ATTACHMENT B: SYNCHRO HCM CAPACITY ANALYSIS OUTPUT

Transcription

1 ATTACHMENT B: SYNCHRO HCM CAPACITY ANALYSIS OUTPUT

2 1: T:ine Boulevard &Grann:i White Pike AM Existing Conditions.,J t of '- ~ t ~ \.!,.I Lane Configurations Sign Control Volume (vph) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Volume Total (vph) Volume Left (vph) Volume Right (vph) Hadj (s) Departure Headway (s) Degree Utilization, x Capacity (veh/h) Control Delay (s) Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS F F F F on summary n Delay HCM Level of Service F Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.1% ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 11/17/2009 Synchro 6 Report

3 1: Tyne Boulevard &Granny White Pike MD Existing Conditions t ~ ~ SIR S Lane Configurations tt. tot..;. Si n Control Stop StoR StoR Stop Volume (vph) Peak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Volume Total (vph) Volume Left (vph) Volume Right (vph) Had' (s) Departure Headway (s) Degree Utilization, x Capacity (veh/h) Control Delay (s) Approach Delay (s) Ap'proach LOS B B B B In n Summa Delay 11.9 HCM Level of Service B Intersection Capacity Utilization 38.9% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 11/17/2009 Synchro 6 Report Kimley-Horn and Associates. Inc. Page 1

4 1 : T~ne Boulevard & Grann~ White Pike PM Existing Conditions ~ -.. ~.f..- '- t ~ \.. ~./ "" Lane Configurations Sign Control Volume (vph) eak Hour Factor Hourly flow rate (vph) Volume Total (vph) Volume Left (vph) Volume Right (vph) Hadj (5) Departure Headway (s) Degree Utilization x Capacity (veh/h) Control Delay (5) Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS E F F F Delay HCM Level of Service Intersection Capacity Utilization Analysis Period (min) F 81.3% 15 ICU Level of Service D 11/17/2009 Synchro 6 Report

5 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Tyne Boulevard & Granny White Pike AM Proposed Conditions-Left-turn.,.,.. Lane Configurations 'i t. t. 'i t. Ideal Flow (v h I) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow ~~erm~ Volume (vph) Peak-hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Grou~ Flow ~v~h~ Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated glc Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension ~sl Lane Grp Cap (vph) vis Ratio Prot co co vis Ratio Perm vic Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service A B B B A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B A A ntersection Summa!i: HCM Average Control Delay 8.9 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.60 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 31.2 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 51.4% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group

6 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Tyne Boulevard &Granny White Pike MD Proposed Conditions-Left-turn Lane Configurations 'i t. " ft. " Intersection Summ!!i: HCM Average Control Delay 7.1 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.25 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 42.6 Sum of lost time (s) 8.0 Intersection Capacity Utilization 36.1% ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group t ft 'i ft. Ideal Flow (yp-hri Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Pennitted Satd. Flow ~~enn~ Volume (vph) Peak-hour factor, PHF Adj. Flow vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) Lane Grou~ Flow ~v~h~ Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated glc Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension ~s~ Lane Grp Cap (vph) vis Ratio Prot 0.04 co.04 co vis Ratio Perm vic Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service B B B B A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B A A

7 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 1: Tyne Boulevard & Granny White Pike PM Proposed Conditions-Left-turn t Lane Configurations 'i ft " 'ft. " ) 'ft. Ideal Flow 'mhpl) Total Lost time (s) Lane Util. Factor Frt Fit Protected Satd. Flow (prot) Fit Permitted Satd. Flow (perm) Volume (vph) Peak-hour factor, PHF Adj. Row (vph) RTOR Reduction (vph) o 6 o Lane Group Flow (vph) o o Turn Type Perm Perm Perm Perm Protected Phases Permitted Phases Actuated Green, G (s) Effective Green, g (s) Actuated glc Ratio Clearance Time (s) Vehicle Extension (s) Lane Grp Cap (vph) vis Ratio Prot 0.13 co.16 co vis Ratio Perm vic Ratio Uniform Delay, d Progression Factor Incremental Delay, d Delay (s) Level of Service A B B B A A A A Approach Delay (s) Approach LOS B B A A )ntersection Summary HCM Average Control Delay 8.0 HCM Level of Service A HCM Volume to Capacity ratio 0.54 Actuated Cycle Length (s) 30.9 Intersection Capacity Utilization 54.2% Analysis Period (min) 15 c Critical Lane Group Sum of lost time (s) ICU Level of Service 8.0 A

8 1: Tyne Boulevard & Granny White Pike AM Proposed Conditions - Roundabout Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourl~ flow rate (vph) Approach Volume veh/h) Crossing Volume velilh) High Capacity (veh/h) High vic (veh/h) Low Capacity (veh/h) Low vic (veh/h ~l' 't r.~:.-...ti Maximum vic High 0.53 Maximum vic Low 0.65 Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.1% ICU Level of Service C

9 1: Tyne Boulevard & Granny White Pike MD Proposed Conditions-Roundabout Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/h) Peak Hour Factor Hourly' flow rate h) Approach Volume (veh/h) Crossing Volume (veh/h) High Capacity (veh/h) High vic (veh/h) Low Capacity (veh/h) Low vic (veh/h) t Maximum vic Hi9h 0.26 Maximum vic Low :-:-~l':'" Intersection Capaci Uti ization 38.9% ICU Level of Service A

10 1: Tyne Boulevard & Granny White Pike PM Proposed Conditions-Roundabout t Right Turn Channelized Volume (veh/h 22 Peak Hour Factor 0.55 Hourl~ flow rate ( h) 40 Approach Volume (veh/h) Crossing Volume (veh/h) High Capacity (veh/h) High vic (veh/h) Low Capacity (veh/h) Low vic (veh/h) Maximum vic Hi9.h Maximum vic Low Intersection Capacity Utilization % ICU Level of Service D