Chapter 1

Introduction to Highway Engineering and Traffic Analysis

Highways:
ƒ Influence is economic, social and political
ƒ Have been studied as a cultural, political and economic phenomenon.

Highway trends:
ƒ Emphasis shifting from the construction of the mid-20th century (e.g., US Interstate
system, the greatest Civil Engineering project of all time)
ƒ Current focus:
ƒ Infrastructure maintenance and rehabilitation,
ƒ Improvements in operational efficiency,
ƒ Various traffic-congestion relief measures,
ƒ Energy conservation,
ƒ Improved safety and
ƒ Environmental mitigation.

1.2 Highways and the Economy

ƒ 15% of household income spent on vehicles
ƒ 16 million new vehicles sold in the US annually
ƒ Vehicle industry $400 billion in vehicle sales
ƒ 5 million jobs related to vehicle production and maintenance
ƒ Over $200 billion spent annually on construction and maintenance of highways
ƒ Highways critical to industrial and retail supply chains (just-in-time inventory, etc.)
ƒ Highways strongly influence economic development

1.3 Highways Energy and the Environment

ƒ In US, highways responsible for 60% of petroleum consumption (12 million barrels
of oil per day)
ƒ Highways responsible for 25% of US greenhouse emissions
ƒ 35 percent of all nitrous oxide emissions (NOx)
ƒ 25 percent of volatile organic compound emissions (VOC)
ƒ More than 50 percent of all carbon monoxide (CO) emissions
ƒ Major source of fine particulate matter (2.5 microns or smaller, PM2.5), which is a
known carcinogen.
1.4 Highways and the Transportation System
ƒ For passenger travel, highways account for about 90 percent of all passenger-miles
(passenger-kilometers)
ƒ Trucks account for about 37 percent of the freight ton-miles (metric ton-kilometers)
and nearly 80 percent of the value of all transported goods

1.5 Elements of Highway Transportation

1.5.1 Passenger Transportation Modes and Traffic Congestion
ƒ In the last 50 years, the percentage of trips taken in private vehicles has risen from
slightly less than 70 percent to over 90 percent (public transit and other modes make
up the balance)
ƒ Over this same period, the average private-vehicle occupancy has dropped from 1.22
to 1.09 persons per vehicle
ƒ Result: Massive traffic congestion that is difficult to manage

1.5.2 Highway Safety

ƒ Highway safety involves technical and behavioral components and the complexities
of the human/machine interface.
ƒ Safety improvements:
ƒ Highway design (such as more stringent design guidelines, breakaway signs,
an so on),
ƒ Vehicle occupant protection (safety belts, padded dashboards, collapsible
steering columns, driver- and passenger-side airbags, improved bumper
design),
ƒ Vehicle technologies (anti-lock braking, traction control systems, electronic
stability control) and
ƒ New accident countermeasures (campaigns to reduce drunk driving)
ƒ Still 40,000 people die in US on highways
1.6 Highways and Evolving Technologies
1.6.1 Infrastructure Technologies
ƒ New technologies to assist in construction, maintenance, and rehabilitation
ƒ New sensing technologies in the emerging field of structural health
monitoring
ƒ Extend the life-expectancy of new infrastructure with the ongoing
nanotechnology advances in material science

1.6.2 Vehicle Technologies

ƒ Foreign competition and changing consumer tastes have propelled technological
advances:
ƒ Supplemental restraint systems,
ƒ Anti-lock brake systems,
ƒ Traction control systems,
ƒ Electronic stability control
ƒ Such technologies directly influence highway design and traffic operations, and are
critical considerations in providing high levels of mobility and safety.

1.6.3 Traffic Control Technologies

ƒ New advances in traffic signal timing and traffic signal coordination
ƒ New traffic signal controls, numerous safety, navigational, and congestion-
mitigation technologies are now reaching the market under the broad heading of
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
ƒ Obstacles associated with ITS implementation include system reliability, human
response and the human/machine interface

1.7 Scope of Study

ƒ Highway engineering and traffic analysis involves an extremely complex interaction
of economic, behavioral, social, political, environmental, and technological factors.
ƒ These elements introduce a level of complexity that is unequalled by any other
engineering discipline.
Chapter 2

Road Vehicle Performance

Why is vehicle performance important?

Determines all highway design and traffic operations
Defines how transportation engineers must react to advancing vehicle technologies
The single most important factor in defining the tradeoff between mobility (speed) and
safety
TRACTIVE EFFORT AND RESISTANCE
Tractive effort – force available to perform work (engine-generated)
Resistance:
Aerodynamic
Drag, shape of vehicle, etc.
Rolling resistance
Tire, roadway surface
Grade (gravitational) resistance

Figure 2.1 Forces acting on a road vehicle.

Ra = aerodynamic resistance in lb (N),

Rrlf = rolling resistance of the front tires in lb (N),
Rrlr = rolling resistance of the rear tires in lb (N),
Ff = available tractive effort of the front tires in lb (N),
Fr = available tractive effort of the rear tires in lb (N),
W = total vehicle weight in lb (N),
θ g = angle of the grade in degrees,
m = vehicle mass in slugs (kg), and
a = acceleration in ft/s2 (m/s2).

With F = Ff + Fr and Rrl = Rrlf + Rrlr, sum of Forces give:

F = ma + Ra + Rrl + R g (2.2)

AERODYNAMIC RESISTANCE
Sources:
Turbulence around the body (85%)
Air friction (12%)
Air flow through components (3%)
 Basic Formula:

ρ
R a = C D A fV 2
(2.3)
2

Where:

Ra = aerodynamic resistance in lb (N),

ρ = air density in slugs/ft3 (kg/m3),
CD = coefficient of drag and is unit less,
Af = frontal area of the vehicle (projected area of the vehicle in the direction of travel) in ft2
(m2), and
V = speed of the vehicle in ft/s (m/s).

Air Density:

Table 2.1 Typical Values of Air Density Under specified Atmospheric Conditions

Table 2.2 Ranges of Drag Coefficients for Typical Road Vehicles

Table 2.3 Drag Coefficients of Selected Automobiles

Figure 2.2 Effect of operational factors on the drag coefficient of an automobile.

Power required to overcome air resistance:

US Customary Metric
ρ CD Af V 3 ρ
hp Ra = PRa = C D A f V 3
1100 2
(2.4)

Where:
hp Ra = horsepower required to overcome aerodynamic resistance (1 horsepower
equals 550 ft-lb/s),
PRa = power required to overcome aerodynamic resistance in Nm/s (watts), and
Other terms as defined previously.

What would you guess the drag coefficient of a 1969 MGC?

0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40<correct>
0.45

Vehicle Cd Area (m2 ) Area (ft2 ) Cd x m2 Cd x ft2

'69 MGC 0.400 1.646 17.71 0.66 7.09

What would you guess the drag coefficient of a 2005 Mercedes Maclaren SLR (617hp)?
0.20
0.23
0.27
0.32
0.37<correct>

2005 Mercedes Maclaren SLR

T = 11.60 sec from standing start

127.2 mph, 1/4 mile flashes past in third gear.

T = 12.51 sec from standing start

130 mph.
Of 464 hp making it to the road, over 110 are devoted to air resistance.
Driver brakes, rear wing rises to 65 degree angle, drag coefficient increases to 0.43, generating
15 hp worth of aero drag and 167 lb of down force, distributed 49/51% front/rear.

Concepts in Road Vehicle Performance

1) Accelerating from 0-60 mph in 5 seconds is considered fast for a car.

2) Accelerating from 0-60 mph in 5 seconds is considered fast for a motorcycle.
3) Anti-lock brakes prevent accidents.
4) Vehicle weight is the major factor in determining top speed on a level surface.
5) Vehicles can accelerate at more than 1g (9.807 m/s2).
6) Weight distribution of a vehicle is critical for stopping distance.
7) Four-wheel-drive vehicles stop quicker on ice than 2-wheel drive vehicles.
8) Front-wheel drive vehicles have better traction than rear wheel drive vehicles.
9) The amount of power needed to overcome air resistance at 60 mph is more than twice the
power needed at 30 mph.
10) The amount of power needed to overcome rolling resistance at 60 mph is more than twice
the power needed at 30 mph.
 ROLLING RESISTANCE
Sources:
Tire deformation (90%)
Pavement penetration (4%)
Friction, other sources (6%)

Factors influencing sources:

Tire inflation, temperature, speed
Coefficient of rolling resistance:

US Customary Metric
⎛ V ⎞ ⎛ V ⎞
f rl = 0.01⎜1 + ⎟ f rl = 0.01⎜1 + ⎟ (2.5)
⎝ 147 ⎠ ⎝ 44.73 ⎠

Where:
frl = coefficient of rolling resistance and is unitless, and
V = vehicle speed in ft/s (m/s).

θ
Rolling resistance, in lb (N), is coefficient of rolling resistance multiplied by W cos g ,
with small θg, cos θg = 1:

Rrl = f rl W (2.6)
power required to overcome rolling resistance is:

US Customary Metric
f WV PRrl = f rlWV
hp Rrl = rl (2.7)
550

Where:
hp Rrl = horsepower required to overcome rolling resistance (1 horsepower equals
550 ft-lb/s),
PRrl = power required to overcome rolling resistance in Nm/s (watts), and
W = total vehicle weight in lb (N).
 Problem 2.2
A vehicle manufacturer is considering an engine for a new sedan (CD = 0.30, Af = 21 ft2). The
car is being designed to achieve a top speed of 100 mi/h on a paved surface at sea level (ρ =
0.002378 slugs/ft3). The car currently weighs 2100 lb, but the designer initially selected an
underpowered engine and did not account for aerodynamic and rolling resistances.
If 2 lb of additional vehicle weight is added for each unit of horsepower needed to overcome
the neglected resistance, what will be the final weight of the car if it is to achieve the 100 mi/h
top speed?

GRADE RESISTANCE

From in Fig. 2.1, the resistance (Rg) is

R g = W sin θ g (2.8)
With small highway grades sin θ g ≅ tan θ g . So,

Rg ≅ W tan θ g = WG (2.9)
Where:
G = grade defined as the vertical rise per some specified horizontal distance in ft/ft (m/m).

AVAILABLE TRACTIVE EFFORT

Force available to overcome resistance will be governed by engine or tire/pavement interface:

Maximum Tractive Effort – Tire/pavement interface

Figure 2.3 Vehicle forces and moment-generating distances.

Ff = available tractive effort of the front tires in lb (N),
Fr = available tractive effort of the rear tires in lb (N),
W = total vehicle weight in lb (N),
Wf = weight of the vehicle on the front axle in lb (N),
Wr = weight of the vehicle on the rear axle in lb (N),
θg = angle of the grade in degrees,
m = vehicle mass in slugs (kg),
a = rate of acceleration in ft/s2 (m/s2),
L = length of wheelbase,
h = height of the center of gravity above the roadway surface,
lf = distance from the front axle to the center of gravity, and
lr = distance from the rear axle to the center of gravity.

Summing moments gives, for Rear wheel drive:

 μW (l f − f rl h ) L
Fmax = (2.14)
1 − μh L

Similarly, for a front-wheel-drive vehicle

μW (l r + f rl h ) L
Fmax = (2.15)
1 + μh L

μ = coefficient of road adhesion

Table 2.4 Typical Values of Coefficients of Road Adhesion

In some instances, the coefficient of road adhesion values can exceed 1.0.

Engine Generated Tractive Effort

US Customary Metric
2πM e ne 2 πM e ne
hp e = Pe = (2.16)
550 1000

Where:
hp e = engine-generated horsepower (1 horsepower equals 550 ft-lb/s),
Pe = engine-generated power in kW,
Me = engine torque in ft-lb (Nm), and
ne = engine speed in revolutions per second (the speed of the crankshaft).

Figure 2.4 Typical torque-power curves for a gasoline-powered automobile engine.

Figure 2.5 Tractive effort requirements and tractive effort generated by a typical gasoline-
powered vehicle.

Engine-generated tractive effort reaching the driving wheels (Fe) is given as

 M e ε 0 ηd
Fe = (2.17)
r

Where:
Fe = engine-generated tractive effort reaching the driving wheels in lb (N),
r = radius of the drive wheels in ft (m),
Me = engine torque in ft-lb (Nm),
ε0 = overall gear reduction ratio, and
ηd = mechanical efficiency of the driveline (0.75 to 0.95).

Relationship between vehicle speed and engine speed is

2πrne (1 - i )
V= (2.18)
ε0

Where:
V = vehicle speed in ft/s (m/s),
ne = crankshaft revolutions per second,
i = slippage of the driveline, generally taken as 2 to 5%
(i = 0.02 to 0.05) for passenger cars, and
Other terms as defined previously.

VEHICLE ACCELERATION

Basic equation

F − ∑ R = γ m ma (2.19)

where the mass factor (rotational inertia) is approximated as

γ m = 1.04 + 0.0025ε 02 (2.20)

the force available to accelerate is

Fnet = F − ΣR.

Figure 2.6 Relationship among the forces available to accelerate, available tractive effort, and
total vehicle resistance.
 Problem 2.6.
A rear-wheel-drive car weighs 2700 lb, has 14-inch radius wheels, a driveline efficiency of
95% and an engine that develops 540 ft-lb of torque. Its wheelbase is 8.2 ft and the center of
gravity is 18 inches above the road surface and 3.3 ft behind the front axle. What is the lowest
gear reduction ratio that would allow this car to achieve the highest possible acceleration from
rest on good, dry pavement?

FUEL EFFICIENCY
Factors affecting fuel efficiency
Engine design
Driveline slippage
Driveline efficiency
Aerodynamics
Frontal area
Weight
Tire design

PRINCIPLES OF BRAKING

Figure 2.7 Forces acting on a vehicle during braking with driveline resistance ignored.
Braking Forces

Maximum braking (coefficient of road adhesion, μ),

Fbf max = μW f
μW (2.28)
= [lr+ h( μ+ frl )]
L

and

Fbr max = μWr

=
μW
L
[ ]
l f − h( μ+ frl )
(2.29)

Maximum braking forces developed when tires are at the point of an impending slide.

Table 2.4 Typical Values of Coefficients of Road Adhesion

In some instances, the coefficient of road adhesion values can exceed 1.0.
 Braking Force Ratio and Efficiency

Front/rear proportioning of braking forces optimal when deceleration rate equal to μg).
Occurs when brake force ratio is Fbf max/Fbr max or

l r + h( μ+ f rl )
BFR f/r max = (2.30)
l f − h( μ+ f rl )

Problem:
lr and lf change depending on deceleration rate.

Percentage of braking force that the braking system should allocate to the front axle (PBFf) and
ear axle (PBFr) for maximum braking is

100
PBF f = 100 − (2.31)
1+ BFR f/r max

and

100
PBFr = (2.32)
1+ BFR f/r max

Braking Efficiency

Figure 2.8 Effect of brake force proportioning on the braking performance of a light truck and
a passenger car.

g max
ηb = (2.33)
μ

Where:
ηb = braking efficiency,
μ = coefficient of road adhesion, and
g max = maximum deceleration in g-units (with the absolute maximum = μ).
 Anti-Lock Braking Systems
ABS – can get close to 100% efficiency and avoid wheels locking

EBD – Electronic brake distribution

Performance example:

NISSAN 350Z
0-60 acceleration: 5.5 seconds
0-100 acceleration: 14.0 seconds
Peak braking g's: 1.12

Theoretical Stopping Distance

With γb = mass factor accounting for moments of inertia during braking (1.04 for automobiles)
from physics stopping distance is:

V2
VdV
S = ∫ γb m (2.35)
V1
Fb + ∑ R

With resistances:

V2
VdV
S = γb m ∫ (2.36)
F + Ra + f rlW ± W sin θ g
V1 b

With:

ρ
Ka = C D A f , m = W/g, Fb = μW
2

and, frl, constant and approximated by using the average of initial (V1) and final (V2)
speeds (V = (V1 + V2)/2):

γbW ⎡ μW + K aV1 + f rlW ± W sin θ g ⎤

2

S= ln ⎢ ⎥ (2.39)
2 gK a ⎢⎣ μW + K aV22 + f rlW ± W sin θ g ⎥⎦

If the vehicle is assumed to stop (V2 = 0) and including braking efficiency,

γbW ⎡ K aV12 ⎤
S= ln ⎢1 + ⎥ (2.42)
2 gK a ⎢⎣ μW + f rlW ± W sin θ g ⎥⎦
If aerodynamic resistance is ignored (due to its comparatively small contribution to braking),

S=
(
γb V12 − V22 )
2 g (ηb μ + f rl ± sin θ g )
(2.43)

Problem 2.21

A small truck is to be driven down a 4% grade at 75 mi/h. The coefficient of road adhesion is
0.95 and it is known that the braking efficiency is 80% when the truck is empty and it
decreases by one percentage point for every 100 lb of cargo added. Ignoring aerodynamic
resistance, if the driver wants the truck to be able to achieve a minimum theoretical stopping
distance of 300 ft from the point of brake application, what is the maximum amount of cargo
(in pounds) that can be carried?

Car Braking from 60mph From 80mph

Corvette Z06 109ft 197ft

Viper 113ft 196ft
Honda Civic SI 133ft 228ft
Mercedes SLR 107ft 186ft
Pontiac Solstice 114ft 206ft
Zamboni far very far
Zamboni does ¼ mile in 93.5s with a terminal speed of 9.7mph

Practical Stopping Distance

Basic physics 101 equation,

V22 = V12 + 2ad (2.44)

Where:
d = deceleration distance (practical stopping distance) in ft (m),
a = acceleration (negative for deceleration) in ft/s2 (m/s2),
V1 = initial vehicle speed in ft/s (m/s), and
V2 = final vehicle speed in ft/s (m/s).

AASHTO [2001] recommends a deceleration rate of

11.2 ft/s2 (3.4 m/s2), so with grade and V2 = 0:
 V12
d= (2.47)
⎛⎛ a ⎞ ⎞
2 g ⎜⎜ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ ± G ⎟⎟
⎝⎝ g ⎠ ⎠

Where:
g = gravitational constant, 32.2 ft/s2 (9.807 m/s2),
G = roadway grade (+ for uphill and − for downhill) in percent/100, and
Other terms as defined previously.
Note similarity with real equation (Eq. 2.43) with:
V2 = 0;
sin θ g = tan θ g = G (for small grades),
γb and frl ignored due to their small and essentially offsetting effects, we have

V12
S= (2.48)
2 g (ηb μ ± G )

η b μ = g max (Eq. 2.33).

AASHTO maximum deceleration of 0.35 g’s (11.2/32.2 or 3.4/9.807) is used for Eq. 2.47.

Distance Traveled During Driver Perception/Reaction

In providing a driver sufficient stopping distance, Must consider distance traveled during
perception/reaction:

dr = V1 × tr (2.49)

Where:
V1 = initial vehicle speed in ft/s (m/s), and
tr = time required to perceive and react to the need to stop, in sec.
Conservative perception/reaction time has been determined to be 2.5 seconds [AASHTO 2001].
Average drivers have perception/reaction times of approximately 1.0 to 1.5 seconds.
Total required stopping distance = theoretical or practical plus the distance traveled during
perception/reaction,

d s = d r + d (2.50)
Where:
ds = total stopping distance (including perception/reaction) in ft (m),
d = distance traveled during braking in ft (m), and
dr = distance traveled during perception/reaction in ft (m).

What would you guess the perception/reaction time of an average racer?

0.10s
0.20s <correct>
0.30s<correct>
0.40s
0.50s

Problem 2.28

An engineering student claims that a country road can be safely negotiated at 70 mi/h in rainy
weather. Because of the winding nature of the road, one stretch of level pavement has a sight
distance of only 590 ft. Assuming practical stopping distance, comment on the student’s claim.