Comparing and Evaluating Types of RCUT Intersection using Traffic Simulation

Document Type : Research Paper

Authors

1 M.Sc., Department of Civil–Transportation Planning, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, I. R. Iran.

2 Professor, Department of Civil–Transportation Planning, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, I. R. Iran.

3 PhD Candidate, Department of Civil–Transportation Planning, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, I. R. Iran.

Abstract

The purpose of this study is how the RCUT intersection works in different traffic volumes. To evaluate the intersection, the volume to capacity ratio of 0.9, 0.6, and 0.4 was used to check the performance of the intersection during peak hours. Also, with the aim of choosing the best type of the intersection, changes in the geometric design of the intersection were made and evaluated. Nine scenarios were experienced in four main designs to evaluate all intersection types. These designs include the RCUT intersection, two-lane roundabout, reduced intersection light timing, and dog-bone roundabout. Then, VISSIM software was used to simulate these scenarios and the results of the obtained parameters such as queue length, delay, level of service, number of the vehicle stops and the percentage of pollutants of all scenarios were compared with each other using the multi-criteria decision-making method. Results indicate that the best scenarios included increasing the median width from 7.5 m to 11 m, increasing the median width in the roundabout from 7.5 m to 11.3 m, and increasing the distance of the roundabout from the intersection from 137 m to 183 m, which caused the queue length to decrease by more than 50%. There has been a reduction in delays and stoppages by nearly 20% and associated with pollutants and fuel by nearly 5%. At the end, using the multi-criteria decision-making method, the best scenario, and reducing the optimization of timing of the lights was determined. In this scenario, the queue length results were 50% less than other designs, the level of service was one level higher, and a 25% reduction in delay and stoppages was observed.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

AASHTO. 2018. “A policy on geometric design of highways and streets”. 7th ed., Ch. 9, pp. 139-141, Washington, DC.
Hummer, J., Ray, B., Daleiden, A., Jenior, P. and Knudsen, J. 2014. “Restricted crossing U-turn, informational guide”. FHWA, pp. 3-5, 22-24, Washington DC.
 Pal Meela, I., Vesperb, A., Borsosc, A. and Koren, C. 2017. “Evaluation of the effects of auxiliary lanes on road traffic safety at downstream of U-turns”. Elsevier B.V. pp. 1931-1945.
Sun, C., Qing, Z., Edara, P., Balakrishnan, B. and Hopfenblatt, J. 2017. “Driving simulator study of J-turn acceleration-deceleration lane and U-turn spacing configurations”. J. Transport. Res. Board, 2638(1): 26-34.
Journal of Transportation Infrastructure Engineering
Volume 10, Issue 3 - Serial Number 39
November 2024
Pages 88-110

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 30 August 2024
  • Revise Date: 28 September 2024
  • Accept Date: 15 October 2024

Share

How to cite

Statistics