout in Chakka and in the case of small and big cars, it is observed to have
almost similar proportion at both the roundabouts.

5.2 Estimation of PCU Value

The capacity of a roundabout with heterogeneous traffic flow with vehicles of widely varying static and dynamic
characteristics is best expressed in terms of PCU/h. Different vehicle categories such as buses, light commercial
vehicles, trucks, two-wheelers, and auto-rickshaws are expressed into equivalent PCU. This dictates an accurate
estimation of PCU, which varies dynamically with various traffic flow parameters such as stream speed, vehicle
composition and traffic volume. The time occupancy method of PCU estima tions as suggested by Sonu et al.,2016 is
used in the present study also. Table 2. Shows the PCU values used for the present study for capacity estimation and
performance evaluation.

T able 2 T he PCU value adopted for different vehicle categories (Sonu et al., 2016)

Ve hicle cate gory Left-turn movement Straight movement Right-turn movement

Two-wheeler 0.22 0.22 0.22
T hree-wheeler 0.67 0.67 0.67
Small car 1 1 1
Big car 1.52 1.58 1.65
LCV 1.75 1.81 1.93
Heavy vehicle 4.04 4.43 4.64
 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 5

Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992 989

6. Entry capacity model for mixed traffic scenario

The relationship between entry capacity and circulating flow is developed for Jaipur- roundabout since
substantial queue formation and considerable delay has only been observed in the field. Entry capacity is considered
as dependent variable whereas circulating flow is considered as an independent variable. For this purpose, the entry
flow values and circulating flow values of each observed queue formation is first converted into the equivalent entry
capacity and circulating flow using the corresponding agg regated PCU values of different vehicle categories.
The entry capacity is calculated based on the conflicting flow in the circulatory roadway space, which
comprises the various turning movements for different vehicle categories from other approaches that p ass in front of
the subject approach leg for which entry capacity is to be estimated. Traffic flow values such as entry capacity and
circulatory flow have been estimated in both, vehicles per hour and PCU per hour. Estimated PCU values given in
Table 2 using the concept of occupancy time, for left-turn movement, straight movement and right-turn movement
separately are used for this conversion. The entry capacity value can be determined as the maximum number of
vehicles that are able to enter into the roundabout area in the presence of conflicting or circulating flow. The
relationships developed between entry capacity and circulating flow expressed both in vehicles/h and PCU/h are
shown in Figure 1.

4000

3500
y = 3734 e-0.0003X VEHICLES/
Entry Capacity

3000 R² = 0.70 hour

PCU/h
2500

2000
y = 3294 *e-0.0003X
1500 R² = 0.67
1000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Circulatory flow

Fig. 1. Relationship between Entry Capacity and circulatory flow (Chomu house)

The relationship between entry capacity and circulatory flow is found to be negatively exponential. It
implies that the entry capacity reduces exponentially with the increase in circulating flow. The propos ed model
validates the findings of Mahesh et al., (2015) on roundabout under mixed traffic in India. The functional forms are
found to be acceptable concerning R2 value of the estimated Equations 1. and Equation 2. The relationship obtained
is supporting the general trend that when the flow on circulating space is low, more number of vehicles can enter
from given approach, but as vehicles add to the circulating flow lesser number of vehicles can enter.

(1)
(2)

Further, the estimated values of entry flows concerning the circulating flows for the two roundabouts are compared
with the estimates obtained using HCM 2010 equation. The HCM (2010) roundabout entry capacity model is
expressed as given by Equation 3.
6 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000
990 Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992

(3)

Whereas the parameters A and B related to the follow-up time and critical gap and simply we can write it as shown
in Equation 4.

(4)
Where
Qe-Entry capacity, Qc-circulatory flow, tf-follow up time, tc-critical gap

6.1. Critical gap and Follow-up time

The critical gap can be defined as the least possible time interval which can be taken up by an entering
vehicle so that it can safely merge into the circulating stream. Explicitly, a driver with a specific critical gap value
will never accept a gap less than and will accept each major stream gap larger than. MLM is treated as the best
method for the estimation of critical gap at unsignalized intersection conspicuously publicized from literature
(Brilon 2016). Critical gap values of each vehicle classes were found out, and an equivalent stream critical gap was
derived. Two-wheelers are observed to accept a gap of comparatively small range; this variation can be related to the
vehicular characteristics such as dimensions and acceleration rate. Moreover, it is found that percentage of two-
wheeler is more than 50 % in both the study location and they accept comparatively very smaller gaps because of its
lower physical dimension. Similarly, in the case of other vehicle types such as small car, big car and LCV the
estimated critical gap value is comparatively higher as compared to motorized two-wheeler and three-wheeler and
this finding necessitates the introduction of a stream equivalent critical gap due to the mixed traffic scenario at the
study location.

T able 3. Critical estimated by Maximum Likelihood Method

Critical Gap
Location
Two-Wheeler Three -Wheeler Small Car Big car LCV
Jaipur 1.21 1.50 1.94 1.70 2.20
T rivandrum 1.45 1.74 1.78 1.89 2.23

gap value estimated by Maximum Likelihood Method (MLM) has been further considered for the evaluation of the
capacity of the roundabout. The stream equivalent critical gap at Chomu hou se roundabout (Jaipur) has been
estimated by multiplying critical gap value with the corresponding composition of vehicle category in the study
location shown in Equation 5.

tc, mix = t c,2W * P2W + tc,3W * P3W + t c,SC* PSC+ t c, BC* PBC+ tc,LCV* PLCV + tc,HV* PHV =1.60 sec (5)

Where t c, 2W = Critical gap of two wheeler, P 2W = Percentage composition of two wheeler; tc, 3W = Critical gap of three wheeler, P 3W = Percentage
composition of three wheeler; tc, SC = Critical gap of small car, PSC = Percentage composition of small car; t c, BC Critical gap of Big car, P BC =
Percentage composition of big car; t c, LCV= Critical gap of LCV and P LCV= Percentage composition of Light Commercial Vehicle, t c, HV= Critical
gap of Heavy Vehicles and P HV = Percentage composition of Heavy Vehicles.

The critical gap in combination with follow-up time gives a reliable and realistic estimate of capacity at
roundabout entry. Similarly, stream equivalent critical gap of 1.65 has been derived for Chakka roundabout
(Trivandrum). The study was further extended by developing a stream equivalent value for follow-up time under
queuing conditions since it becomes a logical necessity to evaluate the follow-up time for saturated conditions.
Follow-up time can be defined as the minimum time interval between two successive vehicles of a minor stream
which enter the roundabout using the same gap from the major stream. The factors such as vehicle type, waiting for
 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000 7

Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992 991

a position in a queue, queuing vehicles behind, traffic v olume and driver’s gender will largely affect the follow-up
time. The analysis was carried out for Chomu house roundabout since substantial queue formation and considerable
delay has only been observed in Chomu house. The resultant follow-up time obtained by weighted average approach
is 1.24 seconds.

7. Proposed Model for Entry Capacity

As explained in the section above, the HCM-2010 equation for entry capacity is based on tf and tc values.
The values adopted in HCM were 4.5 and 2.7 respectively for tc and t f. These values are observed to be much lower
in the relevant roundabout which can be due to the absence of large-sized vehicles and a higher proportion of the
two-wheeler in the stream. The percent value of the composition of traffic is used as a weight for the respective
value of critical gaps and follow-up time to arrive at the traffic stream value. This gave a value of 1.60 s for the
critical gap and 1.24 s for follow-up time. Using these values in the equation proposed by HCM 2010, the entry
capacity was re-estimated concerning the circulating flows values observed in the field. The results were compared
with the capacity values obtained in PCU/hour by occupancy method. It implies that the capacity value estimated by
HCM method (incorporating new tc and tf estimated by weighted average approach) is relatively lower by a MAPE
value 11.8 % than the observed field conditions in PCU/hour shown in Figure 2 (a).

2(a) 2(b)
Fig. 2. Modified HCM model for heterogeneous traffic condition

This led to incorporating a new adjustment factor to modify the HCM equation for Indian conditions. The
adjustment factor is defined as the ratio between the field entry flow value an d that given by HCM (Mahesh et al.,
2015) and present study this factor changing gradually and varies from 0.98 to 1.25. Further, the average value of all
adjusting factors was recommended as a common multiplicative factor for the estimation of entry capacity under
heterogeneous traffic scenario. The representative line has been drawn the modification factor was incorporated in
the field data and the plot for entry capacity has been modified is shown in Figure 2 (b). Adjustment factors are
proposed for entry capacity estimation by HCM equation on roundabouts with respect to the real values of critical
gaps and follow-up time prevailing in India. It is observed that a modification factor of 1.1 for HCM provides
similar capacity value as acquired from field condition. Hence, the modified equation for entry capacity of a
roundabout under mixed traffic scenario can be written as Equation. 6

(6)
8 Sonu/ Transportation Research Procedia 00 (2017) 000–000

992 Sonu Mathew et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 27 (2017) 985–992

8.0 Conclusion

Two roundabouts in the different region of the country have been selected for study to modify the HCM 2010
equation for Indian traffic condition. The relation between Entry flow and Circulatory flow was plotted corresponds
to queue condition and is found that it follows negative exponential behavior. It implies that the entry capacity
reduces exponentially with the increase in circulating flow. The relationship obtained is supporting the general trend
that when the flow on circulating space is low, more number of vehicles can enter from given approach, but as
vehicles in the circulating flow increases lesser number of vehicles can enter from given approach. The entry
capacity as obtained from HCM, 2010 equation was found to be 11.8% lower while using PCU estimated from
occupancy method. It should be as certain that estimated critical gap, in combination with follow-up time gives a
reliable and realistic estimate of capacity at roundabout entry. A value of 1.60s for stream critical gap and 1.24 s for
follow-up time is suggested for estimation of entry flows at roundabouts in developing countries. An adjustment
factor is proposed for entry capacity estimation on roundabouts by taking the ratio of field entry value and that given
by HCM. Further, the average value of all adjusting factors, observed as 1.1 was recommended as a common
multiplicative factor for the estimation of entry capacity under heterogeneous traffic scenario. It is expected that
contributions made in this study may propose revision of the prevailing practices of evaluation of roundabout
capacity given in IRC 65(1976) code on ‘Recommendation practices for traffic rotaries’. Also, the study results may
give some real insight into on-going national level efforts of developing an Indo Highway Capacity Manual.

References

Al-Masaeid H., Faddah M (1997) Capacity of roundabouts in Jordan. T ransportation Research Record: Journal of the T ransportation Research
Board, (1572), pp.76-85.
Bovy H., Dietrich K., Harman, A (1991) Guide Suisse des Giratoires [Switzerland Guide to Roundabouts], Lausanne, Switzerland.
Brilon, W (2016) Some remarks regarding the estimation of critical gaps, T ransportation Research Record: Journal of the T ransportation
Research Board, No.2553, T ransportation Research Board of the National Ac ademies, Washington, D.C., pp.10-19.
Brilon, Werner., Ralph Koenig., Troutbeck, R. J.(1999) Useful estimation procedures for critical gaps, Transportation Research Part A, vol.33,
No.3-4, pp.161-186.
Chandra S., Rastogi R (2012) Mixed traffic flow analysis on roundabouts, International Journal of Indian Roads Congress. Vol.73, No.1, pp.69–
77.
Highway Capacity Manual (2010) T ransportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C.
Highway Capacity Manual (2000) T RB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
IRC-65 (1976) Indian Road Congress, Recommendation practice for traffic rotaries, New Delhi.
Kimber G. M (1980) The traffic capacity of roundabouts, Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) Report LR 942. UK: Department of T ransport.
Mahesh S., Ahmad A., Rastogi R (2015) An approach for the estimation of entry flows on roundabouts, T ransportation Research Procedia,
T PMDC2014, Mumbai, Elsevier BV.
Akçelik R (2011) Some common and differing aspects of alternative models for roundabout capacity and performance evaluation International
Roundabout Conference, T ransportation Research Board, Carmel, Indiana, USA.
Robinson B.W., Rodegerdts L., Scarborough W., Kittelson W., Troutbeck R., Brilon W., Bondzio L., Courage K., Kyte M., Mason J., Flannery A
(2000) Roundabouts: An informational guide, No. FHWA-RD-00-067.
Sonu M., Dhamaniya A., Arkatkar S., Joshi G.J (2016) T ime occupancy as measure of PCU at four legged roundabouts, Transportation Letters,
pp.1-12. DOI: 10.1080/19427867.2016.1154685
T routbeck R.J., Brilon W (2001) Unsignalised Intersection Theory Chapter 8,Traffic Flow T heory, A State-of-the-Art Report, Organized by the
Committee on T raffic Flow T heory and Characteristics.
T routbeck R. J (2014) Estimating the Mean Critical Gap, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the T ransportation Research Board, No.
2461, T ransportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., pp 76-84.
T upper S., M. Knodler Jr., Hurwitz D (2011) Comparative Analysis of Critical Gap Analysis Methods, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Yap Yok Hoe., Helen M. Gibson., Ben J. Waterson (2013) An international review of roundabout capacity modelling. Transport Reviews, vol.33,
No.5, pp.593-616.