Effect of Time Gaps and Lane Flow Distributions on Freeway Bottleneck Capacity

Abstract

An alternative to the current approach to freeway bottleneck capacity analysis is outlined: average time gaps (average time separations between the rear of a vehicle and the front of one following it), average passage times (average times for vehicles to pass a point), and lane flow distributions serve as intervening variables to link geometric, vehicle population, and driver population characteristics to capacity flows. The first phase of research to evaluate this approach is described. The goal was to investigate interrelationships between the intervening variables and to relate them to average flow per lane under capacity conditions. Two types of “capacity condition”–-pre-queue flow and queue discharge flow–-were considered. Traffic data for 18 extended data collection periods at 15 bottlenecks in the Minneapolis–St. Paul, Minnesota; San Diego, California; and Seattle, Washington, areas were analyzed to calculate average values of critical lane time gaps (where the critical lane is that with the highest flow rate), critical lane passage times, and critical lane flow ratios (ratio of critical lane flow to flow per lane) and to relate them to average flows for periods of pre-queue and queue discharge flow. Critical lane average time gaps were not significantly correlated with critical lane flow ratios but were significantly correlated with average passage times and with flow per lane in both pre-queue and queue discharge flow; however, critical lane flow ratios were significantly correlated with flow per lane in queue discharge flow only. There is a strong, near-linear negative relationship between critical lane flows and critical lane average time gaps in both pre-queue and queue discharge flow.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Highway Capacity Manual. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000.

Banks

J. H.

Flow Processes at a Freeway Bottleneck. In Transportation Research Record 1287, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1990, pp. 20–28.

Banks

J. H.

Two-Capacity Phenomenon at Freeway Bottlenecks: A Basis for Ramp Metering? In Transportation Research Record 1320, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 83–90.

Hall

F. L.

, and Agyemang-Duah

. Freeway Capacity Drop and the Definition of Capacity. In Transportation Research Record 1320, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 91–98.

Urbanik

II , Hinshaw

, and Barnes

. Evaluation of High-Volume Urban Texas Freeways. In Transportation Research Record 1320, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 110–118.

Ringert

, and Urbanik

II Study of Freeway Bottlenecks in Texas. In Transportation Research Record 1398, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1993, pp. 31–41.

Cassidy

, and Bertini

. Some Traffic Features at Freeway Bottlenecks. Transportation Research B, Vol. 33, 1999, pp. 25–42.

Persaud

, Yagar

, and Brownlee

. Exploration of the Breakdown Phenomenon in Freeway Traffic. In Transportation Research Record 1634, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 64–69.

Persaud

, Yagar

, Tsui

, and Look

. Breakdown-Related Capacity for Freeway with Ramp Metering. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1748, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 110–115.

10.

Zhang

, and Levinson

. Some Properties of Flows at Freeway Bottlenecks. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1883, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 122–131.

11.

Zhang

, and Levinson

. Ramp Metering and Capacity of Active Freeway Bottlenecks. Presented at 83rd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2004.

12.

Elefteriadou

, and Lertworawanich

. Defining, Measuring, and Estimating Freeway Capacity. Presented at 82nd Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2003.

13.

Elefteriadou

, Roess

R. P.

, and McShane

W. R.

. Probabilistic Nature of Breakdown at Freeway Merge Junctions. In Transportation Research Record 1484, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 80–89.

14.

Lorenz

M. R.

, and Elefteriadou

. Defining Freeway Capacity as Function of Breakdown Probability. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1776, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001, pp. 43–51.

15.

Banks

J. H.

Average Time Gaps in Congested Freeway Flow.

Transportation Research A, Vol. 37, 2003, pp. 539–554.

16.

Amin

M. R.

A Study of Freeway Lane Use. MS thesis. San Diego State University, Calif., 2003.

17.

Chen

, Skabardonis

, and Varaiya

. Systematic Identification of Freeway Bottlenecks. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1867, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 46–52.

18.

Seattle Area Traffic. Washington State Department of Transportation, Olympia. www.wsdot.wa.gov/traffic/seattle/i405_coalcreekpkway.htm#cam. Accessed July 22, 2005.

19.

TDRL Utility Software Download Page. www.d.umn.edu/∼tkwon/TDRLSoftware/Download.html. Accessed April 12, 2005.

20.

TDRL. Index. ftp://tdrl.d.umn.edu/pub/tmcdata. Accessed April 12, 2005.

21.

TDAD: Traffic Data Acquisition and Distribution. University of Washington ITS Research Program, Seattle. www.its.washington.edu/tdad. Accessed April 12, 2005.

22.

Local Climatological Data, Minneapolis, MN (Oct. 2000 to Dec. 2000 and June 2004 to Aug. 2004) and Seattle, WA (May 2004 to Aug. 2004). National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center, 2000 and 2004.

23.

Cassidy

M. J.

, and Windover

J. R.

. Methodology for Assessing Dynamics of Freeway Traffic Flow. In Transportation Research Record 1484, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 73–79.