| Literature DB >> 35998180 |
Jingqi Xu1,2, Kevin K Kigen3, Dalin Xu4, Shilin Wang5, Min Gu5, Xinyu Liu1, Jing Zhao1.
Abstract
The special width approach lane (SWAL) is a newly proposed unconventional design, whereby a wide approach lane is divided into two narrower lanes. The design entails the use of a single lane by two passenger cars or one heavy vehicle. Such design has been applicated at signalized intersections of Karlsruhe, Germany. This paper focuses on the saturation flow rate analysis since most existing studies on such design rely on the default highway capacity manual (HCM) values. Saturation flow rate data was collected at four SWAL design based signalized intersections with procedural steps of the HCM 2010 using the video camera. The two-sample t-test was performed to explore the potential influencing factors, and then the non-linear regression analysis was conducted to estimate the saturation flow rate of SWAL. The proposed model can effectively depict the saturation flow rate with lane marking, presence of cyclists, and rainfall being the influencing factors. The overall accuracy of the proposed model is about 95%. The results indicate that the three influencing factors are independent of each other. The existence of cyclists and rainfall lead to a decrease in the saturation flow rate, while the lane markings can improve the saturation flow rate. Moreover, the SWAL works well in Karlsruhe, Germany. The model predicts a base saturation flow rate value of 1652 pcu/h/ln, which is plausible with comparison of the base saturation flow rate recommended in the German Highway Capacity Manual.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35998180 PMCID: PMC9398025 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0272503
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Fig 1Layout design of SWAL.
Fig 2Data collection of the SWAL approaches in Karlsruhe, Germany.
(a) Karlstrasse- Amalienstrasse. (b) Rheinstrasse–Philippstrasse. (c) Rheinstrasse–Nuiststasse. (d) Rheinstrasse—Am Entenfang.
Statistical mean of the saturation headway.
| Factor | Category | Number of samples | Mean | Std. Deviation | Std. Error Mean |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cyclists | 1 | 132 | 3.362 | 1.619 | 0.141 |
| 0 | 1610 | 2.709 | 1.587 | 0.040 | |
| Lane marking | 1 | 377 | 2.645 | 1.352 | 0.070 |
| 0 | 1365 | 2.790 | 1.659 | 0.045 | |
| Rainfall | 1 | 219 | 2.780 | 1.467 | 0.099 |
| 0 | 1523 | 2.756 | 1.617 | 0.041 |
Significance test.
| Factors | Levene’s Test for Equality of Variances | t-test for Equality of Means | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| F | Sig. | t | df | Sig. | Mean Difference | Std. Error Difference | 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference | |||
| Lower | Upper | |||||||||
| Cyclists | Equal variances assumed | 1.415 | 0.234 | 4.540 | 1740 | 0.000 | 0.653 | 0.144 | 0.371 | 0.936 |
| Equal variances not assumed | 4.462 | 152 | 0.000 | 0.653 | 0.146 | 0.364 | 0.943 | |||
| Lane marking | Equal variances assumed | 2.507 | 0.114 | -1.565 | 1740 | 0.118 | -0.145 | 0.093 | -0.328 | 0.037 |
| Equal variances not assumed | -1.756 | 720 | 0.079 | -0.145 | 0.083 | -0.308 | 0.017 | |||
| Rainfall | Equal variances assumed | .007 | 0.934 | .212 | 1740 | 0.832 | 0.025 | 0.116 | -0.202 | 0.251 |
| Equal variances not assumed | .228 | 299 | 0.820 | 0.025 | 0.107 | -0.187 | 0.236 | |||
Iteration procedure results.
| Iteration number | Residual sum of squares | Parameter | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| 1.0 | 1387295707.393 | 1500.000 | 0.500 | 0.500 | 0.500 |
| 1.1 | 401058846.271 | 1640.761 | 1.208 | 1.044 | 1.535 |
| 2.0 | 401058846.271 | 1640.761 | 1.208 | 1.044 | 1.535 |
| 2.1 | 101098071.038 | 1647.425 | 0.970 | 0.988 | 1.006 |
| 3.0 | 101098071.038 | 1647.425 | 0.970 | 0.988 | 1.006 |
| 3.1 | 100080844.477 | 1652.477 | 0.943 | 0.986 | 0.970 |
| 4.0 | 100080844.477 | 1652.477 | 0.943 | 0.986 | 0.970 |
| 4.1 | 100080833.616 | 1652.570 | 0.943 | 0.986 | 0.970 |
| 5.0 | 100080833.616 | 1652.570 | 0.943 | 0.986 | 0.970 |
| 5.1 | 100080833.616 | 1652.570 | 0.943 | 0.986 | 0.970 |
Parameter estimation.
| Parameter | Estimate | Std. Error | 95% Confidence Interval | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower Bound | Upper Bound | |||
|
| 1652.570 | 12.515 | 1628.023 | 1677.116 |
|
| 0.943 | 0.013 | 0.917 | 0.969 |
|
| 0.986 | 0.009 | 0.969 | 1.003 |
|
| 0.970 | 0.011 | 0.948 | 0.991 |
Correlations of influencing factors.
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.000 | -0.004 | 0.028 |
|
| -0.004 | 1.000 | -0.196 |
|
| 0.028 | -0.196 | 1.000 |
Calculated Saturation flow rate.
| Intersections | Lanes | Bicycles ( | Lane marking ( | Rainfall (R) | Adjust values | Saturation flow rate (veh/h) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Collected | Calculated | Relative error | ||||||
| Karlstrasse–Amalienstrasse | Lane 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.930 | 1588 | 1537 | 3.21% |
| Lane 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.986 | 1522 | 1629 | 7.03% | |
| Rheinstrasse–Philippstrasse | Lane 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.902 | 1421 | 1490 | 4.86% |
| Lane 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0.956 | 1465 | 1581 | 7.92% | |
| Rheinstrasse–Nuiststasse | Lane 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0.943 | 1565 | 1558 | 0.45% |
| Lane 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1736 | 1653 | 4.78% | |
| Rheinstrasse–Am Entenfang | Lane 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0.930 | 1642 | 1537 | 6.39% |
| Lane 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.986 | 1747 | 1629 | 6.75% | |
Paired samples significance test.
| Paired differences | t | df | Sig. (2-tailed) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | Std. deviation | Std. error mean | 95% Confidence interval of the difference | ||||
| Lower | Upper | ||||||
| 9.00000 | 95.249 | 33.675 | -70.630 | 88.630 | 0.267 | 7 | 0.797 |