Signalized INTERSECTIONS .


19 views
Uploaded on:
Description
SIGNALISED INTERSECTIONS. TS4273 Traffic Engineering. First Traffic Light. Traffic lights were used before the advent of the motorcar. In 1868, British railroad signal engineer J P Knight invented the first traffic light, a lantern with red and green signals.
Transcripts
Slide 1

Signalized INTERSECTIONS TS4273 Traffic Engineering

Slide 2

First Traffic Light Traffic lights were utilized before the approach of the motorcar. In 1868, British railroad flag design J P Knight created the primary movement light, a lamp with red and green signs. It was introduced at the convergence of George and Bridge Streets before the British House of Commons to control the stream of steed surreys and people on foot. http://www.didyouknow.cd/trafficlights.htm

Slide 3

Prinsip-prinsip desain simpang bersinyal Suatu persimpangan membutuhkan lampu lalulintas jika waktu tunggu rata-rata kendaraan sudah lebih besar daripada waktu tunggu rata-rata kendaraan pada persimpangan dengan lampu lalulintas .

Slide 4

Prinsip-prinsip desain simpang bersinyal Waktu tunggu rata-rata kendaraan pada persimpangan bersinyal dipengaruhi oleh: Arus lalulintas pada masing-masing arah, Waktu antara kedatangan kendaraan dari masing-masing arah, Keberanian pengemudi untuk menerima waktu antara yang tersedia guna menyeberangi jalan.

Slide 5

Unsignalised Signalized Delay Traffic Flow Prinsip-prinsip desain simpang bersinyal

Slide 7

Scope of IHCM Signalized Intersection Analyses Isolated, altered time controlled signalized crossing points with typical geometry format (four-arm and three-arm) and movement flag control gadgets. Composed activity flag control is ordinarily required if the separation to contiguous signalized crossing points is little (< 200m).  Persimpangan Raya Darmo – Polisi Istimewa & Raya Darmo – RA Kartini.

Slide 8

Objectives of IHCM Signalized Intersection Analyses To keep away from blockage of a convergence by clashing movement streams, subsequently ensuring that a specific limit can be kept up amid pinnacle activity conditions;

Slide 9

Objectives of IHCM Signalized Intersection Analyses To encourage the intersection of a noteworthy street by vehicles or potentially people on foot from a minor street; To decrease the quantity of auto collisions brought about by crashes between vehicles in clashing bearings.

Slide 10

Potential Conflict at Intersections

Slide 11

Primary and Secondary Conflictis in a Four-Arm Signalized Intersections

Slide 12

Street A Street B Time Sequence for Two-Phase Signal Control

Slide 13

Time Sequence for Four-Phase Signal Control

Slide 14

Street A Street B Time Sequence for Two-Phase Signal Control

Slide 17

Purpose of the Intergreen Period Warn releasing movement that the stage is ended.  Amber Period ( for urban activity motion in Indonesia is ordinarily 3,0 sec ) Certify that the last vehicle in the green stage which is being ended gets sufficient time to clear the contention zone before the principal propelling vehicle in the following stage enters similar range.  All-Red Period

Slide 18

Signal Phasing Arrangements Introducing more than two stages ordinarily prompts an expansion of the process duration and of the proportion of time dispensed to exchanging between stages (particularly for secluded and altered controlled).

Slide 19

Signal Phasing Arrangements Although this might be advantageous from the activity security perspective, it regularly implies that the general limit of the crossing point is diminished .

Slide 20

Basic Model for Saturation Flow (Akcelik 1989)

Slide 21

Basic Model Saturation Flow Discharge rate begins from 0 toward the start of green and achieves its pinnacle esteem after 10-15 sec Effective Green = Displayed Green Time – Start Loss + End Gain Start misfortune  End pick up  4,8 sec (MKJI p.2-12) Effective Green = Displayed Green Time

Slide 22

Basic Model Saturation Flow Base immersion stream is distinctive between Protected approach and Opposed approach For secured approach  S 0 = 600 x We For restricted approach  S 0 in Indonesia for the most part lower where there is a high proportion of right turning developments, contrast and Western models.

Slide 23

Perhitungan Arus Jenuh Metode Time Slice Arus jenuh/stick  (3.600/5)x4,5 = 3.240 smp/stick Jika lebar lajur = 4,0m  (3.240/4) = 810 smp/stick/m Maka  S = 810 x We

Slide 24

Traffic Safety Considerations Traffic mishap rate for signalized crossing points has been evaluated as 0,43 mischances/million approaching vehicles as contrast with 0,60 for unsignalised convergences and 0,30 for roundabouts .

Slide 25

STEP A-1: Geometric, Traffic Control and Environmental Conditions General data (date, took care of by, city, and so on.) City size (to the closest 0,1 M tenants) Signal staging & timing Left turn on red (LTOR) Approach code Road environment and level of side rubbing Median Gradient Approach width (to the closest tenth of a meter)

Slide 26

Geometry of Signalized Intersection

Slide 27

STEP A-2: Traffic Flow Conditions Q = Q LV + (Q HV x pce HV ) + (Q MC x pce MC )

Slide 28

STEP B-1: Signal Phasing and Timing If the number and sorts of flag stages are not known, two-stage control ought to be utilized as a base case . Isolate control of right-turning developments ought to ordinarily just be considered if a turning-development surpasses 200 pcu/h and has a different path .

Slide 29

STEP B-1: Signal Phasing and Timing Early begin = driving green  one approach is given a brief period before the begin of the green additionally in the contradicting course (typically 25%-33% from aggregate green time) Late cut-off = slacking green  the green light in one approach is broadened a brief period after the end of green in the restricting heading. The length of the main and the slacking green ought not be shorter than 10 sec .

Slide 30

STEP B-2: Intergreen time and lost time Only to plan purposes !!!

Slide 31

STEP B-2: Intergreen time and lost time For operational and plan examination !!! L EV , L AV  remove from stop line to struggle point for clearing and propelling vehicle (m) l EV  length of emptying vehicle (m) V EV , V AV  speed of clearing and propelling vehicle (m/sec)

Slide 33

STEP B-2: Intergreen time and lost time V AV  10m/sec (engine vehicles) V EV  10m/sec (engine vehicles) V EV  3m/sec (un-mechanized) V EV  1,2m/sec (people on foot) l EV  5m (LV or HV) l EV  2m (MC or UM)

Slide 34

STEP B-2: Intergreen time and lost time IG  Intergreen = Allred + Amber The length of AMBER normally 3,0 sec

Slide 35

STEP C-1: Approach Type PROTECTED (P)  Discharge with no contention between right-turning developments and straight-through/left-turning developments.

Slide 36

STEP C-1: Approach Type OPPOSED (O)  Discharge with struggle between right-turning developments and straight-through/left-turning developments from various methodologies with green in similar stage.

Slide 37

STEP C-2: Effective Aproach Width (W e ) Without LTOR For Approach Type P ( Q = Q ST ) If W EXIT  W e x (1 - p RT - p LT )  W e = W EXIT

Slide 39

STEP C-2: Effective Aproach Width (W e ) If W LTOR ≥ 2m ( it is accepted that the LTOR vehicle can sidestep the other vehicle )  W e = min { (W A - W LTOR ) , (W ENTRY ) } For Approach Type P ( Q = Q ST ) If W EXIT < W e x (1 – p RT )  W e = W EXIT

Slide 40

STEP C-2: Effective Aproach Width (W e ) If W LTOR < 2m ( it is expected that the LTOR vehicle can\'t sidestep the other vehicle )  W e = min { (W A ) , (W ENTRY +W LTOR ) , (W a x(1+p LTOR )- W LTOR ) } For Approach Type P ( Q = Q ST ) If W EXIT < W e x (1 – p RT – p LTOR )  W e = W EXIT

Slide 41

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) For ensured approach

Slide 42

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) For Approach Type P S 0  base immersion stream (pcu/hg) W e  viable width (m) Figure C-3:1 page 2-49

Slide 43

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) For Approach Type O (contradicted) Q RT and Q RTO (Column 14 Form SIG-II restricted release right-turning) Figure C-3:2 page 2-51 for methodologies without particular right-turning. Figure C-3:3 page 2-52 for methodologies with isolated right-turning. Utilize introduction if approach width bigger or littler than genuine W e

Slide 44

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) Ex: without independent right-turning path Q RT = 125 pcu/h, Q RTO = 100 pcu/h Actual W e = 5,4m Obtain from Figure C-3:2 p. 2-51 (W e =5 & W e =6) S 6,0 = 3.000 (pcu/hg) ; S 5,0 = 2.440 (pcu/hg) Calculate; S 5,4 =(5,4-5,0)x(S 6,0 - S 5,0 )+ S 5,0 =0,4(3.000-2.440)+2.440  2.660 (pcu/hg)

Slide 45

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) If right-turning development > 250 pcu/h, secured flag staging ought to be viewed as For No Separate RT-path If Q RTO < 250 pcu/h Determine S PROV for Q RTO = 250 pcu/h Determine Actual S as S = S PROV – [(Q RTO - 250) x 8]pcu/h

Slide 46

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) For No Separate RT-path If Q RTO > 250 pcu/h Determine S PROV for Q RTO and Q RT = 250 pcu/h Determine Actual S as S = S PROV – [(Q RTO + Q RT - 500) x 2]pcu/h If Q RTO < 250 pcu/h and Q RT > 250 pcu/h Determine S concerning Q RT = 250 pcu/h

Slide 47

STEP C-3: Base Saturation Flow (S) For Separate RT-path If Q RTO > 250 pcu/h Q RT < 250 pcu/h Determine S from Figure C3:3 through extrapolation Q RT > 250 pcu/h Determine S PROV with respect to Q RTO and Q RT = 250 pcu/h If Q RTO < 250 pcu/h and Q RT > 250 pcu/h Determine S from Figure C3:3 through extrapolation

Slide 48

STEP C-4: City Size Adjustment Factor F CS [ Table C-4:3 p.2-53]

Slide 49

STEP C-4: Side Friction Adjustment Factor F SF [ Table C-4:4 p.2-53]

Slide 50

STEP C-4: Side Friction Adjustment Factor F SF [ Table C-4:4 p.2-53]

Slide 51

STEP C-4: Side Friction Adjustment Factor F SF [ Table C-4:4 p.2-53]

Slide 52

STEP C-4:Gradient Adjustments Factors F G [Figure C-4:1 p.2-54] If G  0  1 – (0,01 x G) If G < 0  1

Recommended
View more...