Sub-problem 4a - Page 3 of 3 |
ID# C104A03 |
Sub-problem 4a: Pretimed
Control vs.
Actuated Control
Exhibit 1-39 summarizes the level of service and delay at each approach for a pretimed and actuated control.
Exhibit
1-39. Comparison of Pretimed and
Traffic-Actuated Operation (Datasets 2, 18) |
Approach |
EB |
WB |
NB |
SB |
Overall |
Pretimed delay (sec/veh) |
20.3 |
22.0 |
6.1 |
6.5 |
10.9 |
Actuated delay (sec/veh) |
7.9 |
8.3 |
7.4 |
7.9 |
7.8 |
Pretimed LOS |
C |
C |
A |
A |
B |
Actuated LOS |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
Note that traffic-actuated control has produced a
substantial reduction in delay for east-west traffic accompanied by a very
slight increase for north-south traffic. Note also that the delays are
now more or less equal on all approaches, whereas the distribution of times
under the pretimed design favored the north-south (arterial) movements at
the expense of the east-west (cross street) movements. In apportioning
the times, the controller has clearly ignored the much longer maximum green
times for the north-south phase. In other words, the north-south phase
would never reach the maximum time, because the unit extension settings would
cause the phase to terminate whenever the queue of vehicles on the approach
has been serviced.
While the timing plan presented above produces lower
delays than the previous pretimed plan, the local agency may still wish to
favor the north/south movements because of the heavier movement on U.S. 95. The results of this exercise suggest that increasing the maximum green time
would not accomplish this goal. The maximum green setting will have a
definite effect on the green time distribution under high traffic volumes;
but when demand is low, the minimum green time is the only parameter that
will force a green time distribution that is not in keeping with the
distribution of demand.
[ Back ] [ Continue ] to Sub-Problem 4b