A COMPUTER SIMULATION STUDY OF THE

11 SUMMARY This thesis reports on a

iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No Acknow

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9

viii LIST OF TABLES 3.1 Observed Fl

1.1 Roundabout Design 1 Intersectio

3 a modified formula was introduced

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW: CAPACI

(Wardrop, 1957). The investigation

9 They looked also at ways of impro

11 small-island layouts were design

13 operating under no clearly defin

where a: the critical gap (sec), NQ

where = Q e cx e -1 17 the maximum

19 The research carried out at TRRL

take account of local operating con

23 These types are illustrated in f

25 exceeded by a considerable margi

27 queues at the end and beginning

29 TYPICAL CONVENTIONAL ROUNDABOUT

EXAMPLE OF GRADE SEPARATED JUNCTION

EXAMPLES OF MINI-ROUNDABOUT LAYOUTS

"- C) 0 '.-. ) LU 0 S.- 0 C) ( j 0

38 CHAPTER 3 COLLECTION 0F DATA

40 Sheffield. It was observed that,

42 using a SONY AV342OCE portable m

44 Ecciesall Road. However, this di

46 TABLE 3.2 Day Entry Total flow F

\\ Ec.esa11 Road \"\\/i? LLjji 1lTh

\\\\\ ' \\\\ r * ' \\\_\ ' ' \\% .'

61 CHAPTER 4 GAP ACCEPTANCE CHARACT

63 this field. The conventions used

65 have been developed that use mor

67 of drivers who accept such gaps,

69 consistently accept all gaps gre

71 a merging platoon. Although they

73 They related the gap-acceptance

75 advance which rejected gaps shcu

77 proposed by Bennett (1971), Horm

larger than the respective ones for

81 The direct linear relationship i

83 mean squared errors or variances

85 produce reasonable predictions,

87 the rejected gaps. The results o

89 exclusion of top values decrease

91 definition of gap size as depend

93 4.5.8 The Effect of Assuming the

95 demonstrated on Fig. 4.8 and Fig

97 When the model was validated by

99 4.8.2.2 The Negative Exponential

101 0: the proportion of restrained

103 coefficient of the regression s

105 From the point of view of which

107 TABLE 4.1 (continued) No.1 Loca

Cl U) a) a) 0 I )1) H U) 0 U) a) '-

1 2 3 4 56789 10 2.95 2.94 2.68 2.9

Ci) (ii) 0. 113 TABLE 4.7 mean st.d

1 2 345678 9 0 2.42 2.44 2.50 2.63

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 2.61 2.93 2.68

(i) (ii) a 119 TABLE 4.13 mean st.d

oup 121 TABLE 4.16 no.of entries on

1 2 3 4 5 67 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 125 TABLE 4.21

4i -1 0 '-I- U-I a) .li.IC 127 E- .

231 GPNO(i13) = GPNO(K3)+1 NOG GPNO

43 121(SX,A1) 12 IF (A1.GE.AP) AX =

235 DELY(H2,M3) T3(i12,N3)-121(112,

82 2 237 sui entries of lane tar

108 106 CONTINUE 109 CONTINUE DO 10

CAP CAP+CA(N3) 125 CONTINUE 00 128

ci) 0 ci) a) '-I 0 a) 0 4-1 in 4-1

I-i a) 0 ci) a) $4 a) L;l 4-I 0 -'-