TRAFFIC ENGINEERING

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this chapter, students should be able to:

- Understand capacity by defining it and exploring its factors and
measurement methods, highlighting its importance in roadway planning and
management.

- Analyze level of service metrics, including travel time and delay, and their
role in evaluating roadway performance to inform transportation decision-
making.

- Introduce queuing theory basics, such as arrival and service rates, and
discuss its application in traffic flow analysis for optimizing signal timing and

6
intersection design.
0 CONTENTS
0 Contents ....................................................................................................................... 2
1 Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 3
2 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 3
3 Capacity and Level of Service ................................................................................... 3
3.1 Example................................................................................................................. 5
4 Queuing Theory ........................................................................................................... 7
4.1 D/D/1 Queuing ..................................................................................................... 8
4.1.1 Example.......................................................................................................... 8
4.2 M/D/1 Queuing................................................................................................... 10
4.2.1 Example........................................................................................................ 10
4.3 M/M/1 Queuing .................................................................................................. 11
4.3.1 Example........................................................................................................ 11
4.4 M/M/N Queuing ................................................................................................. 11
4.4.1 Example........................................................................................................ 12
5 Assignment ................................................................................................................. 13
6 References ................................................................................................................. 13
1 DEFINITIONS
 Speed, ( ) – the rate of movement of traffic is expressed in metric units in
kilometers per hour (kph)
 Density, ( ) – is the number of vehicles per unit length of the road at that
instant is expressed as the number of vehicles per lane-km of the road.
 Volume, ( ) – is a measure to quantify the traffic flow. Expressed as the
number of vehicles that pass across a given transverse line of the road during
unit time.
 Flow, ( ) – Rate of traffic, vehicle per hour (vph); equivalent hourly rate
 Kendall's Notation is a system of notation according to which the various
characteristics of a queuing model are identified.

2 INTRODUCTION
Describing traffic is considered very difficult due to several factors that cause its
irregularity or unpredictability. These factors could be attributed to several events
which could happen on the road: accidents, stalled vehicles, lane changing or
swerving, parking maneuvers, indiscriminate loading and unloading of public utility
vehicles, etc. Without these events, traffic flow could be expected to be fairly regular
and predictable within a day or even within a week. However, the more frequently
these events occur along the road, the harder it is to predict the traffic condition.

It is during the occurrence of a traffic event when more advanced knowledge of

traffic flow theory, like queuing analysis or shock wave, becomes necessary.

First, let us consider how we can best describe traffic conditions when congestion
builds up simply due to continuous increase of traffic density along a road. To illustrate,
imagine the development of traffic along the expressway. In the early morning, drivers
can freely choose their own speeds because there are only very few vehicles on the
road. As traffic density increases, the drivers are constrained to adjust their speeds.
Traffic condition becomes very unstable when the capacity of the highway has
already been reached, after which, a stop-and-go condition will be experienced. If
the situation worsens, traffic is brought to a standstill—a complete breakdown of the
expressway because of lack of capacity. This condition may last for several minutes
or even hours. However, we can expect a reverse process to occur when traffic flow,
returns to stable condition.

3 CAPACITY AND LEVEL OF SERVICE

Capacity is defined as the maximum hourly rate at which persons or vehicles can
reasonably be expected to traverse a point or uniform section of a lane or roadway
during a given time period under prevailing roadway, traffic, and control conditions.

On the other hand, level of service (LOS) is a qualitative description of how a

certain facility is performing.
 Traffic engineers rely on capacity and level of service analyses to determine the
width and number of lanes when planning for new facilities or when expanding
existing facilities that are already experiencing congestion problems.

The Philippine Highway Planning Manual (PHPM) developed by the Planning

Service of the DPWH provides a methodology to carry out the process of such analysis.

The LOS concept uses qualitative measures that characterize operational

conditions within a traffic stream and perception of these conditions by motorists and
passengers.

Six levels of service are defined for each type of facility and are given letter
designations from A to F, with A representing the best operating conditions and F the
worst. Each level of service represents a range of operating conditions and is defined
by quantitative factors known as measures of effectiveness. In the PHPM method, LOS
are defined based on the computed volume and capacity ratio and the space mean
speed of the traffic flow. The volume referred to is the hourly demand volume. This
method was similar to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) method of 1965. The
latest HCM now considers density as the main variable in determining LOS.
Nevertheless, both methods give the same description of each level of service as
shown in table 3.1.

Table 3.1
Levels of Service

Level of Service Description

Free flow, with low volumes and high speeds. Drivers are virtually
A unaffected by the presence of others. Little or no restriction in
maneuverability and speed.
The level of comfort and convenience provided is somewhat
less than at LOS A. Zone of stable flow with operating speeds
beginning to be restricted somewhat by traffic conditions.
B
Drivers will have reasonable freedom to select their speed but
there is a decline in freedom to maneuver within the traffic
stream from LOS A.
Still in zone of stable flow, but speed and maneuverability are
most closely controlled by higher volumes. Most of the drivers
C are restricted in the freedom to select their own speed, lane
changing, or overtaking maneuvers. The level of comfort and
convenience declines noticeably at this level.
Approaches unstable flow. Speed and freedom to maneuver
are severely restricted, and drivers experience a generally poor
D
level of comfort and convenience. Small increases in traffic flow
will generally cause operational problems.
Flow is unstable, and there may be stoppages of momentary
condition. Represents operating conditions at or near capacity
level. All speeds are reduced to allow but relatively uniform
E
value. Freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream is
extremely restricted, and it is generally accomplished by forcing
a vehicle to "give way" to accommodate such maneuver.
 Forced or breakdown flow. The amount of traffic approaching
a point exceeds the amount that can traverse the points.
Queues form behind such locations. Operation within the
F
queue is characterized by stop-and-go waves and is extremely
unstable. It is the point at which arrival flow causes the queue to
form.
Source: Transportation Research Board 2000.

Table 3.2
Volume-Capacity Ratio and LOS

Level of Service Volume-Capacity Ratio

A less than 0.20
B 0.21-0.50
C 0.51-0.70
D 0.71-0.85
E 0.86-1.00
F greater than 1.0

In the current US Highway Capacity Manual, the different measures of effectiveness

that most appropriately describe the LOS for different types of facility are shown in
table 3.3.

Table 3.3
Measure of effectiveness for different highway types

Type of Facility Measure of effectiveness

Basic expressway segments Density (passenger car/km/lane)
Weaving areas Average travel speed (km/hr)
Ramp junctions flow rates (passenger car/hr)
Multilane highways Density (passenger car/km/lane)
Two-lane highways Percent time delay (%)
Signalized intersections Average individual stopped delay (sec/veh)
Unsignalized Intersections Reserve capacity (passenger car/hr)
Arterials Average travel speed (km/hr)
Source: Transportation Research Board 2000.

3.1 EXAMPLE
1. The speeds of 25 cars were observed. 10 cars were noted to travel at 35 kph, 8
cars at 40 kph, 2 at 50 kph, and 5 at 45 kph. Assuming that each car was
traveling at constant speed, determine the time mean speed, space mean
speed.
10 × 35 + 8 × 40 + 2 × 50 + 5 × 45 995
= = = 39.8 ℎ
25 25
 25 25
= = = 39.2572 ℎ
10 8 2 5 0.636825
+ + +
35 40 50 45
2. Data on density and speed where obtained from a four-lane, two-way rural
highway (in one direction only)
Density, veh/km Speed, kph
75 45
15 85
142 10
100 30
Determine the following:
a. relation between density and speed,
b. free flow speed and jam density
c. Capacity of the rural highway in one direction
d. Level of service of the highway if traffic volume in the same direction where
capacity was estimated as 2,050 vehicles per hour at a particular period.

Solution:
a. relation between density and speed
Use linear regression that takes the form
= +
where − speed
− density
, − constants to be determined

= 91.959 − 0.5959
The negative sign confirms that as density increases, speed decreases.
90
80
70
60
Speed, kph

50
40
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Density, veh/km

b. Free Flow and Jam Density

The density-speed relation obtained previously is
= 91.959 − 0.5959
Free flow speed occurs when density = 0
= 91.959 − 0.5959(0) = 91.959 ℎ
 Jam density occurs when speed = 0
0 = 91.959 − 0.5959
= 91.96 ÷ 0.5959 = 154.3195 ℎ/

c. Capacity
The formula for can be used to compute for the capacity.
154.3195 91.959
= × = × = 3547.7671 ℎ/ℎ
2 2 2 2

d. Level of Service
The volume capacity ratio is:
2050
= = 0.5778
3547.7671
Comparing this volume-capacity ratio with the values provided in
table 3.2, the LOS is C.

4 QUEUING THEORY
Queuing at a gasoline station or at the toll gate, falling in line to transact business
at the bank or just to get a movie pass, queuing at a busy parking lot, jet planes
waiting before being given the signal to land or takeoff— these are everyday
occurrences that would surely test one’s patience.

Queuing analysis provides ways of assessing the impacts of these activities by

knowing the magnitude of vehicular delay and the extent of queue propagated. The
models that will be discussed in this section are derived based on some assumptions
related to arrival and departure patterns, and the prevailing queue discipline.
Consider the system shown in figure 4.1.

Service
Station
Input Output

Figure 4.1
Queuing Theory

The input is normally characterized by some form of arrival pattern usually given
by its arrival distribution. The output generally depends on the queue discipline and
the service mechanism at the service station. The most common type of queue
discipline is the so-called FIFO or first-in first-out, i.e., the first one that arrives at the
service station gets served first and therefore the first to leave the system as well.
(Another type of queue discipline, which has limited application to traffic flow, is the
so called LIFO or last-in first-out. Typical examples of this discipline are the following:
the last rider of an elevator normally gets out first; the last document piled on top gets
signed first— not a recommended practice!) Service mechanism refers to the manner
customers are served at the station. For example, a toll booth that charges a single
fee, accepts only a fixed amount, and does not give back any change will have a
fairly uniform service rate compared to a booth that charges variable toll fees and
gives back change up to the last centavo.

Kendall’s notation is popularly used to describe a queuing system. It takes the form

/ / ( )

where

− represents the input or arrival pattern

− represents the service mechanism

− represents the number of servers

− represents the limit of the queue or users

Arrivals and departures may either follow a random or deterministic pattern.

Markov (M) is used for random processes while Deterministic (D) is used for processes
that are characterized by regular or constant arrivals or departures. Typical examples
of these processes are:

M/M/1 (∞) − random arrival and departure (service rate); one or single
server; infinite queue (no limit)

/ / (∞) − random arrival and departure; N or multiple server; infinite

queue

/ /1 (100) − regular arrival; regular service rate or departure; single

server; limit of queue is 100

A combination of Markov and deterministic processes, say / /1 may also be

used.

4.1 D/D/1 QUEUING

Due to the regularity of both arrivals and departures, it is more convenient to
analyze a D/D/1 queuing system graphically. Arrivals and departures are easily
represented by straight lines with the slopes corresponding to their rates.

4.1.1 Example
Consider a temporary single lane on-ramp/entrance to the expressway. While
the entrance is open 24 hours, a fixed toll fee of ₱10 is charged from 7 AM to 9 AM as
a form of congestion pricing. On average, a vehicle is served for 7.5 seconds during
which the teller receives the fee and gives back the change. The flow rate is 600
vehicles/hour during the first 25 minutes after which, it is reduced to 360 vehicles/hour
and remains constant for the next hours as shown in figure 4.1.1.
 Figure 4.1.1
Graphical representation of D/D/1 queuing

Consider time reckoned from 7 AM. The total number of vehicles that have
arrived and departed are estimated:

Arrivals:
/
For ≤ 25 : × = 10
/
For > 25 : 10 × 25 + × ( − 25) = 250 + 6 × ( − 25)

Departures:

For all : × =8
. /

Queue is expected to dissipate at the intersection of the two lines. At this point,
the total number of arrivals will be equal to the total number of departures.
250 + 6 × ( − 25) = 8
= 50

Therefore, queue dissipates at about 7:50 AM. After which, no queue is expected
to propagate since the departure rate (8 veh/min) is already higher than the arrival
rate (6 veh/min).

The total number of vehicles delayed is 8 × = 8 × 50 = 400 ℎ

The longest queue occurs at = 25 with a value of

(10 − 8) × = 2 × 25 = 50 ℎ

The total vehicular delay is estimated from the area of the triangle, i.e., area
between arrival and departure curves.

Total vehicular delay =

1/2 × 50 ℎ × 25 + 1/2 × 50 ℎ × (50 − 25) = 1250 ℎ/

The average delay per vehicle is 1250/400 = 3.125 / ℎ.

4.2 M/D/1 QUEUING
The M/D/1 queuing system assumes that the arrivals of vehicles follow a negative
exponential distribution, a probability distribution characterized by randomness.
Departure is assumed to be regular as in the D/D/1. The reader is advised to refer to
other books on queuing theory for the derivation of the formulas.

Let λ − arrival rate; and μ − departure rate.

Then ρ = is the traffic density or utilization factor.

Note that if ρ < 1 then λ < μ, which means that the system is stable. Otherwise,
queue becomes longer and longer (unstable condition).

Basic formulas for M/D/1:

a. Average length of queue

2ρ − ρ
=
2(1 − ρ)
b. Average waiting time
ρ
=
2μ(1 − ρ)
c. Average time spent in the system
2−ρ
=
2μ(1 − ρ)

4.2.1 Example
At the exit of a toll gate with a single booth, vehicles arrive at random at a rate
of 20 vehicles per minute. The service has an average rate of 22 vehicles per minute.

Estimate the following:

a. average length of queue formed at the toll gate

b. average waiting time of vehicles
c. average time vehicles spent in the system

Solution:

Arrival rate is λ = 20 vehicles/minute

Service rate is μ = 22 vehicles/minute

Utilization factor is ρ = 0.9091

(Note that although ρ < 1, the condition may start to become unstable.)

a. average length of queue

2 × 0.9091 − 0.9091
= = 5.45 ℎ
2(1 − 0.9091)
b. average waiting time
0.9091
= = 0.2273 / ℎ ≈ 13.64 / ℎ
2 × 22(1 − 0.9091)
c. average time spent in the system
 2 − 0.9091
= = 0.2727 min/veh ≈ 16.36 sec/veh
2 × 22(1 − 0.9091)

4.3 M/M/1 QUEUING

The M/M/1 queuing system assumes negative exponential for both arrival and
departure distributions.
Basic formulas for M/M/1:
a. Average length of queue
λ
=
μ(μ − λ)
b. Average waiting time
λ
=
μ(μ − λ)
c. Average time spent in the system
1
=
μ−λ

4.3.1 Example
Consider the same problem in previous example. However, due to variable toll
fees, the service is also random with an average rate of 22 vehicles per minute.

Solution:

a. Average length of queue

λ 20
= = = 9.0909 ℎ
μ(μ − λ) 22(22 − 20)
b. Average waiting time
λ 20
= = = 0.4545 / ℎ ≈ 27.2727 / ℎ
μ(μ − λ) 22(22 − 20)
c. Average time spent in the system
1 1
= = = 0.50 / ℎ ≈ 30 / ℎ
− 22 − 20
It may be observed that with a stochastic service rate, estimates for the M/M/1
are almost twice that of the M/D/1.

4.4 M/M/N QUEUING

When there is more than one server, such as in a toll gate, an arriving vehicle
will be able to proceed to a vacant gate, if available.

Otherwise the driver may have to wait in queue if all gates are full. Again the
arrivals are assumed with a rate of λ and the service rate per server is μ. ρ is still defined
as . However, is defined as the utilization factor.

For M/M/N, the value of ρ may be greater than 1 but must be less than 1 for
stable condition.

Basic formulas for M/M/N:

 a. Average length of queue
1
=
! (1 − / )
where
1
=
∑
! + ! (1 − / )
is the probability of no units in the system.
b. Average waiting time
+ 1
= −

c. Average time spent in the system

+
=

4.4.1 Example
If the operator of the toll road in the previous example wants to improve the
current condition at the toll plaza, determine the new queue characteristics if the
number of toll booths is increased to 2.

Solution:

The number of servers = 2. From the previous example, = 0.9091 and the
utilization factor is / = 0.9091/2 = 0.4545.

The probability of having no vehicles in the system is computed using:

1 1 1
= = =
∑ ∑
! + ! (1 − / ) ! + ! (1 − /2) 0! + 1! + 2! (1 − /2)
1
= = 0.375
0.9091
1 + 0.9091 +
2(1 − 0.9091/2)

a. Average length of queue

1 0.375 × 0.9091 1
= =
! (1 − / ) 2! 2 (1 − 0.9091/2)
= 0.23674242424 ≈ 0.2367 ℎ

b. Average waiting time

+ 1 0.9091 + 0.2367 1
= − = − = 0.01183712121
20 22
≈ 0.0118 0.71

c. Average time spent in the system

+ 0.9091 + 0.2367
= = = 0.05720833333 ≈ 0.0572 3.125
22
Increasing the number of toll booths to 2 will greatly improve the operation of the toll
plaza.
5 ASSIGNMENT
1. The spacing of moving traffic in queue can be modeled by
= 3.0 + 0.4 + 0.0025
where is the traffic speed in kilometers per hour. Determine the maximum
traffic flow and the speed and density at which this occurs.

2. Consider a truck terminal with 2 platforms. Empty trucks’ arrival follows Poisson
process with average arrival rate of 2 trucks in an hour. Each platform can load
goods with a service time of 28 minutes/truck (negative exponentially
distributed). Assume that an arriving truck can use any available platform.

Analyze the problem using queuing theory. If you are the operator of the
truck terminal, will you retain the 2 platforms, reduce it to 1, or increase it to at
least 3?

To be submitted May 23, 2024.

6 REFERENCES
Cascetta, E. (2001). Transportation Systems Engineering: Theory and Methods.
Springer-Science.

Garber, N. J., & Hoel, L. A. (2009). Traffic and Highway Engineering (4th ed.). Toronto,
Canada: CEngage Learning.

Jotin Khisty, C., & Kent Lall, B. (2016). Transportation Engineering. Pearsons.

Mathew, T. V., & Rao, K. (2007). Introduction to Transportation Engineering.

NPTEL. (2007). Introduction to Transportation Engineering.

Ortúzar, J. d., & Willumsen, L. G. (2011). Modelling Transport. New Delhi, India: John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Sigua, R. G. (2008). Fundamentals of Traffic Engineering. Quezon City: The University

of the Philippines Press.

Teodorovic, D., & Janic,, M. (2017). Transportation Engineering: Theory, Practice, and
Modeling. Elsevier Inc.