Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Signalized Intersections Kelli Lee S.S/Science Todd Bonds...
-
Upload
deborah-hines -
Category
Documents
-
view
224 -
download
1
Transcript of Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Signalized Intersections Kelli Lee S.S/Science Todd Bonds...
Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Simulation-Based Impact Analysis of Signalized IntersectionsSignalized Intersections
Kelli Lee
S.S/Science
Todd BondsS.S/Science
Research Study Site: Intersection of
Martin Luther King Drive and Clifton Avenue
GOAL: Improve vehicular delay and CO emissions at signalized intersections.
Objectives:
•Identify relationship between vehicles’ delay and CO emission;
•Identify existing delay and CO emission;
•Propose solutions to minimize delay & CO emission.
Data Collection Data Collection
MethodologyMethodology
Delay and CO ResultsDelay and CO Results
•Correlated patterns on the peaks and valleys;•Delay has an obvious impact on the CO concentration.
Existing ConditionsExisting Conditions
•LOSs of the different movements are unbalanced
•Overall emitted CO is 44.97g/hr.
Movement Existing CondtionsLOS Delay
WB LT D 42.43WB T C 29.23
WB RT B 15.42EB LT C 29.52EB T B 17.42
EB RT A 9.47NB LT D 41.81NB T D 39.69
NB RT B 17.31SB LT F 101.80SB T D 39.15
SB RT B 16.83
Overall Average C 33.19
This is good!
This is
unacceptable!
Alternative Solution 1Alternative Solution 1
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4 Phase 5 Phase 6
G: 4.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 9.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 24.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s
G: 11.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 0.5sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 13.5sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
G: 6.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 38.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s
G: 11.0sY: 3.0sR: 1.0s
G: 15.0sY: 3.6sR: 2.4s
Cycle length remains 90 seconds
Movement Existing Condtions Alternative One
LOS Delay LOS DelayWB LT D 42.43 D 38.62
WB T C 29.23 C 29.68
WB RT B 15.42 B 15.04
EB LT C 29.52 D 43.60EB T B 17.42 C 30.71
EB RT A 9.47 B 13.96
NB LT D 41.81 D 40.37
NB T D 39.69 D 43.32NB RT B 17.31 B 19.30
SB LT F 101.80 D 35.45
SB T D 39.15 C 32.39
SB RT B 16.83 B 13.00
Overall Average C 33.19 C 30.60
2.59s/veh better
Satisfactory (from “F”)
Alternative Solution 1Alternative Solution 1
More Balanced
Alternative Solution 2Alternative Solution 2
•Alternative Solution 1 +
Alternative Solution 2Alternative Solution 2Movement Existing Condtions Alternative One Alternative Two
LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS DelayWB LT D 42.43 D 38.62 C 26.69WB T C 29.23 C 29.68 C 25.18
WB RT B 15.42 B 15.04 B 12.04EB LT C 29.52 D 43.60 D 42.71EB T B 17.42 C 30.71 C 29.91
EB RT A 9.47 B 13.96 B 12.65NB LT D 41.81 D 40.37 D 43.41NB T D 39.69 D 43.32 D 41.88
NB RT B 17.31 B 19.30 B 19.66SB LT F 101.80 D 35.45 C 34.17SB T D 39.15 C 32.39 C 33.58
SB RT B 16.83 B 13.00 B 13.90
Overall Average C 33.19 C 30.60 C 28.32 BEST!
BEST!
ConclusionsConclusions
• Correlated patterns on the peaks and valleys
• Existing LOS unbalanced; Southbound left turn unacceptable LOS F.
• Alternative Solution 1: delay 7.78%, CO emission 4.26%,
• Alternative Solution 2: delay 14.68%, CO emission 9.68%,
• Recommendations:Alternative Solution 1 short-term solution
Alternative Solution 2 long-term plan
Questions???Questions???
THANK YOU!!
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgementsLane Group Delay and LOS Rating
Andrea Burrows, RET Grant Coordinator
Dr. Anant Kukreti, RET Project Director
Dr. Heng, Wei, Associate Professor, Ph.D., P.E.
Zhixia Li, Ph.D. Student and Research Assistant
Zhuo Yao, Ph.D. Student, Research Assistant
Project RET is funded through NSF Grant # EEC-0808696