Christopher Cabral Graduate Student UMass Dartmouth

In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the CEN 519 course in Advanced Traffic Engineering Spring Semester 2012

Confusing Intersection (half signalized) Frequent Accidents The North Attleborough Board of Public Works has addressed the need for improvements Proposed solutions appear to be costly and complex The town BPW has not yet agreed upon any permanent solutions

Visually and quantitatively investigate the problems of the intersection Simulations using peak AM and PM traffic volumes with VISSIM Design alternatives that have not yet been proposed Use VISSIM to simulate the newly proposed design for peak AM and PM volumes

Accident Counts (2006-2008)

Year 2006 2007 2008 Total

Number of Accidents
15 16 17 48

Number of Vehicles Involved in Accidents

30 31 35 96

Injuries 4 4 3 11

Peak AM Volumes
To From Route-1A NB Route-1 NB Elmwood St Route-1 SB Route-1A SB Route-1A NB Route-1 NB Elmwood St Route-1 SB Route-1A SB 20 5 15 60 170 25 230 85 60 70 20 0 160 715 80 5 260 175 20 5

Peak PM Volumes
To From Route-1A NB Route-1 NB Elmwood St Route-1 SB Route-1A SB Route-1A NB Route-1 NB Elmwood St Route-1 SB Route-1A SB 45 10 80 205 405 80 735 145 50 75 50 50 70 380 30 55 205 120 25 5

Cycle Length, C = 88 s Number of Phases, N=3

Start up Loss Time ( l1 ) Clearance Loss Time ( l2 ) Total Loss Time ( tL ) Saturation Headway ( hs ) Critical Lane Flow, Vc

Parameter l1 l2 tL hs

Time (s) 3.3 4.5 7.8 2.0

Vc = 1,321 vph

Measured Critical Volume = Max of [ (Route 1 NB + Route 1 NB LT) / 2 Lanes + (Route 1 SB + Route 1 SB LT) / 2 Lanes ] + Max of [ (Route 1A (EB) + Route 1A (EB) RT) / 2 Lanes + Elmwood St] Measured Critical Volume (AM) = (Route 1 NB + Route 1 NB LT) / 2 + (Route 1A (EB) + Route 1A (EB) RT) / 2 = (785 + 180) / 2 + (225 + 105) / 2 = 648 vph Measured Critical Volume (PM) = (Route 1 SB + Route 1 SB LT) / 2 + Elmwood St = (945 + 50) / 2 + 215 = 713 vph

Direction Critical Lane-Flow All Approaches Approach Capacity Route 1 NB Route 1 SB Route 1A (EB) Elmwood St

Calculated Maximums 1,321 1,002 675 470 470

Measured AM PM 648 713

483 158 165 140 293 498 208 215

Since the measured capacities of each individual approach and total critical lane flow are less than the allowable maximums, the signal phasing and timing sequence is not the main problem causing traffic queuing and delays

Insert movie clip of peak AM simulation on current design

Insert movie clip of peak PM simulation on current design

Peak AM Volumes
Mean (s) Approach 6.0 3.1 71.0 10.2 Standard Dev 85% Confidence Bounds for Mean Delay (s) 0.6 0.7 10.9 0.9 5.6 2.6 64.0 9.6 6.4 3.5 78.0 10.8

LOS
A A E A - B

Route 1 NB Route 1 SB Route 1A (EB) Elmwood St

Peak PM Volumes
Mean (s) Approach 3.4 64.1 104.1 14.0 Standard Dev 85% Confidence Bounds for Mean Delay (s) 0.6 16.3 18.1 0.6 3.0 53.6 92.4 13.6 3.8 74.6 115.8 14.3

LOS
A D - E E B

Route 1 NB Route 1 SB Route 1A (EB) Elmwood St

BETA Group, Inc

Engineering consulting firm hired by North

Attleborough to design potential solutions

The town has not yet made any decisions

Costly and complex proposals submitted so far

3 Alternatives
Require movement elimination, land acquisition,

and/or new road construction

Open up existing intersection Have traffic from all 5 directions apart of 1 signalized intersection Based on approach volumes, 4 additional lanes to be constructed
Limited area, but with proper curb and median

adjustments the added lanes can fit Right Turn lanes for Route 1 SB and Route 1A NB Left Turn lanes for Route 1 NB and Route 1A SB

5 Phases

Protected Movements

Unprotected Movements

Originally, each approach was given its own phase

VISSIM showed long queuing and delay times

Then, Routes 1 and 1A straight movements were given a phase together

Majority of traffic through intersection

Phases for protected turning movements were grouped together Route 1 SB to Route 1A SB movement eliminated
Only 5 vph for both peak AM and PM traffic

Route 1A SB, All Protected Movements

Routes 1 and 1A, NB and SB, Straight Movements Route 1 SB Unprotected Left Turn

Route 1 NB, All Protected Movements

Route 1 SB and Route 1A NB, Protected Right Turns

Elmwood St, All Protected Movements

Cycle Length (s)

Phase Max Vol. (vph) Design Use (vph) Cycle Length (s) Total Available Green Time (s) % of Total Design Use (%) Green Time (s) Design Green (s)

Total Available Green Time (s) Peak AM

1 2 3 4 5 Total 170 393 393 240 140 1,123 90 260 180 240 140 910
80.0 50.0

9.9 28.6 19.8 26.4 15.4 100.0 % of Total Design Use 20.9 33.1 10.9 17.2 18.0 100.0

4.945055 14.28571 9.89011 13.18681 7.692308 50.0 Green Time (s) 18.82845 29.74895 9.790795 15.43933 16.19247 90.0

5.0 14.0 10.0 13.0 8.0 50.0 Design Green (s) 19.0 30.0 10.0 15.0 16.0 90.0

Peak PM

Phase 1 2 3 4 5 Total

Max Vol. (vph) 405 395 228 205 215 1,448

Design Use (vph) 250 395 130 205 215 1,195

Cycle Length (s)

Total Available Green Time (s)

120.0

90.0

AM
Approach 1 2 Phase 3 4 5 Approach 1 2

PM
Phase 3 4 5

Route 1 NB Straight
Route 1 NB Left Route 1 SB Straight Route 1 SB Right Route 1A NB Straight Route 1A NB Right Route 1A SB Straight

R 11
R 11 R 11 R 11 R 11 R 11 G 11 G 14 G 14 G 14

G 20
R 20 y 4 R 20 y 4 R 20 y 4 R 20 R 20 R 2 R 2 R 2

G 10
G 10

y 4
y 4 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16

ar 2
ar 2

R 19
R 19 R 19 G 13 y 4 R 19 G 13 y 4 R 19 R 19 R 19 G 8 ar 2 ar 2

R 14
R 14 R 14 R 14 R 14 R 14 R 14 R 14 y ar 4 2

Route 1 NB Straight
Route 1 NB Left Route 1 SB Straight Route 1 SB Right Route 1A NB Straight Route 1A NB Right Route 1A SB Straight Route 1A SB Left Elmwood St

R 25
R 25 R 25 R 25 R 25 R 25 G 25 G y ar 19 4 2 R 25 G 30 G 30 G 30

G 36
R 36 y 4 R 36 y 4 R 36 y 4 R 36 R 36 R 2 R 2 R 2

G 10
G 10

y 4
y 4 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16 R 16

ar 2
ar 2

R 21
R 21 R 21 G 15 y 4 R 21 G 15 y 4 R 21 R 21 R 21 G 16 ar 2 ar 2

R 22
R 22 R 22 R 22 R 22 R 22 R 22 R 22 y ar 4 2

Route 1A SB G y ar Left 5 4 2 Elmwood St R 11

Cycle Length =80 s

Cycle Length =120 s

Insert movie clip of peak AM simulation on new design

Insert movie clip of peak PM simulation on new design

Peak AM

Approach Route 1 NB Straight Route 1 NB Left Route 1 SB Straight Route 1 SB Right Route 1A NB Straight Route 1A NB Right Route 1A SB Straight Route 1A SB Left Elmwood St Approach Route 1 NB Straight Route 1 NB Left Route 1 SB Straight Route 1 SB Right Route 1A NB Straight Route 1A NB Right Route 1A SB Straight Route 1A SB Left Elmwood St

Peak PM

Proposed Design Delay (s) 6.7 12.6 13.4 14.8 10.6 12.1 4.3 6.5 19.4 21.2 17.8 20.1 8.3 10.4 20.5 24.9 16.2 18.8 Proposed Design Delay (s) 18.2 19.5 26.6 32.5 43.8 47.2 48.2 55.5 21.6 23.2 27.6 36.0 33.9 38.0 72.9 76.9 35.1 39.2

LOS A B B A B B A C B LOS B

Existing Design Delay (s) 5.6 2.6 C C B 6.4 3.5

LOS A A

64.0

78.0

9.6 10.8 Existing Design Delay (s) 3.8 74.6

A - B LOS A D - E

B 3.0 C D 53.6 D C - C C - D 92.4 C - D E D 13.6

115.8

14.3

New proposal evenly distributes delay times and improves traffic operations Not as complex and expensive compared to other alternatives Proper curb and median adjustments can allow for the additional lanes in this design to fit within the already limited area Potential solution to minimizing accidents, driver confusion, delays and queuing

Maximum fixed green times analyzed

Traffic Engineer will have to determine proper

Minimum green times as well as vehicle extension times for Detectors

Pedestrian phase neglected

Pedestrian button to be installed if design

implemented

Route 1 SB to Route 1A SB movement eliminated/sacrificed

Only 5 vph during both peak AM and PM volumes

Pavement markers - safely direct traffic

Intersection Design. Massachusetts Highway Department, 2006. Cabral, Steven P.E. Crossman Engineering, Inc. Town of North Attleborough Board of Public Works. 2012 Chaudhary, N., C. Chu, S. Sunkari, and K. Balke. Guidelines for Operating Congest Traffic Signals. Texas Transportation Institute, 2010. DeGray, Jason. BETA Group, Inc. 2012 DeMelia, A. At a Dead End - Proposals to Fix Busy North Intersection Proving Complicated and Costly. Sun Chronicle, Vol. News, No. http://www.thesunchronicle.com/articles/2012/02/14/news/10969045.txt , 2012. Google Inc. Google Earth. , Vol. 5.1.3533.1731, 2009. Last, M., G. Avrahami, and A. Kandel. Using Data Mining Techniques for Optimizing Traffic Signal Plans at an Urban Intersection. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, Vol. 26, No. 7, 2011, pp. 603-620. Massachusetts Highway Department. Project Development and Design Guide. http://www.vhb.com/mhdGuide/mhd_Guidebook.asp , Accessed February, 2012. MassDOT. Average Crash Rates. http://www.mhd.state.ma.us/default.asp?pgid=content/traffic/crashrate&sid=about , Accessed February, 2012. McShane, W., E. Prassas, and R. Proses. Traffic Engineering. Pearson, New Jersey, 2011.NCHRP. Evaluating Intersection Improvements: An Engineering Study Guide. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2001. PTV Vision. VISSIM. , Vol. 5.3, 2010.

Thank you