Thesis (MScEng)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Capacity waste happens when right-turn vehicles have right-of-way during a separate right-turn phase and lanes (e.g., through lanes) of the same approach of the intersection cannot discharge vehicles during that green phase. Right-turn traffic consumes the capacity which otherwise could be provided to through traffic movements at an at-grade signalized intersection. Therefore, it is widely considered that it would lower intersection capacity and increase total delay (Lin, Machemehl, Lee & Herman, 1984). The pre-signal strategy proposed in this research is specifically designed to improve this problem. The following aspects of this strategy were studied in this research, - Capacity benefits of this strategy, - Relationships between the capacity and the length of sorting area (the area between the two signals), - Signal timing of both main signal and pre-signal, - Clearance time of the sorting area, - Main signal phasing options - Signal coordination between the main signal and the pre-signal, - Utilization of the sorting area, and - Pre-signal strategy performance in a simulated environment. The results of this study showed that right-turn movement benefits significantly from this pre-signal strategy. For example, right-turn capacity can be doubled if a presignal is installed on one through lane of an approach with one right-turn lane. It was also found, the maximum approach capacity benefit is not affected significantly by the length of the sorting area for a given green period. The optimal green time and the available pre-signal green time for right-turn movement were also derived in this research. Different main signal phasing options were studied and compared. Phasing options which fit the proposed pre-signal strategy were found. Recommended values for right-turn green time of both signals were given based on different lengths of sorting area. The case study, which compared the performance of some critical movements at the intersection with and without the proposed pre-signal system, confirms the results concluded in this study. A potential problem with this strategy when applied at a real intersection is that it may confuse drivers. Drivers need to be educated and will need time to get familiar with this signal control method. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Beskermde regsdraaifases vir verkeer by gelykvlak seinbeheerde kruisings gebruik die kapasiteit wat benut kon word deur deurbewegings. Dit verlaag interseksie kapasiteit en totale oponthoud verhoog. Die voorseinstrategie wat in die navorsing studie voorgestel word is spesifiek ontwikkel om die probleem op te los of te verminder. Die volgende aspekte van die strategie is ondersoek in die navorsingsstudie: - Kapasiteitsvoordele van die strategie. - Die verhouding tussen die kapasiteit en die lengte van die sorteringsarea (die area tussen die twee seine). - Seintydstoedeling van beide die hoofseinfase en die voorseinfase. - Ontruimingstyd van die stoorarea. - Hoofseinfaseopsies. - Seinkoordenasie tussen die hoofsein en die voorsein. - Benutting van die sorterings area, en - Voorseinstrategieprestasie in ‘n gesimuleerde omgewing. Die resultate bewys dat die regsdraaibeweging grootliks bevoordeel word nadat die voorseinstrategie ingestel is. Byvoorbeeld, regsdraaikapasiteit kan verdubbel word as ‘n voorseinfase ingestel word op een van die deurlane tesame met ‘n enkele regsdraailaan. Daar is ook gevind dat die kapasiteit nie grootliks beinvloed word deur die lengte van die stoorgebied nie. Die optimale groentyd en die beskikbare voorsein groen tyd vir die regsdraaibeweging is ook afgelei in die navorsing. Verskillende hoofseinfaseopsies is bestudeer en vergelyk. Faseringsopsies vir die voorgestelde voorseinstrategie is gevind. Voorgestelde waardes vir regsdraaigroentyd van voorseine en hoofseine is bereken om kapasiteit te verbeter, gebasseer op verskillende lengtes van die stoorarea. Die gevallestudie wat die prestasie op ‘n aanloop met en sonder die voogestelde voorseinstrategie vergelyk, bewys resultate wat ooreenstem met die bevindinge in die studie. Die verwagte probleem met die voorseinstrategie, wanneer dit ingestel word by ‘n werklike interseksie, is verwarring van die bestuurders. Bestuurders sal opgevoed moet word en sal tyd nodig hê om gewoond te raak aan die voorseinmetode.

Disagreements regarding to what degree right-turn lanes improve or worsen the safety of intersections and driveways provided the motivation and the need for this study. The objectives of this study were to: a) carry out an in-depth study to determine the safety impacts of right-turn movements in different contexts, and b) develop safety-based volume warrants for right-turn lanes if safety indeed improves. Lack of adequate study on the applicability of past warrants and guidelines for the specific context of right-turn movements made from major uncontrolled approaches at unsignalized intersections, and particularly driveways, on two-lane roadways provided the scope for this study. Five-year historical data of statewide traffic crashes reported on Minnesota's twolane trunk highways were analyzed using binary/multinomial logistic regressions. Conflicts due to right turns were analyzed by fitting least squares conflict prediction models based on the data obtained from field surveys and traffic simulations. The safety impacts of rightturn lanes were determined through crash-conflict relationships, crash injury severity, and crash and construction costs. The study found that the probabilities of right-turn movement related crash ranged from 1.6 to 17.2% at intersections and from 7.8 to 38.7% at driveways. Rear-end, samedirection- sideswipe, right-angle and right-turn crash types constituted 96% of right-turn movement related crashes. Rear-end crash probabilities varied from 13.7 to 46.4% at approaches with right-turn lanes and from 37.9 to 76.9% otherwise. The ratios of rearend/ same-direction-sideswipe crashes to conflicts were 0.759 x 10-6 at approaches with right-turn lanes and 1.547 x 10-6 otherwise. iv Overall, right-turn lanes reduced right-turn movement related crash occurrences and conflicts by 85% and 80%, respectively. Right-turn lanes also reduced crash injury severity, hence, reducing the economic cost by 26%. Safety benefits, in dollars, realized with the use of right-turn lanes at driveways were 29% and 7% higher compared to those at intersections at low and high speed conditions respectively for similar traffic conditions. Depending on roadway conditions, interest rate and construction costs, the safety-based volume thresholds ranged from 3 to 200 right turns per hour during the design hour at intersection approaches, and from 2 to 175 right turns at driveway approaches. / Civil and Environmental Engineering / College of Engineering

Most safety analysis is conducted using crash data. Surrogate safety measures, such as various time-based measures of time-to-collision can be related to crash potential and used to gain insight into the frequency and severity of crashes at a specific location. One of the most common and acknowledged measures is post-encroachment time (PET) which defines the time between vehicles occupying a conflicting space. While commonly used in studies of motor vehicle interactions, studies of PET for bicycle-vehicle interactions are few. In this research, the PET of bicycle-vehicle interactions measured in the field, a driving simulator, and in a micro-simulation are compared. A total of 52 right-hook conflicts were identified in 135 hours of video footage over 14 days at a signalized intersection in Portland, OR (SW Taylor and SW Naito Pkwy). The results showed that 4 of 17 high-risk conflicts could not be identified by the conventional definition of PET and PET values of some conflicts did not reflect true risk of collision. Therefore, right-hook conflicts were categorized into two types and a modified measure of PET was proposed so that their frequency and severity were properly measured. PETs from the field were then compared to those measures in the Oregon State University driving simulator during research conducted by Dr. Hurwitz et al. (2015) studying the right-hook conflicts. Statistical and graphical methods were used to compare field PETs to those in the simulator. The results suggest that the relative validity of the OSU driving simulator was good but not conclusive due to differences in traffic conditions and intersections. To further explore the field-observed PET values, traffic simulation models of the field intersection were developed and calibrated. Right-hook conflicts were extracted from the simulation files and conflicts observed in PM-peak hours over 6 days in the field were compared to those obtained from 24 traffic simulation runs. The field-observed PET values did not match the values from the simulation values very well. However, the approach does show promise. Further calibration of driving and bicycling behaviors would likely improve the result.

Disagreements regarding to what degree right-turn lanes improve or worsen the safety of intersections and driveways provided the motivation and the need for this study. The objectives of this study were to: a) carry out an in-depth study to determine the safety impacts of right-turn movements in different contexts, and b) develop safety-based volume warrants for right-turn lanes if safety indeed improves. Lack of adequate study on the applicability of past warrants and guidelines for the specific context of right-turn movements made from major uncontrolled approaches at unsignalized intersections, and particularly driveways, on two-lane roadways provided the scope for this study. Five-year historical data of statewide traffic crashes reported on Minnesota’s twolane trunk highways were analyzed using binary/multinomial logistic regressions. Conflicts due to right turns were analyzed by fitting least squares conflict prediction models based on the data obtained from field surveys and traffic simulations. The safety impacts of rightturn lanes were determined through crash-conflict relationships, crash injury severity, and crash and construction costs. The study found that the probabilities of right-turn movement related crash ranged from 1.6 to 17.2% at intersections and from 7.8 to 38.7% at driveways. Rear-end, samedirection- sideswipe, right-angle and right-turn crash types constituted 96% of right-turn movement related crashes. Rear-end crash probabilities varied from 13.7 to 46.4% at approaches with right-turn lanes and from 37.9 to 76.9% otherwise. The ratios of rearend/ same-direction-sideswipe crashes to conflicts were 0.759 x 10^6 at approaches with right-turn lanes and 1.547 x 10^6 otherwise. Overall, right-turn lanes reduced right-turn movement related crash occurrences and conflicts by 85% and 80%, respectively. Right-turn lanes also reduced crash injury severity, hence, reducing the economic cost by 26%. Safety benefits, in dollars, realized with the use of right-turn lanes at driveways were 29% and 7% higher compared to those at intersections at low and high speed conditions respectively for similar traffic conditions. Depending on roadway conditions, interest rate and construction costs, the safety-based volume thresholds ranged from 3 to 200 right turns per hour during the design hour at intersection approaches, and from 2 to 175 right turns at driveway approaches.