See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/239391432

Microscopic Analysis of Service Delay at Uncontrolled Intersections in Mixed

Traffic Conditions

Article  in  Journal of Transportation Engineering · June 2009

DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-947X(2009)135:6(323)

CITATIONS READS
18 501

3 authors, including:

Satish Chandra
Indian Institute of Technology Roorkee
92 PUBLICATIONS   1,177 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Development of Performance Parameters for Two-lane Roads under Mixed Traffic Condition View project

Effect of Countdown Display on Traffic Flow Characteristics and Driver Behaviour at Signalised Intersections View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Satish Chandra on 26 December 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Microscopic Analysis of Service Delay at Uncontrolled
Intersections in Mixed Traffic Conditions
Satish Chandra1; Abhishek Agrawal2; and Ashalatha Rajamma3

Abstract: Several studies are available in the literature on delays at unsignalized intersections under homogeneous and lane-disciplined
traffic conditions. The present study introduces a service delay model based on microscopic analysis of delay data under mixed traffic
conditions. The data for the study were collected at five uncontrolled intersections located in different parts of India. The data were
divided into several parts according to the category of the subject approach vehicle and type of the movement. The conflicting traffic was
measured under two categories: light and heavy vehicles. The proportion of heavy vehicles in the conflicting traffic was found to greatly
affect the service delay. The proposed service delay model is compared with Kyte’s linear model for service delay estimation.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲0733-947X共2009兲135:6共323兲
CE Database subject headings: Delay time; Vehicles; Intersections; Traffic management.

Introduction because of the reason that it is a part of total delay to a vehicle in

The unsignalized intersections work on the basis of relative pri-
ority of traffic movements. The right-turning movement 共for left-
hand drive conditions as prevailing in India兲 from the minor street
has the lowest priority at an unsignalized intersection. The perfor-
mance of an unsignalized intersection is described by the delay
experienced by low priority movements. Delay indicates the ex-
cess time consumed in a transportation facility in comparison to a
reference value. It is the time difference between a realized and an
ideal operation time. It is a measure of effectiveness of an inter-
section experienced by the road users. Although it has been
shown that the users’ perception of quality of service may be
difficult to measure, delay is a widely used quality of service
measure for intersections. Delay is also a fundamental parameter
in the economic analysis of highway investments.
Service time or service delay is important as it is related to the
departure headway, which in turn, is the inverse of capacity
共HCM 2000兲. The service delay is the time spent at the stop line
by a vehicle, waiting for sufficient gap in the conflicting traffic
flow, so as to safely clear the intersection. It may be noted that the
terms service delay and service time have been used interchange-
ably in the literature. Al-Omari and Benekohal 共1999兲 used both
of these terms in their paper while Lu and Lall 共1995兲 have used
only the term service delay in their study. HCM 共2000兲 uses the
term service time for the delay experienced by a vehicle at the
stop line. In this paper, the term service delay is used throughout
the approach. It mainly depends upon the conflicting traffic vol-
ume and the priority of the movement. Studies are reported in the
literature to correlate service delay to the conflicting traffic.
All these studies have been conducted assuming that the law
of priority is fully respected. The traffic flow conditions on Indian
roads are substantially different from those in the developed
countries. There exists a mix of various types of light and heavy
vehicles with wide variation in their operating conditions. Even in
locations where stop signs are provided on minor streets of an
intersection, the rules of priority are not fully respected and ve-
hicles do not always follow the lane movement. These conditions
greatly affect the delay to the vehicles at uncontrolled intersec-
tions. Thus, it is necessary to study the effect of mixed traffic
conditions on service delay at uncontrolled intersections.
The present study was undertaken with the following objec-
tives:
1. To establish mathematical relations for service delay to the
different types of vehicles for a priority movement at uncon-
trolled intersections based on microscopic analysis;
2. To study the effect of proportion of heavy vehicles 共bus or
truck兲 in the conflicting traffic on the service delay; and
3. To propose a simple mathematical model for estimating ser-
vice delay to a vehicle at an uncontrolled intersection under
mixed traffic conditions.

1
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Review of Literature
Roorkee 247667, India. E-mail: satisfce@iitr.ernet.in
2
Junior Consultant, Frischmann Prabhu India, 315, Balgovind Wadi, Literature on uncontrolled intersections with mixed traffic where
New Prabhadevi Rd., Prabhadevi, Mumbai 400025, India. large proportion of the traffic does not follow the rules of the road
3
Lecturer, Dept. of Civil Engineering, College of Engineering, Thiru- is extremely limited. Kaysi and Alam 共2000兲 used a simulation
vananthapuram, Kerala 695 004, India.
technique to model driver behavior such as impatience, aggres-
Note. This manuscript was submitted on July 17, 2006; approved on
January 22, 2009; published online on May 15, 2009. Discussion period
siveness, experience, and traffic stream interaction at nominally
open until November 1, 2009; separate discussions must be submitted for priority unsignalized intersections. Troutbeck 共1999兲 used the
individual papers. This paper is part of the Journal of Transportation concept of limited priority at situations were minor stream ve-
Engineering, Vol. 135, No. 6, June 1, 2009. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-947X/ hicles forced their entry into a major stream and developed rela-
2009/6-323–329/$25.00. tionships to predict the capacity and maximum delay to minor

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009 / 323

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
street vehicles. Other important works related to delay at priority Intersection Location and type
intersection are also reviewed here for the benefit of the readers. 1. T-junction in Southern State of Kerala
Kimber et al. 共1977兲 estimated delays occurring at priority junc- 2. T-junction in Northern State of Uttar Pradesh
tions operating at or near capacity. A practical form of the flow/
3. T-junction in Northern State of Uttar Pradesh
delay relationship was suggested, which incorporated the time-
4. Four-legged intersection in Northern State of Uttar
dependent behavior of queues. Kimber and Hollis 共1979兲 Pradesh
presented methods for predicting queue length and delay at road 5. Four-legged intersection in Southern State of Kerala
junctions. The approach is quite comprehensive and takes into
account the stochastic nature of traffic demand and capacity.
Troutbeck 共1986兲 modified Tanner’s delay equation by quantify-
At each intersection, data were collected by video recording
ing the effect of bunching in the major stream. The study indi-
technique on a typical weekday. The video camera was placed at
cated that the degree of bunching in the major streams had a
a suitable vantage point near the intersection to record an
significant effect on the delay experienced by an isolated minor unobstructed view of all approaches and turning movements and
stream vehicle 共Adam’s delay兲, average delay, and the maximum data were recorded for about 2 h. The turning traffic volumes and
minor stream entry flow. Heidemann 共1991兲 analyzed formulas composition of traffic entering each leg of the five intersections
for the calculation of mean queue lengths and average delays for are given in Tables 1 and 2, respectively. The videotape was
vehicles on the minor roads at priority intersections. Kyte et al. played in the laboratory several times to get the conflicting traffic
共1991兲 developed a set of preliminary empirical models to esti- volume count and the service delay experienced by each subject
mate delay and capacity at two-way stop-controlled 共TWSC兲 in- approach vehicle. Both crossing and merging types of conflicts
tersections. A linear equation was suggested for minor street were taken into account while noting the conflicting traffic for
service time based upon the volume on the conflicting ap- each maneuver during the data extraction process. The conflicting
proaches. Akcelik and Troutbeck 共1991兲 presented a generalized traffic volume was divided into two categories as light vehicles
time-dependent delay formula for roundabouts and unsignalized and heavy vehicles 共bus and truck兲. The vehicles on subject
intersections. It can be applied to peak, off peak, as well as post- approach were divided into three categories: two wheelers, cars,
peak periods. The delay estimation process is significantly sim- and heavy vehicles. The number of vehicles observed for delay
plified. Madanat et al. 共1994兲 developed a probabilistic delay ranged from 20 共heavy vehicle, through movement兲 to 86 共car, RT
model at stop-controlled intersections. The model was based on from major兲 for different movements.
the gap acceptance functions developed through empirical data
collected from a T-intersection in Indiana 共U.S.兲. Al-Omari and
Benekohal 共1999兲 developed empirical models at undersaturated Data Extraction
TWSC intersections, to estimate service delay as a function of
conflicting traffic volume and variance of service delay as the Data extraction for the present study was done using microscopic
function of conflicting traffic volume and the average service analysis as described by Kyte et al. 共1991兲. The microscopic
delay. analysis requires the definition of the conflicting traffic flow as
Most of the above studies have been conducted in developed seen by each subject approach vehicle. Let t0 = time of arrival of
countries where rules of priority are fully respected. In a mixed the subject approach vehicle at the reference line; td = time of
traffic situation of the type prevailing in India, the personal expe- departure of the subject approach vehicle; n = number of observed
rience shows that lane driving, respect for the stop sign and the
stop line are not strictly observed. Due to loose structure of the
regulatory system, the vehicles sometimes force their entry to the
intersection, even in very small gaps in the conflicting traffic. This Table 1. Volume of Turning Traffic at Intersections
causes delays to major street vehicles also. Under these situations, Turning movements 共veh/h兲 Total entry
the results of delay studies conducted in developed countries can- volume
not be applied to mixed traffic conditions. The present study was Intersection From Left turn Straight Right turn 共veh/h兲
undertaken to carry out microscopic analysis of service delay at 1. South 310 — 195 505
three legged and four legged uncontrolled intersections in a mixed East 45 610 — 655
traffic situation. West — 490 310 800
2. South 246 — 110 356
East 66 945 — 1011
West — 905 165 1070
Data Collection 3. South 464 — 30 494
East 35 497 — 536
In order to study the service delay 共delay experienced by a vehicle West — 434 428 862
at the stop line兲, five intersections located in different parts of 4. North 145 90 95 330
India were selected. The intersection sites were in nonurban areas South 85 110 85 280
to avoid the effect of any upstream junction, parking, or bus stop East 105 520 40 665
on arrival rate. All the intersections had four-lane divided major West 60 475 125 660
streets and two-lane undivided minor streets. An important traffic
5. North 76 240 200 516
feature at all five intersections was that the queue formation on
South 120 184 60 364
the minor street approach was very rare. Three of the five inter-
East 72 800 102 974
sections were of T-type and the remaining two were four legged
West 160 570 74 804
as described below.

324 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 2. Traffic Composition at Intersections
Traffic composition
Total entry
Intersection From volume 共veh/h兲 Two wheelers Three wheelers Car Heavy vehicle Nonmotorized
1. South 505 152 106 66 181 —
East 655 127 135 279 114 —
West 800 245 95 341 119 —
2. South 356 121 — 128 107 7
East 1,011 344 — 422 245 25
West 1,070 362 — 391 317 11
3. South 494 115 — 256 123 18
East 536 195 — 244 97 21
West 862 312 — 386 164 23
4. North 330 119 — 112 99 15
South 280 82 — 127 71 7
East 665 230 — 212 223 24
West 660 211 — 245 204 16
5. North 516 139 98 114 165 —
South 364 102 55 93 114 —
East 974 343 117 275 239 —
West 804 278 132 240 154 —

conflicting vehicles for the subject vehicle, including the and con-
flicting vehicle passing just after departure of the subject ap-
proach vehicle; and tn = time of arrival of nth conflicting vehicle at
the reference point.
The definition of the conflicting flow rate as seen by the par-
ticular subject approach vehicle is the number of observed con-
flicting vehicles divided by the observation time
n in India兲 at all three T-junctions. At four-legged intersections,
Conflicting flow rate =
共tn − t0兲
This definition differs from the standard macroscopic method of
estimating flow rates, in which averages are reported for some
fixed period, usually 15 min or 1 h. The service delay can be
computed using Eq. 共2兲
Computation of Service Delay
The microscopic analysis carried out in the present study pro-
vided large a amount of data on service delay and the correspond-
ing instantaneous conflicting flow. The analysis was done
separately for three categories of vehicles: two wheelers, cars, and
heavy vehicles and for two types of movements: right turn from
major, and right turn from minor 共left-hand drive rule is followed
共1兲 through traffic from a minor street was also analyzed in addition
to the right turns from major and minor streets. Scatter plots were
made between the service delay 共Ts, s兲 and the corresponding
conflicting traffic volume 共CT, veh/s兲. The analysis of these data
is given in the following sections.

Service delay = td − t0 共2兲 Effect of Conflicting Heavy Vehicles on Service

The major advantage of using disaggregate data in microscopic
analysis is that information is not lost by aggregation, and, also,
the data points are tremendously increased. It also gives instanta-
neous conflicting flow rate as faced by a vehicle waiting for a
suitable gap. It is more relevant in mixed type of traffic where
instantaneous flow is many times much larger than average flow
due to clustered or abreast movement of vehicles.
The computation of service delay requires identification of a
reference line where the subject approach vehicles would stop. In
a homogeneous and lane-disciplined traffic, the stop line is taken
as the reference line for measuring the service delay. However, in
a mixed traffic flow, as mentioned earlier also, the vehicles do not
respect the stop line and tend to stop very close to the conflicting
area. It was noticed during a preliminary study of recorded data
that 50–60% of drivers did not respect the stop line at each of the
sites. After observing the behavior of traffic carefully, reference
lines where vehicles of each priority movement actually stopped
were marked on the screen. The reference line for minor street
vehicles was approximately a half-lane width beyond the stop
line, i.e., inside the major street.
Delay
It is the psychological behavior of a driver to reject a gap, which
would have otherwise been accepted, in the conflicting traffic
when the conflicting vehicle is a heavy vehicle 共bus or truck兲.
Thus, it is obvious that the presence of heavy vehicles would
inflict more service delay. This aspect was explored mathemati-
cally in the present study. Fig. 1 shows the scatter plot between
service delay and corresponding conflicting traffic for two wheel-
ers taking a right turn from a major street. The data show an
exponential trend and mathematical equation fitted through the
data points has the form as given below
Ts = 2.5554e1.8377CT R2 = 0.421 共3兲
where Ts = service delay, s, and CT= conflicting traffic, veh/s.
Plots were made between service delay and conflicting traffic
with different proportions of heavy vehicles. It was observed that
the service delay to a vehicle type increases with proportion of
heavy vehicles in the conflicting traffic. However, a clear demar-
cation in data points was observed when heavy vehicles 共HVs兲
were more than 25% and when these were less than or equal to

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009 / 325

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
 It indicates that the two models given by Eqs. 共4兲 and 共5兲 are a
16
statistically better representation of the data than a combined
14 model given by Eq. 共3兲. In other words, the effect of heavy ve-
12
hicles on service delay is statistically significant. A similar exer-
cise was done for other conditions also and the effect of heavy
Service delay (s)

10 vehicles was found significant in all the cases. The mathematical

8 models for three types of subject vehicles and different priority
movements are given in Table 4. As expected, the service delay
6
varies exponentially with conflicting traffic.
4 The models given in Table 4 were used to quantify the effect
of heavy vehicles in the total conflicting traffic on service delay to
2
a vehicle. Figs. 3–5 show the effect of proportion of heavy ve-
0 hicles in the total conflicting traffic on service delay to a priority
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
movement for an assumed value of conflicting traffic 共0.6 veh/ s兲.
Conflicting traffic (veh/s)
It was observed that the service delay to a vehicle type increases
considerably when heavy vehicles in the conflicting traffic are
Fig. 1. Service delay to two wheelers going right from major more than 25%. The increase was more significant in the case of
vehicle movements from the minor street. The service delay to a
vehicle was found to be 1.7 to 2.4 times greater when heavy
25%. Therefore, data were segregated into two groups, conflicting vehicles in conflicting traffic were more than 25%. To test the
traffic with more than 25% heavy vehicles and conflicting traffic hypothesis that the service delay experienced by a vehicle does
with less than or equal to 25% heavy vehicles. These plots are not depend on its type, a two-sample “t”-test for equal means and
shown in Fig. 2. The exponential equations fitted through the data unknown and unequal variances was conducted. The null hypoth-
points for the two curves are as below esis tested was that means of service delay to type 1 and type 2
For HV艋 25% vehicles are equal. Table 5 gives the t-test statistics for move-
Ts = 1.4649e2.3347CT R2 = 0.610 共4兲 ments at intersection 3. In all cases, the computed value of t is
less than the critical value, indicating that there is no significant
For HV⬎ 25% difference in the mean of the service delay of different types of
vehicles. Hence, the null hypothesis is accepted. Similar tests
Ts = 2.9251e2.3161CT R2 = 0.821 共5兲
were conducted at other intersections also and it revealed that the
An F-test was conducted to determine whether the combined service delay to a vehicle does not depend on its category.
model given in Eq. 共3兲 is a better representation of data than the
two separate models given by Eqs. 共4兲 and 共5兲. The sum of
squares of residuals 共SSR兲 and degree of freedom for these mod- Aggregate Service Delay Model
els are shown in Table 3. The calculated value of the F statistic is
2.61 against the tabulated value of 1.525 at 95% confidence level. Most of the studies reported earlier on delay are for the homoge-
neous type of traffic. Hence, separate delay models for different
categories of vehicles could not be found in the literature. To
16
Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV
facilitate the comparison of the models developed in the present
14 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV
study with those already existing, the delay data were pooled and
subject vehicles were classified into two categories: light and
12
heavy, for all types of movements. The plots for aggregate data
Service Delay, s

10 for light and heavy vehicles are shown in Figs. 6 and 7, respec-
tively.
8
Later, all delay data were combined irrespective of the vehicle
6 type and a general model was developed 共Fig. 8兲. Mathematical
models for the curves shown in Figs. 6–8 are given in Table 6.
4
The delay data were further generalized, ignoring the percentage
2 of heavy vehicles in the conflicting traffic as shown in Fig. 9. The
equation for this aggregate service delay model is given below
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8
Conflicting Traffic, veh/s
Ts = 2.0692e2.3036CT R2 = 0.653 共6兲
where Ts = average service delay to a priority movement, s 共RT
Fig. 2. Effect of heavy vehicles on service delay to two wheelers and TH from minor and RT from major combined兲, and CT
going right from major = conflicting traffic, veh/s.
The model, which is available in the literature, is only for the
Table 3. Statistical Parameters of the Models Developed minor street movements. Therefore, the data corresponding to the
Equation Sum of squares of Degrees of freedom right turn from major street were excluded and the delay model
number residuals 共SSR兲 共dof兲 R2 exclusively for the minor street was developed as shown in Fig.
共3兲 335.705 63 0.420 10. The proposed minor street service delay model made for com-
共4兲 69.429 34 0.610 parison purposes is given by Eq. 共7兲
共5兲 55.086 27 0.821
Ts = 2.1955e2.0868CT R2 = 0.629 共7兲

326 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 4. Models for Service Delay
Heavy vehicles in Service delay
Type of movement Subject vehicle conflicting traffic 共%兲 equation R2 value
RT from major Two wheelers 艋 25 Ts = 1.4649e 2.3347 CT
0.610
⬎25 Ts = 2.9251e2.3161 CT 0.8208
Car 艋25 Ts = 1.6049e2.0982 CT 0.5844
⬎25 Ts = 2.9733e2.2562 CT 0.8363
Heavy vehicle 艋25 Ts = 1.4975e2.6580 CT 0.6428
⬎25 Ts = 2.3947e2.8740 CT 0.7751
TH from minor Two wheelers 艋25 Ts = 0.7649e3.8457 CT 0.7261
⬎25 Ts = 1.6212e3.8829 CT 0.7847
Car 艋25 Ts = 1.4358e3.0281 CT 0.8243
⬎25 Ts = 2.7497e3.0243 CT 0.6731
Heavy vehicle 艋25 Ts = 0.9675e3.7660 CT 0.7757
⬎25 Ts = 2.1832e3.6241 CT 0.7443
RT from minor Two wheelers 艋25 Ts = 1.1362e2.8721 CT 0.8608
⬎25 Ts = 1.4779e3.5037 CT 0.8796
Car 艋25 Ts = 0.9185e3.2051 CT 0.7602
⬎25 Ts = 2.2334e3.1805 CT 0.7839
Heavy vehicle 艋25 Ts = 2.5751e1.8420 CT 0.9488
⬎25 Ts = 3.9585e2.1142 CT 0.9744
Note: RT= right turn; TH= through, CT= conflicting traffic volume, veh/s; and Ts = service delay, s.

16 18
Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV
14 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV 16 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV
14
12
12
Service Delay, s
Service Delay, s

10
10
8
8
6
6
4
4
2 2

0 0
2W CAR HV 2W CAR HV
Vehicle Type Vehicle Type

Fig. 3. Service delay to RT from major street Fig. 5. Service delay to RT from minor street

18
Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV 50
16 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV
45
Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV
14 40

12 35
Service Delay, s
Service Delay, s

30
10
25
8
20
6
15
4 10

2 5

0 0
2W CAR HV 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Vehicle Type Conflicting Traffic, veh/s

Fig. 4. Service delay to TH from minor street Fig. 6. Service delay to light vehicles irrespective of their movement

JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009 / 327

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
Table 5. Statistics of t-Test
t-statistic
Vehicle types
Movement type considered Computed Tabulated Inference
RT from minor Car and two wheelers 1.476 2.052 At ␣ = 0.05 and degree of freedom 共dof兲 = 27, the null
hypothesis is accepted.
Car and heavy vehicle 0.674 2.060 At ␣ = 0.05 and dof= 25, the null hypothesis is accepted.
RT from major Car and two wheelers 1.122 2.013 At ␣ = 0.05 and dof= 47, the null hypothesis is accepted.

45 35
Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV
40 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV 30
35
25
30

Service Delay, s
Service Delay, s

25 20

20 15
15
10
10
5
5

0 0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Conflicting Traffic, veh/s Conflicting Traffic, veh/s

Fig. 7. Service delay to heavy vehicles irrespective of their move- Fig. 9. Aggregate service delay ignoring the effect of heavy vehicles
ment in conflicting stream

35
50

45 30
Conflicting traffic with 25% or less HV
40 Conflicting traffic with more than 25% HV
25
Service Delay, s

35
Service Delay, s

20
30

25 15
20
10
15
10 5
5
0
0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Conflicting Traffic, veh/s
Conflicting Traffic, veh/s

Fig. 10. Aggregate service delay for minor street vehicles

Fig. 8. Combined service delay to all types of vehicles and move-
ments 35
Equation 7
30 Equation 8

25
Table 6. Service Delay Models for Aggregate Data
20
Heavy
vehicles in
15
conflicting
Vehicle category traffic 共%兲 Service delay equation R2 value
10
Light vehicles 共Fig. 6兲 艋25 Ts = 1.5831e2.2610CT 0.5515
5
⬎25 Ts = 2.7933e2.2772CT 0.5829
Heavy vehicles 共Fig. 7兲 艋25 Ts = 1.9033e2.0606CT 0.6892 0
⬎25 Ts = 3.5782e2.0161CT 0.7909 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6
Combined 共Fig. 8兲 艋25 Ts = 1.6651e2.1852CT 0.5421 Conflicting Traffic, veh/s
⬎25 Ts = 2.8727e2.2341CT 0.6201
Fig. 11. Comparison of proposed service delay model with Kyte’s
Note: CT= conflicting traffic volume, veh/s; Ts = service time or service
delay, s. model

328 / JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009

Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
 Kyte et al. 共1991兲 developed a linear equation for minor street
service delay, as given below, after conducting microscopic stud-
ies at four different intersections in the Pacific Northwest. This
relationship was developed for a conflicting traffic volume range
of 183 veh/ h to 1,100 veh/ h 共0.051 veh/ s to 0.31 veh/ s兲
Ts = 17.28 · CT
Fig. 11 compares the service delay as obtained from Eqs. 共8兲
and 共9兲. As may be seen, the prediction of delay by the proposed
model is on the lower side of Kyte’s equation beyond a conflict-
ing traffic of 0.20 veh/ s. Hence, it can be said that service delay
varies linearly with conflicting traffic up to a conflicting traffic of
0.20 veh/ s, beyond which an exponential trend is followed. The
Kyte’s linear model is valid only for a low conflicting traffic of up
to 0.20 veh/ s, beyond which it would overestimate the service
delay. When conflicting traffic is very high, say more than
3,500 veh/ s, the available gaps in the major stream vehicles are
unacceptably low and service delay to low priority movements
increases rapidly. Such high traffic volume occurs under mixed
traffic because of the undisciplined movement leading to cluster-
ing of traffic. Linear models would certainly fail under such con-
ditions.
Conclusions
This study provides preliminary exponential models to estimate
service delay to different categories of vehicles for various prior-
ity movements and for varying proportions of heavy and light
vehicles in the conflicting traffic. It is observed that the service
delay to a vehicle does not depend much on its type. It depends
only on the amount of conflicting traffic and its composition in
terms of proportion of heavy vehicles. The delay data show a
distinct demarcation when the proportion of heavy vehicles in the
conflicting traffic is greater than 25%. It is found to increase the
service delay by about 1.7 to 2.4 times that with less than 25%
heavy vehicles in the conflicting traffic. The delay to a vehicle
from the minor street 共through or turning兲 is about 1.1 to 1.4
times more than that for a right turn movement 共for left-hand
drive conditions兲 from the major street. The delay for a right turn
from the minor street is almost similar to that for a straight
through movement from the minor street. Earlier studies have
shown that the service delay is linearly dependent upon the con-
flicting traffic volume, especially under low ranges of conflicting
traffic. The comparison of the proposed delay model with Kyte’s
model shows that the linear variation of service delay is valid up
to a conflicting traffic volume of 0.20 veh/ s, beyond which it is
exponential.
The models developed under homogeneous and lane disci-
plined traffic conditions cannot be applied to the mixed traffic
View publication stats Downloaded 07 Jul 2010 to 59.163.196.106. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visithttp://www.ascelibrary.org
scenario at uncontrolled intersections. It is mainly due to impa-
tient behavior of drivers and difference in the static and dynamic
characteristics of vehicles in India and other developing countries.
The proposed model is developed for mixed traffic conditions of
the type prevailing on Indian roads and can be used to better
estimate the service delay to various priority movements at un-
共8兲
controlled intersections. Service delay is related to the departure
headway, which in turn, is the inverse of capacity of a movement
type. Therefore, service delay models suggested here can also be
used by practicing engineers to estimate the capacity of a priority
movement at an unsignalized intersection under mixed and unruly
traffic behavior.
References
Akcelik, R., and Troutbeck, R. 共1991兲. “Implementation of Austrian
roundabout analysis method in SIDRA.” Proc. 1st Int. Symp. on High-
way Capacity, Balkema, Karlsruhe, Germany, 17–34.
Al-Omari, B., and Benekohal, R. 共1999兲. “Hybrid delay models for un-
saturated two-way stop-controlled intersections.” J. Transp. Eng.,
125共3兲, 291–296.
Heidemann, D. 共1991兲. “Queue length and waiting time distributions at
priority intersections.” Transp. Res., Part B: Methodol., 25共4兲, 163–
174.
Highway Capacity Manual 共HCM兲. 共2000兲. “Highway capacity manual.”
SR, 209, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council,
Washington, D.C.
Kaysi, I., and Alam, G. 共2000兲. “Driver behavior and traffic stream inter-
actions at unsignalized intersections.” J. Transp. Eng., 126共6兲, 498–
505.
Kimber, R. M., and Hollis, E. M. 共1979兲. “Traffic queue and delays at
road junctions.” DOE, DTp. TRRL Rep. No. LR 909, Transport and
Road Research Laboratory, Crowthrone, U.K.
Kimber, R. M., Marlow, M., and Hollis, E. M. 共1977兲. “Flow/delay rela-
tionships for major/minor priority junctions.” Traffic Eng. Control,
18共11兲, 516–519.
Kyte, M., Clemow, C., and Khisty, C. J. 共1991兲. “Capacity and delay
characteristics of two-way stop-controlled intersections.” Transporta-
tion Research Record. 1320, Transportation Research Board, National
Research Council, Washington, D.C., 160–167.
Lu, J. J., and Lall, B. K. 共1995兲. “Empirical analysis of traffic character-
istics at two-way stop-controlled intersections in Alaska.” Transpor-
tation Research Record. 1495, Transportation Research Board,
National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 49–56.
Madanat, S. M., Cassidy, M. J., and Wang, M.-H. 共1994兲. “Probabilistic
delay model at stop-controlled intersection.” J. Transp. Eng., 120共1兲,
21–36.
Troutbeck, R. J. 共1986兲. “Average delay at an unsignalized intersection
with two major streams each having a dichotomized headway distri-
bution.” Transp. Sci., 20共4兲, 272–286.
Troutbeck, R. J. 共1999兲. “Capacity of limited priority merge.” Transpor-
tation Research Record. 1678, Transportation Research Board, Na-
tional Research Council, Washington, D.C., 269—276.
JOURNAL OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING © ASCE / JUNE 2009 / 329