Traffic Engineering, 4th Edition

Roess, R.P., Prassas, E.S., and McShane, W.R.

Solutions to Problems in Chapter 14
Problem 14-1
Estimate the free-flow speed of a four lane undivided multi-lane
highway havng the following characteristics:

a) Base free-flow speed = 60 mph

b) Average lane width = 11 ft.

c) Lateral clearance = 3 ft at both roadsides

d) Access-point density = 15/mi on each side of the roadway.

The free-flow speed of a multilane highway is estimates using

Equation 14-6.

FFS = BFFS - fLW - fLC fM - fA

Where: BFFS = 60 mph (given)

fLW = 1.9 mph (table 14.5, 11-ft. lanes)
fLC = 0.65 mph (table 14.7, 3 +6* = 9 ft total lateral
clearance)
fM = 1.6 mph (Table 14.8, undivided)
fA = 3.75 mph (Table 14.9, 15 access pts/mi)
From page 294 For a multi-lane highway the left or median lateral clearance is
assumed to be 6ft.

FFS = 60.0 1.9 0.65- 3.75 = 53.7 mph

Problem 14-2
Estimate the free-flow speed of a six-lane suburban freeway with
12 ft lanes, right-side lateral clearance of 2ft. and a ramp density
of 3.5/mi.

The freeflow speed of a freeway is estimated using Equation 14

5:

0.84
FFS = 75.4 - fLW - fLC 3.22TRD

Where: fLW = 0.0 mi/h (Table 14.5, 12ft lanes)

fLC = 1.6 mi/h (Table 14.6, 2ft clearance, 6lane
freeway)
TRD = 3.5 ramps/mi (given)

0.84
FFS = 75.4 0.0 1.6 3.22(3.5 ) = 75.4 0.0 1.6 9.2 =
64.6 mph

Problem 14-3
Find the appropriate composite grade for each of the following
grade sequence:
(a) 2,000 ft of 3% grade followed 1,000 ft. of 2.3%
(b) 2,000 ft of 4% grade, followed by 5,000 ft of 3% grade,
followed by 3,000 ft of 5% grade.
(c) 4,000 ft of 5% grade, followed by 3,000 ft of 3% grade.

(a) As the total length of the composite grade (2,000+1,000+900

= 3,900 ft) is less than 4,000 ft, the average grade
methodology may be used.
Rise on 3% Grade: 2,000*0.03 = 60 ft
Rise on 2% Grade: 1,000*0.02 = 20 ft
Rise on 4% Grade: 900*0.04 = 36 ft
Total 116 ft
 Composite Grade = (116/3,900)*100 = 2.97%

(b) As this composite grade is longer than 4,000 ft (10,000 ft),

and part of the curve has a grade of greater than 4%, this
grade must be handled using the graphic composite grade
methodology illustrated below.

After 2,000 ft of 4% grade, trucks will be traveling at

approximately 36 mi/h. This is the speed at which trucks
enter the 5,000 ft of 3%. It is as if the trucks had been on the
3% grade for approximately 3,800 ft. Traveling another 5,000
ft along this grade, to 8,800 ft, trucks have reaccelerated to
an approximate speed of 38 mi/h, at which they now enter
 the final 3,000 ft of 5% grade. Starting as if they were
approximately 1,800 ft along the 5% grade, they travel
another 3,000 ft to 4,800 ft. Theyre final speed is
approximately 28 mi/h, and the composite grade is 5%,
10,000 ft long.

(d) As the initial portion of the grade is the steepest, the

composite grade is taken to the end of the first segment: 5%,
4,000 ft.
Problem 14-3
A freeway operating is generally rolling terrain has a traffic
composition of 12% trucks and 3% RVs. If the observed peak hour
volume is 3,200 vph, what is the equivalent volume in pch.

From Table 14.11, for rolling terrain, E T = 2.5 and ER = 2.0. Then:
PC Equivalents for Trucks: 3,200*0.12*2.5 = 960
pc/h
PC Equivalents for RVs: 3,200*0.03*2.0 = 192
pc/h
PC Equivalents for Cars: 3,200*0.85*1.0= 2,720 pc/h
Total Equivalent Volume: 3,872
pc/h

Problem 14-3
It is necessary to determine the free-flow speed of the subject
freeway using Eqn 14-5:
0.84
FFS = 75.4 - fLW - fLC 3.22TRD

Where: fLW = 1.9 mi/h (Table 14.5, 11ft lanes)

fLC = 0.8 mi/h (Table 14.6, 2ft clearance, 4lane
freeway)
TRD = 4.2 ramps/mi (given)
0.84
FFS = 75.4 1.9 0.8 3.22(4.2 ) = 62.0 mph

From 14.10, the 60-mi/h speed-flow relationship is used for this

freeway.

Service flow rate are computed using Eqn 14-2; service volumes
are computed using Eqn 14-3:
Maximum service flow rates (MSF) are selected from Table 14.3 for a
FFS of 60 mi/h:
LOS A 660 pc/h/ln; LOS B 1,080 pc/h/ln; LOS C 1,560 pc/h/ln;
LOS D 2,010 pc/h/ln; LOS E - 2,300 pc/h/ln.

The heavy vehicle factor is based upon passenger car equivalents

for trucks on a 4% grade of 1.5 miles. The pce values are different
for the upgrade and the downgrade.

ET (upgrade) = 3.75 (Table 14.12, 4% grade, 1.5 mi, 3% trucks

interpolated)
ET (dngrade) = 1.50 (Table 14.14, 4% grade, < 4mi, 3% trucks
extrapolated)

Then, using Eqn 14.9:

The PHF is given as 0.92,

there are 4 lanes in each direction on the freeway, and the driver
population adjustment factor (fp) is 1.00 for a normal driver
population. Equations 142 and 143 are implemented in the
spreadsheet table shown below.
Problem 14-6
An existing six-lane divided multi-lane highway with a field-
measured free-flow sped of 45 mph serves a peak hour volume of
4,000 vph with 12% trucks and no RVs. The PHF is 0.88. The
highway has rolling terrain. What is the likely level of service for
this section?

To determine the probable LOS for this existing 6lane multilane

highway with FFS = 45 mi/h, the equivalent ideal lane flow must
be determined using Eqn 141:
Where: V = 4,000 veh/h (given)
PHF = 0.88 (given)
N = 3 lanes (given)
fp = 1.00 (normal driver population assumed)

Then: ET = 2.5 (Table 14.11, Rolling Terrain)

And:

Then

Comparing this to the MSF values of Table 14.4 for a FFS of 45 mi/h,
it is seen that the LOS is E.

Problem 14-7
A long section of suburban freeway is to be designed on a
level terrain. A level section of 5 miles is however,
followed by a 5% grade, 2.0 mi in length. If the DDHV is
2,500 veh/h with 10% trucks and 2% RVs, how many
lanes will be needed on the:
a) Upgrade
b)Downgrade
c) Level Terrain
To provide for a minimum level of service of C? Assume
that the base conditions of a width and lateral clearance
exist and that ramp density is 0.50/mi. The PHF is 0.92.
This is a design application for a section of freeway that goes from
level terrain to a sustained 5%, 2mile grade. LOS C is the design
target. The number of lanes needed to provide this on the (a)
upgrade, (b) downgrade, and (c) level terrain is needed. Equation
144 is used:

The FFS of the facility is needed to begin:

0.84
FFS = 75.4 - fLW - fLC 3.22TRD

Where: fLW = 0.0 mi/h (Table 14.5, 12ft lanes)

fLC = 0.0 mi/h (Table 14.6, 2ft clearance, 6lane
freeway)
TRD = 0.5 ramps/mi (given)
0.84
FFS = 75.4 0.0 0.0 3.22(0.5 ) = 73.6 mph =>75 mph

DDHV = 2,500 veh/h (given)

MSFC = 1,750 pc/h/ln (Table 14.3, FFS = 75 mi/h)
PHF = 0.92 (given)
fp = 1.00 (normal driver population assumed)

There may be as many as three different heavy vehicle adjustment

factors for the three segments to be analyzed. They are based upon
the appropriate passenger car equivalents for trucks and RVs. Level
terrain values are selected from Table 14.11; upgrade (5%, 2 mi)
values are selected from Table 14.12 for trucks and 14.13 for RVs;
downgrade values are selected from Table 14.14 for trucks and
Table 14.11 for RVs (level terrain assumed for downgrade). The
resulting values are shown in the table that follows:
The downgrade value for the 2% RVs :As per page 298. The pces for RVs on
downgrade sections is taken to be the same as that for level terrain sections, or

1.2.

Problem 14-8
An old urban four-lane freeway has the following characteristics:
a) 11-ft lanes d) 7% trucks, no RVs
b) No lateral clearances (0 ft.) e) PHF - .90
c) A ramp density of 4.5 /mi f) Rolling Terrain
The present peak hour demand on the facility is 2,100 vph, and
anticipated growth expected to be 3% per year. What is the present
level of service expected? What is the expected level of service in 5
years? 10 years? 20 years? to avoid breakdown (LOSF) when will it
substantial improvements be needed to this facility or alternative
routes?

This question concerns an old freeway with projected traffic growth in

the future. It asks for an evaluation of LOS at various future time
points. The easiest way to approach this problem is to create a table
of service volumes for the freeway which can be matched against
future demand levels.

It is first necessary to estimate the FFS of the freeway using Eqn 145:
0.84
FFS = 75.4 - fLW - fLC 3.22TRD

Where: fLW = 1.9 mi/h (Table 14.5, 11ft lanes)

fLC = 3.6 mi/h (Table 14.6, 0ft clearance, 2 lanes)
TRD = 4.5 ramps/mi (given)
0.84
FFS = 75.4 1.9 3.6 3.22(4.5 ) = 58.5 mph => SAY 60mph
However, this could have been solved either graphically or algebraically
as follows:
Where: V = 2,100 veh/h (given)
PHF = 0.90 (given)
N = 2 lanes (given)
fp = 1.00 (normal driver population assumed)
ET = 2.5 (table 14.11, rolling terrain), yielding = fHV = 1/
[1+0.07(2.51)] = 0.905

Thus, Vp = 1289 vph D = V 1289/58.5 = 22.03 pc/h/l As per Table

14.2 => LOS C
S

Or go to figure 14.2, plot 1289 vs FFS curve of 60 results in the LOS C

Density Zone

Do the same with the adjusted V for the 5, 10 & 20 year growth factor
and the results will be the same as above.

e.g. at 1) year V = 2822 then Vp = 1732 1732/58.5 = 29.6 pc/h/l LOS

D.