MSC Thesis PDF

Master’s Thesis
Analysis of Operational Performance of

Old Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu for Vehicular Traffic
Gopi Chandra Shrestha
Nepal Engineering College

Changunarayan, Bhaktapur
Pokhara University
Nepal
June, 2018
Analysis of Operational Performance of
Old Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu for Vehicular Traffic
By

(TEAM 013-1209)
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Masters
of Science (M.Sc.) in Transportation Engineering and Management awarded by
Pokhara University
Nepal Engineering College

Changunarayan, Bhaktapur
Pokhara University
Nepal
June, 2018
ABSTRACT
Old Baneshwor intersection is one of the major traffic junctions in Kathmandu Valley
used from the north-eastern zones to access the central and southern zones of the
Valley. It is a four way intersection with a high traffic demand flow and controlled by
traffic police during peak traffic flow periods. In spite of widening of the road
corridors intersecting at this junction, one can usually observe congestion and long
queues of vehicles waiting in queues to cross the intersection for a considerable time
during the high traffic volume. It seems that no consideration has been given in the
proper and adequate improvement and operational management of the intersection.
The main objective of this research is to investigate operational performance of the

Old Baneshwor intersection for vehicular traffic at present and explore into various
viable improvements to enhance its operational performance for vehicular traffic.
Classified traffic volume study was conducted by recording video from 8:00 to 11:00
in the AM and from 4:00 to 7:00 in the PM for three typical weekdays at the
intersection and upstream of queues in each approach of the intersection. Studies of
prevailing Saturation flow, phasing and timing data based on observation of the traffic
police controlling the intersection, negotiation speeds of various turning movements
were conducted with the recorded video footage. Studies of approach cruise speeds,
back of queues were conducted manually at the field.
The collected data were organized, critically analysed in MS-Excel and prepared for
the analysis of performance of the intersection. The maximum total departure volume
from the intersection was found out to be 5387 veh/h (2370 PCU/h) from 10:00 to
11:00 in the AM. Total demand (vehicle arrival) volume during the peak hour reached
up to 5545 veh/h (2419 PCU/h). Motorcycles were found out to be 71.3% in the total
traffic mix. The percentage of heavy vehicles was 1.0 % during the study period.
SIDRA Intersection 5.1 was used for developing the traffic models of the intersection.
The model was calibrated to represent the particular intersection conditions as closely
as possible. Local calibration of the default basic saturation flow was performed for
the existing base case model. Validation of the intersection traffic model of the
existing base case was carried out by using 95 percentile back of queue and degree of
saturation. Validation of the model was accepted based on degree of saturation. It was
assumed in analysis that there was not any parking or vehicle stopping within 75 m
from the stop line in the approach and exit lanes in each intersection leg.
The performance of the intersection was studied at the present condition with traffic
police control without any improvement and with various six options of combinations
of lane configurations and signal phasing for traffic signalization of the intersection
without geometric improvement. Further, analysis of the intersection with geometric
improvement was performed for future year performance. A sustainable traffic growth
rate of 2 % per year was adopted for future year analysis. The performance measures
for evaluation were mainly capacity, degree of saturation (DoS), average delay, LOS,
back of queue (BOQ), and overall performance index (PI).
ii
The overall performance level of the intersection at present condition with traffic
police control without any improvement was found to be at LOS F, oversaturated with
DoS = 1.16, average overall intersection delay of 98.3 sec/veh.
Fixed time signal method was used for traffic signalization. The analysis of
alternative options showed that inadequate lane assignments in the approaches of the
Gausala and Sinamangal legs with higher traffic demand and inefficient phasing of
the traffic police during the peak hour were the main causes of poor performance of
the intersection at present with traffic police control. Hence, it was concluded that
improvement in lane configuration with rearrangement of lane assignments and minor
adjustment of lane widths within the existing carriageway and optimum traffic signal
phasing and timing are necessary for improving the operational performance of the
intersection for vehicular traffic.
Among the six options A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, and C2 that were evaluated with
signalization and adjustment of lane assignments,option C2 had the least PI = 116.5
and least delay of 32.6/veh. Hence, it was concluded this option is best performing in
terms of all performance parameters for signalization at the base year.
Further evaluation of option C2 for the design life of 5 years revealed that the
intersection in this option will perform at an unacceptable LOS E at the end of 5
years. So, a geometric improvement in the option C2 was proposed by increasing the
radii of the existing very sharp corner kerbs to 9 m to 15 m for more efficient traffic
operation. Analysis of this geometric improvement for various future years showed
intersection performance is enhanced to an acceptable LOS C with the worst lane
performing at LOS D by the year 2028. So grade separation will not be required up to
year 2028 provided the traffic growth rate is maintained at a sustainable rate of2 %
per year, which can be achieved by implementing walking, cycling and public
transport favoured land use and urban transport policies.
It is recommended to improve the intersection with rearrangement of lane

assignments and minor adjustment of lane widths as per the lane configuration C with
installation of traffic signalization for short term up to the year 2020. Then the
proposed geometric improvement by increasing the radii of the corner turning kerbs
along with traffic signalization is recommended to be implemented up to year 2028.
iii
Declaration
I hereby declare that this study entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of

Old Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu for Vehicular Traffic is based on my
original research work. Related works on the topic by other researchers have been
duly acknowledged. I owe all the liabilities relating to the accuracy and authenticity of
the data and any other information included hereunder.
Signature:
Name of the student: Gopi Chandra Shrestha
Date:
iv
Recommendation
This is to certify that this thesis entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of

Old Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu for Vehicular Traffic prepared and
submitted by Gopi Chandra Shrestha, in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the
degree of Master of Science (M.Sc.) in Transportation Engineering and Management
awarded by Pokhara University, has been completed under my supervision. I
recommend the same for acceptance by Pokhara University.
Signature:
Name of supervisor: Er. Subash Dhungel
Independent Consultant
Traffic-Transportation & Road-safety
Date:
v
Certification
This thesis entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of Old Baneshwor

Intersection in Kathmandu for Vehicular Traffic prepared and submitted by Gopi
Chandra Shrestha has been examined by us and is accepted for the award of the
degree of Master of Science (M.Sc.) in Transportation Engineering and management
by Pokhara University.
Prof. Dr. Padma Bahadur Shahi ………………. …………….

External Examiner Signature Date
Er. Subash Dhungel ………………. …………….

Independent Consultant
Traffic-Transportation & Road-safety Signature Date
Supervisor
Prof. Dr. Khem Raj Sharma ………………. …………….

Director Signature Date
nec-CPS
vi
Acknowledgements
First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation towards my
thesis supervisor Er. Subash Dhungel (Independent Traffic-Transportation & Road-
safety Consultant) for his valuable support, constant guidance, critical comments and
encouragement throughout the thesis without which this work would not have been
possible. He is a constant source of inspiration and working under him is an
unforgettable experience.
I express my gratitude to all the personnel of Nepal Engineering College, who helped
me during this thesis work particularly, Prof. Dr. Khem Raj Sharma (Director, nec-
CPS), Associate Prof. Dr. Thusitha Chandani Shahi (TEAM Coordinator, nec-CPS),
ER. Rabindra Pokhrel (Assistant Professor, nec-CPS), Dr. Asish Ghimire (Research
Coordinator).
I am also very grateful to Er. Prashant Malla (Directorof AVIYAAN Consultancy and
Softwel P. ltd) for providing me equipment like the CC cameras and video recorders
along with the Traffic Count software and Excel Macro program for traffic volume
study, without which this work would not have been possible. I appreciate the support
of the consultancy’s employees: Er. Suraj Kacchyapati, and Er. Raj Mohan Sijakhwa
for supporting me in setting up the CC cameras and guiding me in using the Traffic
Count Software and Excel macro program inthe traffic volume data reduction.
My thanks also go to all the house owners, who permitted me to fix the CC cameras
on top of their houses for recording the traffic video.
Lastly, I would like to thank my all friends Sanam Khanal, Prakash Dangal, Saroj
Chaudahary, Om Narayan Chaudhary, Ram Karki, Ujwal Shrestha, Raj Karmacharya,
Umesh Hyaumikha, and my son Aditya Chandra Shrestha for their unforgettable and
laborious support in field data collection and data entry, and thanks to my friends of
TEAM program for their invaluable support and feedback during this study.
Lastly, I would like to thank my family for their constant support and patience
throughout my study period.

TEAM 013-1209
vii
Table of contents
Title Page
ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................................... ii
Declaration ........................................................................................................................... iv
Recommendation .................................................................................................................. v
Certification ......................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. vii
Table of contents ................................................................................................................ viii
List of tables......................................................................................................................... xi
List of figures ..................................................................................................................... xiii
List of Appendices .............................................................................................................. xv
Abbreviations and Acronyms ............................................................................................ xvi
Chapter 1 ............................................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Background ............................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Problem Statement .................................................................................................... 2
1.3 Research Questions ................................................................................................... 2
1.4 Research Objectives .................................................................................................. 2
1.5 Significance of the Study .......................................................................................... 3
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study ............................................................................ 3
1.6.1 Scope of the Study......................................................................................... 3
1.6.2 Limitation of the Study ................................................................................. 3
Chapter 2 ............................................................................................................................... 4
LITERATURE REVIEW ..................................................................................................... 4
2.1 Performance Measures .............................................................................................. 4
2.2 Road Capacity ........................................................................................................... 4
2.3 Signalized Intersection Capacity ............................................................................... 4
2.4 Level of Service (LOS) ............................................................................................. 5
2.5 Beyond LOS F .......................................................................................................... 6
2.6 Signalized Intersection Flow Characteristics ............................................................ 6
2.7 Demand Flow Rate.................................................................................................... 6
2.8 Saturation Flow Rate at Signalized Intersection ....................................................... 7
2.9 Traffic Signal Controller Characteristics ................................................................ 10
2.10 Concepts of Delay at Signalized Intersection ......................................................... 10
2.10 Peak hour factor (PHF) ........................................................................................... 14
2.11 SIDRA intersection Software.................................................................................. 14
2.12 Model Calibration in SIDRA intersection .............................................................. 15
2.13 Review of relevant previous theses and study reports on intersection
evaluation. ............................................................................................................... 16
2.13.1 Comparison of Intersection Capacity with Traffic flow in Kabul
Metropolitan Area for 2008, 2014, and 2025 ............................................. 16
2.13.2 Detailed traffic study and design for grade separated intersections at
five major junctions in Kathmandu............................................................. 16
viii
2.13.3 Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project (KSUTP)....................... 19
2.13.4 Development of Traffic diversion algorithm for the possible reduction
of Traffic demand at intersection: a case study of Thapathali
intersection .................................................................................................. 20
2.13.5 Comparison of Probable Congestion Reduction Approaches at New
Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu ....................................................... 20
Chapter 3 ............................................................................................................................. 21
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY........................................................................................ 21
3.1 Research Design ...................................................................................................... 21
3.2 Research Approach ................................................................................................. 22
3.3 Study Area............................................................................................................... 23
3.4 Sample Size and Sample Selection ......................................................................... 23
3.5 Data Collection ....................................................................................................... 23
3.5.1 Intersection Geometry ................................................................................. 25
3.5.2 Traffic Volume and Pedestrian Volume...................................................... 25
3.5.3 Passenger Car Unit (PCU)........................................................................... 27
3.5.4 Prevailing saturation flow rate .................................................................... 28
3.5.5 95 percentile back of queue ......................................................................... 28
3.5.6 Vehicle Composition ................................................................................... 29
3.5.7 Size of Vehicle and Queue Space ............................................................... 29
3.5.8 Approach and Exit Cruise Speeds ............................................................... 30
3.5.9 Negotiation Speed, Distance, and Radius ................................................. 31
3.5.10 Phasing and Timing Data .......................................................................... 31
3.5.11 Traffic Growth rate.................................................................................... 32
3.6 Processing of Data .................................................................................................. 32
3.7 Identification of Peak hour and Peak hour factor for the analysis .......................... 32
3.8 Calibration of SIDRA Intersection Model .............................................................. 33
3.9 Validation of base model ........................................................................................ 34
3.10 Data Analysis .......................................................................................................... 35
3.10.1 Evaluation of Operational Performance Measures...................................... 35
3.7 Research Matrix ...................................................................................................... 38
Chapter 4 ............................................................................................................................. 39
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ......................................................................................... 39
4.1 Intersection Geometry ............................................................................................. 39
4.2 Land use and Building uses .................................................................................... 40
4.3 Traffic and Pedestrian Volume ............................................................................... 40
4.4 Traffic Volume – Directional Vehicular Flows ...................................................... 42
4.5 Traffic demand (arrival) flow ................................................................................. 46
4.6 Peak hour and Peak hour factor .............................................................................. 47
4.7 Traffic Composition ................................................................................................ 47
4.8 Cruise Speeds .......................................................................................................... 48
4.9 Intersection Path Data Parameters .......................................................................... 49
4.10 Prevailing (field measured) Saturation Flow Rate observation .............................. 49
4.11 Back of queue observation ...................................................................................... 50
4.12 Phasing and Signal timing....................................................................................... 50
4.13 Calibration of Basic Saturation Flow ...................................................................... 51
4.14 Validation of base case model ................................................................................ 52
ix
4.15 Evaluation of Operational Performance of the Intersection at present under
traffic police control ................................................................................................ 53
4.16 Evaluation of various Lane Configuration Options with signalization of the
Intersection for the base year 2018 ......................................................................... 56
4.16.1 Evaluation of Option A1 (Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan,
Default basic saturation flow used)............................................................. 59
4.16.2 Evaluation of Option A2 (Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan,
Local calibration of default basic saturation flow performed).................... 61
4.16.3 Evaluation of Option B1 (Lane configuration B, Protected right turns
from Sinamangal and Gausala legs, 4 signal phasing plan)........................ 63
4.16.4 Evaluation of Option B2 (Lane configuration B, Protected and
permitted right turns from Sinamangal and Gausala legs, Exclusive left
turns allowed in all phases, 3 signal phasing plan) ..................................... 65
4.16.5 Evaluation of Option C1 (Lane configuration C, Protected and
4.16.6 Evaluation of Option C2 (Lane configuration C, Protected and
4.16.7 Comparison of Various Options .................................................................. 71
4.18 Evaluation of Option C2 for the future year 2023 (5 years design life) ................. 71
4.19 Geometric Improvement Proposed for the Intersection .......................................... 73
4.20 Evaluation of Performance of the Intersection with Proposed Geometric
Improvement ........................................................................................................... 75
4.20.1 Evaluation of proposed geometric improvement for the base year 2018 .... 75
4.20.2 Evaluation of proposed geometric improvement for the year 2020 ............ 76
4.20.5 Summary of performance evaluation of the proposed geometric
improvement of the Intersection for various years ..................................... 79
Chapter 5 ............................................................................................................................. 80
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................... 80
5.1 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 80
5.1 Recommendation .................................................................................................... 82
5.3 Scope for Future Works .......................................................................................... 82
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................... 83
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................... 85
x
Listof tables
Title Page
Table 2.1: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method for Level of Service definitions
based on delay and v/c ratio for vehicles .......................................................... 5
Table 2.2: Default Basic Saturation flows in through car units (tcu) per hour................... 8
Table 3.1: Form of Movement Data exported from Traffic Count Software ..................... 2
Table 3.2: Passenger Car Unit (PCU) of various types of Vehicles ................................. 28
Table 3.3: Vehicle Types .................................................................................................. 29
Table 3.4: Vehicle Dimensions ........................................................................................ 30
Table 3.5: Values of vehicle length and Queue space parameters adopted ...................... 30
Table 3.6: Short-base lengths ........................................................................................... 30
Table 3.7: GEH statistic values and its indications .......................................................... 34
Table 3.8: Research Matrix .............................................................................................. 38
Table 4.1: Hourly Intersection Departure Volume for 3 days .......................................... 40
Table 4.2: Fifteen Minute Interval Intersection Departure Volume for 3 days ................ 41
Table 4.3: AM peak hour Turning Movement Volumes for input in SIDRA
Intersection ...................................................................................................... 44
Table 4.4: Peak hour Demand (Vehicle arrival) Volume for each leg ............................. 46
Table 4.5: Summary of Approach Cruise Speed Study .................................................... 48
Table 4.6: Path Data of various Movements at the Intersection in the Existing
Base Case Condition ....................................................................................... 49
Table 4.7: Summary of lane saturation flow study at the existing intersection................ 50
Table 4.8: Summary of back of queue survey during the AM Peak hour ........................ 50
Table 4.9: Summary traffic police assigned phase time observations .............................. 51
Table 4.10: Phase Timing Results based on observation of Traffic Police Control ........... 51
Table 4.11: Comparison of Field measured and Model estimated Saturation Flows
with GEH statistics .......................................................................................... 52
Table 4.12: Comparison of observed and model estimated 95th percentile back of
queue ............................................................................................................... 52
Table 4.13: Comparison of observed and model estimated degree of saturation (DoS)
for the AM peak hour ...................................................................................... 53
Table 4.14: Summary of operational performance of the intersection at present under
traffic police control ........................................................................................ 53
Table 4.15: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option A1 ........................... 59
Table 4.16: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option A2 ........................... 61
Table 4.17: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option B1 ........................... 63
Table 4.18: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option B2 ........................... 65
Table 4.19: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option C1 ........................... 67
Table 4.20: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option C2 ........................... 69
Table 4.21: Comparison of Overall Performance Measures of the Intersection for
various options (For the base year 2018) ........................................................ 71
Table 4.22: Summary of performance evaluation of Option C2 (Year 2023) .................... 72
Table 4.23: Details of the corner kerb radius ...................................................................... 74
Table 4.24: Evaluation results of geometric improvement for the base year 2018 ............ 75
Table 4.25: Evaluation results of geometric improvement for the year 2020 .................... 76
xi
Table 4.28: Summary of performance evaluation of proposed geometric improvement
of the intersection for various years .................................................................. 79
xii
List of figures
Title Page
Figure 2.1: Saturation flow and the related signal timing parameters ................................. 8
Figure 2.2: Definition of delay experienced by a vehicle stopping at traffic signals ........ 11
Figure 2.3: Delays experienced by vehicles in oversaturated conditions .......................... 11
Figure 2.5: Maximum daily entering volume thresholds for primary and secondary
roads at-grade ................................................................................................... 18
Figure 3.1: Flow Chart of Research Methodology ............................................................ 21
Figure 3.2: Flow chart of research approach .................................................................... 22
Figure 3.3: Location of Old Baneshwor Intersection ........................................................ 24
Figure 3.4: A plan showing the locations of CC Camera set up ....................................... 26
Figure 3.5: Infrared CC Camera to capture the video ....................................................... 26
Figure 3.6: Digital Video Recorder to record the video captured by CC Camera ............ 26
Figure 3.7: Screen shot of the user interface of “Traffic Count” Software ...................... 27
Figure 3.8: Movement Path Data Definitions ................................................................... 32
Figure 4.1: Present Intersection Geometry of Old Baneshwor Intersection ..................... 39
Figure 4.2: Hourly Intersection Departure Volume (average of three days) ..................... 42
Figure 4.3 Fifteen Minute Interval Intersection Departure Volumes (Average of 3
days) .................................................................................................................. 42
Figure 4.4: AM Peak Hour Departure Volumes and Turning Movement at Old
Baneshwor Intersection (in veh/h) .................................................................... 43
Figure 4.5: AM peak hour Turning Movement Volumes classified as HV and LV for
input in SIDRA Intersection base case model .................................................. 44
Figure 4.6: Classified Volume of directional vehicular movements (AM peak hour) ....... 45
Figure 4.7: AM Peak hour directional vehicular flows ...................................................... 45
Figure 4.8: PM Peak hour directional vehicular flows ...................................................... 45
Figure 4.9: Hourly Intersection Total Demand (Vehicle arrival) Volume observed at
u/s of the intersection queues ........................................................................... 46
Figure 4.10: Flow variation within the Peak Hour in PCU/15 min ................................... 47
Figure 4.11: Flow variation within the Peak Hour in vehicles/15min ............................... 47
Figure 4.12: Traffic composition at Old Baneshwor Intersection by vehicle types .......... 47
Figure 4.13: Traffic composition at Old Baneshwor Intersection by vehicle class ........... 48
Figure 4.14: Phasing Plan assigned by Traffic Police in existing condition ..................... 51
Figure 4.15: Lane Configuration and LoS of various lanes of the intersection under
police control at present in the AM Peak hour ................................................. 54
Figure 4.16: Peak hour flow, Capacity, Degree of saturation, average control delay, 95
percentile back of queue, and LoS at the present condition under police
Control ............................................................................................................. 55
Figure 4.17: Lane Configuration A ..................................................................................... 56
Figure 4.18: Lane Configuration B ..................................................................................... 57
Figure 4.19: Lane Configuration C ..................................................................................... 58
Figure 4.20: Phasing Summary for Option A1 ................................................................... 59
Figure 4.21: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option A1 ................................... 60
Figure 4.22: Phasing summary of Option A2 ..................................................................... 61
Figure 4.23: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option A2 ................................... 62
xiii
Figure 4.24: Phasing Summary of Option B1..................................................................... 63
Figure 4.25: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option B1 ................................... 64
Figure 4.26: Phasing Summary of Option B2..................................................................... 65
Figure 4.27: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option B2 ................................... 66
Figure 4.28: Phasing Summary of Option C1..................................................................... 67
Figure 4.29: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C1 ................................... 68
Figure 4.30: Phasing Summary of Option C2..................................................................... 69
Figure 4.31: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C2 ................................... 70
Figure 4.32: Phasing Summary of Option C2 for the year 2023 ........................................ 72
Figure 4.33: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C2 (Year 2023) ............... 73
Figure 4.34: Lane configuration-C with improvement of corner kerb radii ....................... 74
Figure 4.35: LOS summary of geometric improvement for the base year 2018 ................ 75
Figure 4.36: LOS summary of geometric improvement for the year 2020 ........................ 76
xiv
List of Appendices
Title Page
Appendix-1.1: Fifteen Minute Classified Counts of Turning movements in the AM
Peak Hour (Average of 3 days) ................................................................... 86
Appendix-1.2: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements (Average
of three days)............................................................................................... 87
Appendix-1.3: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on Monday,
May 7, 2018 ................................................................................................ 88
Appendix-1.4: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on
Tuesday, May 8, 2018................................................................................. 89
Appendix-1.5: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on
Wednesday, May 9, 2018............................................................................ 90
Appendix-1.6: 15 minute Interval Intersection Total Demand (Arrival) Volume at the
U/S of intersection Queues ......................................................................... 91
Appendix-1.7:Hourly Intersection Total Demand (Arrival) Volume at the U/S of
intersection Queues ..................................................................................... 92
Appendix-1.8:Fifteen Minute Interval Vehicle Arrival Counts (Counted at upstream
of the Intersection queues) on Monday, May 7, 2018 ................................ 93
of the Intersection queues) on Tuesday, May, 2018 ................................... 94
of the Intersection queues)on Wednesday, May 9, 2018 ............................ 95
Appendix-2.1:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Gausala (North) Approach ................... 96
Appendix-2.2:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Maitidevi (West) Approach ................. 99
Appendix-2.3:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Sinamangal (East) Approach ............. 102
Appendix-2.4:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of New Baneshwor (South) Approach ... 105
Appendix-3.1:Field Measured Back of Queue in Sinamangal Approach AM Peak
Hour) ......................................................................................................... 108
Appendix-3.2:Field Measured Back of Queue in Gausala Approach (AM Peak Hour) .. 109
Appendix-3.3:Field Measured Back of Queue in Maitidevi Approach (AM Peak
Hour) ......................................................................................................... 110
Appendix-3.4:Field Measured Back of Queue in New Baneshwor Approach (AM
PeakHour) ................................................................................................. 111
Appendix-4.1: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in New Baneshwor
approach .................................................................................................... 112
Appendix-4.2: Saturation Flow Study of left turn lane in Gausala approach ................... 113
Appendix-4.3: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in Gausala approach ............ 114
Appendix-4.4: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (LTR) in Sinamangal approach .... 115
Appendix-4.5: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in Maitidevi approach .......... 116
Appendix-5.1:Observation of Phase-A Timing of Traffic Police ..................................... 117
Appendix-5.2:Observation of Phase-B Timing of Traffic Police ..................................... 118
Appendix-6.0: Photographs .............................................................................................. 119
xv
Abbreviations and Acronyms
ADB Asian Development Bank

ARR Australian Road Research
ARRB Australian Road Research Board
BOQ Back of queue
CBD Central Business District
DoR Department of Roads
DOS Degree of saturation
DPTI Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
DVR Digital Video Recorder
GEH Geoffrey E. Havers
GoN Government of Nepal
h hour
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HV Heavy Vehicle
IRC SP Indian Roads Congress Special Provision
ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KSUTP Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project
KVDA Kathmandu Valley Development Authority
KVRIP Kathmandu Valley Road Improvement Project
LOS Level of Service
LV Light Vehicle
MC Motorcycle
MoPIT Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport
nec-CPS Nepal Engineering College-Centre for Postgraduate
NRS Nepal Road Standard
ORN Overseas Road Note
PCU Passenger car unit
PFF Peak Flow Factor
PHF Peak Hour Factor
PI Performance Index
RMSNE Root Mean Square Normalised Error
sec second
SIDRA Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection Design and Research Aid
tcu though car unit
TRB Transportation Research Board
TRL Transport Research Laboratory
UK United Kingdom
USA United States of America
v/c ratio Volume-to-Capacity Ratio
xvi
veh Vehicle
xvii
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
An intersection is a road junction where two or more roads either meet or cross at grade.
This intersection includes the areas needed for all modes of travel: pedestrian, bicycle,
motor vehicle, and transit (including buses, streetcars, and street-running light rail). Thus,
the intersection includes not only the pavement area, but typically the adjacent sidewalks
and pedestrian curb cut ramps(Mathew, 2017).
All the road junctions designated for the vehicles to turn to different directions to reach
their desired destinations. Traffic intersections are complex locations on any highway.
This is because vehicles moving in different direction want to occupy same space at the
same time. In addition, the pedestrians also seek same space for crossing. Drivers have to
make split second decision at an intersection by considering his route, intersection
geometry, speed, and direction of other vehicles etc. A small error in judgment can cause
severe accidents. It causes delay which depends on type, geometry, and type of control.
Overall traffic flow depends on the performance of the intersections. It also affects the
capacity of the road. Therefore, both from the accident perspective and the capacity
perspective, the study of intersections are very important for the traffic engineers.
Apart from many factors contributing to poor vehicular traffic flow along the main
corridors, the poor performance of main intersections either due to oversaturation (demand
volume exceeding the capacity), poor management, operation and inadequate geometric
design of the intersection or improper traffic control to serve the existing traffic demand,
contribute towards traffic congestion. This premise is the main rationale for this study and
hence looks into the performance evaluation of the intersection.
Roadway and street systems are ultimately controlled by the function of major
intersections. It therefore becomes critical to evaluate the capacity of intersections
(Kadiyali, 2012). Intersection failure directly reduces the number of vehicles that can be
accommodated during the peak hours which have the highest demand and lowersthe
roadway capacity of a corridor. For urban streets, their capacity is generally limited by the
capacity of intersections, with segment characteristics seldom playing a major role in the
determination of capacity (TRB, 2010).
As a result of this strong impact on corridor function, intersection improvements can be a

very cost-effective means of increasing a corridor’s traffic capacity. In some
circumstances, correct intersection improvements may be able to eliminate or at least
postpone costly corridor expansion projects.Though a substantial portion of total expense
for roadway construction projects is required for design, construction, mobilization and
adjacent area rehabilitation compared to the cost for only intersection improvement, a
careful analysis must be made of the expected service life from the latter improvement
option. With that in mind, it is important to determine how well the major intersections are
functioning by evaluating their performance, (Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 2010).
TRB describes in Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) that an intersection’s

performance is described by the use of one or more quantitative measures that characterize
1
some aspect of the service provided to a specific road user group. Performance measures
for the automobile modeinclude automobile volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio, also called
degree of saturation), automobile delay, and queue storage ratio (the maximum back of
queue as a proportion of the available storage on the subject lane or link). Level of Service
(LOS) is another important performance measure. It is useful for describing intersection
performance to elected officials, policy makers, administrators, and the public. LOS is
based on one or more of the performance measures such as volume-to-capacity ratio,
automobile delay, or queue storage ratio. These measures serve as clues for identifying the
source of problems and provide insight into the development of effective improvement
strategies(TRB, 2010).
The word automobile mode refers to travel by all motorized vehicles that can legally
operate on the street, with the exception of local transit vehicles that stop to pick up
passengers at the intersection (TRB, 2010). The word vehicles refer to motorized vehicles
and include a mixed stream of automobiles, motorcycles, trucks, and buses.
1.2 Problem Statement
One can observe that traffic flows in the road network in Kathmandu Valley still face
unacceptable congestion and delay during peak hours in spite of Kathmandu Valley Road
Improvement Project (KVRIP) implemented jointly by Department of Roads (DoR) and
Kathmandu Valley Development Authority (KVDA). Old Baneshwor intersection is one
of the major intersections in Kathmandu Valley used by traffic from the north-eastern
zones to access the central and southern zones of the Valley. In 2016, DoR and KVDA
under KVRIP project have jointly completed the widening of the road corridors which
meet at the Old Baneshwor intersection. In spite of the road corridor widening, one can
observe that this intersection has been facing congestion during peak hours with long
queues of vehicles waiting in each approach of this intersection for a considerable period
of time while the vehicles speed up on segments between intersections. Often times at
peak hours, the queue of vehicles also influence the operation of upstream intersections
with side roads resulting in a considerable traffic queues in the minor side roads as well.
It seems no attention or consideration has been given in the proper adequate geometric
improvement and operational management of the intersection so that an acceptable level
of service is maintained at the intersection during the peak hours of traffic.
1.3 Research Questions
Based on the stated problem, the following research questions will be considered for this
study:
a) What are the capacity, operational performance, and LoS of the Old Baneshwor
intersection for the vehicular traffic under the existing conditions?
b) What will be the capacity, operationalperformance, and LoS of the intersection under
the future traffic with various probable improvement options?
1.4 Research Objectives
The general objective of the study is to analyse operational performance and LoS at the
Old Baneshwor intersection in Kathmandu. The specific objectives of the study are:
2
a) To determine thecapacity and various operational performance measures including
LoS of the Old Baneshwor intersection for the vehicular traffic under the existing
conditions.
b) To determine the capacity and various operational performance measures including
LoS of the intersection under the future traffic with various probable improvement
options.
1.5 Significance of the Study
This research may be helpful for the concerned agencies for making proper decision on
whether the traffic problem at the Old Baneshwor intersection is in severe condition and
when and how to improve this intersection to address that problem.
1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study
1.6.1 Scope of the Study
Various operational performance measures of Old Baneshworintersection for the vehicular

traffic such as Capacity, Volume-to-Capacity ratio, Delay, queue storage ratio, and LOS
under the prevailing condition and under the various improvement options with future
projected traffic conditions are determined using SIDRA intersection v5.1 software.
By means of this study, existing deficiencies in the intersection will also be identified and
intersection improvement measures will be proposed to enhance the level of service of the
intersection to an acceptable level.
1.6.2 Limitation of the Study
The analysis for the performance measures of the intersection for the pedestrians, bicycles,
and transit modes (i.e., travel modes in which vehicles such as buses, streetcars, and street-
running light rail stop at regular intervals along the roadway to pick up and drop off
passengers)are not performed in this study.
Some local design parameters required to be inputted in SIDRA 5.1 for the intersection
analysis are not available and therefore, the default values adopted as per HCM 2010 and
SIDRA intersection program are assumed. The corresponding result will therefore be
slightly different from reality but this discrepancy is ignored.
Operation of one intersection affects the operation of another intersection especially when
they are in close proximity to each other. This study however ignores the impact of
adjacent minor intersections on the operational performance of the subject intersection.
This study conducts only the static analysis procedures as per HCM2010 and SIDRA
intersection computer application which predict average operating conditions over a fixed
time period and do not deal with transitions in operation from one system state to another.
This study does not use traffic simulation tools which are effective in evaluating the
dynamic evolution of traffic congestion problems on transportation systems and can model
the variability in driver/vehicle characteristics.
3
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Performance Measures
The US Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) describes that an intersection’s performance is

described by the use of one or more quantitative measures that characterize some aspect of
the service provided to a specific road user group. Performance measures from the
perspective of motorists include automobile volume-to-capacity ratio (v/c ratio),
automobile delay, and queue storage ratio (the maximum back of queue as a proportion of
the available storage on the subject lane or link). Level of Service (LOS) is also
considered a performance measure. It is useful for describing intersection performance to
elected officials, policy makers, administrators, and the public. LOS is based on one or
more of the performance measures such as volume-to-capacity ratio, automobile delay, or
queue storage ratio.
These measures serve as clues for identifying the source of problems and provide insight
into the development of effective improvement strategies. HCM encourages the analyst to
consider the full range of these measures.
2.2 Road Capacity
TRB (2010) defines capacity in the HCM as the maximum sustainable hourly flow rate at
which persons or vehicles can be expected to reasonably traverse a point or a uniform
section of a lane or roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway,
environmental, traffic, and control conditions. Reasonable expectancy is the basis for
defining capacity. The stated capacity for a given system elements is a flow rate that can
be achieved repeatedly for peak periods of sufficient demand, as opposed to being the
maximum flow rate that might ever be observed. System elements that have different
prevailing conditions will have different capacities, and the maximum flow rate observed
on a given system element may vary from day to day.
The capacity of an urban street is related primarily to the signal timing and the geometric
characteristics of the facility as well as to the composition of traffic on the facility.
Geometrics are a fixed characteristic of a facility. Thus, while traffic composition may
vary somewhat over time, the capacity of a facility is generally a stable value that can be
significantly improved only by initiating geometric improvements(TRB, 2010).
2.3 Signalized Intersection Capacity
In HCM, analysis for capacity and LOS for each lane group is performed rather than for
the entire intersection. A lane group is an individual or set of movements allocated to an
approach lane of a signalized intersection and is assigned a phase of the signal cycle. As
defined in HCM, the lane group capacity is the maximum hourly rate at which vehicles
can reasonably be expected to pass through the intersection under prevailing traffic,
roadway, and signalization conditions. The capacity of a given lane group is stated as in
the following equation:
4
Where
= capacity of lane group i (veh/h),
= saturation flow rate for lane group i (veh/h), and
= effective green ratio for lane group (ratio of effective green to cycle length)
2.4 Level of Service (LOS)
Automobile LOS for an intersection is a qualitative measure developed by the

transportation professionals to quantify driver perception for such elements as travel time,
number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused by other vehicles
(Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 2010). It provides a scale that is intended to match the
perception by motorists of the operation of the intersection. LOS provides a means for
identifying intersections that are experiencing operational difficulties as well as providing
a scale to compare intersections with each other. The LOS scale represents the full range
of operating conditions. The scale ranges from LOS “A” which indicates little vehicle
delay, if any, to LOS “F” which indicates substantial vehicle delay and traffic congestion.
The LOS analysis is conducted according to the procedures outlined in the HCM.
HCM 2010 describes automobile LOS for entire signalized intersection or an approach in
terms of control delay per vehicle (typically over a 15 minute analysis period). Control
delay for a signalized intersection is the delay caused by the signal. The LOS of a lane
group however is based on both control delay and volume-to-capacity ratio. The delay
experienced by a motorist is made up of a number of delays related to the traffic control,
geometrics, traffic, and incidents. Specifically, Delay is a complex measure and depends
on a number of variables, including the quality of progression, the cycle length, the green
ratio, and the v/c ratio for the lane group.
The volume-to-capacity ratio quantifies the degree to which a phase’s capacity is utilized
by a lane group. Table 2.1 lists the Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method for Level of Service
definitions based on delay and v/c ratio for vehicles.
Table 2.1: Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method for Level of Service definitions based on
delay and v/c ratio for vehicles
Level of Service for v/c

Average delay per vehicle in seconds (d)
Level of > 1.0
Service for "SIDRA Sign Control
v/c ≤ 1.0 Signals Roundabout LOS" (HCM 2010 default for All intersection types
option roundabouts)
A d ≤ 10 d ≤ 10 d ≤ 10 F
B 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 15 F
C 20 < d ≤ 35 20 < d ≤ 35 15 < d ≤ 25 F
D 35 < d ≤ 55 35 < d ≤ 50 25 < d ≤ 35 F
E 55 < d ≤ 80 50 < d ≤ 70 35 < d ≤ 50 F
F 80 < d 70 < d 50 < d F
(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012)
The HCM2010 method requires the analysis of both capacity and LOS conditions to fully
evaluate the operation of a signalized intersection.
5
2.5 Beyond LOS F
The HCM does not subdivide LOS F, but several measures are available to describe the
severity of a LOS F condition. The HCM uses LOS F to define operations that have either
broken down (i.e., demand exceeds capacity) or have exceeded a specified service
measure value (or combination of service measure values) that most users would consider
unsatisfactory. However, particularly for planning applications where different alternatives
may be compared, analysts may be interested in knowing just how bad the LOS F
condition is. Several measures are available to describe individually, or in combination,
the severity of a LOS F condition (TRB, 2010):
• Demand‐to‐capacity ratios describe the extent to which capacity is exceeded during

the analysis period (e.g., by 1%, 15%, etc.).
• Duration of LOS F describes how long the condition persists (e.g., 15 min, 1 h, 3 h).
• Spatial extent measures describe the areas affected by LOS F conditions. These
include measures such as the back of queue (queue length) and the identification of
the specific intersection approaches or system elements experiencing LOS F
conditions.
2.6 Signalized Intersection Flow Characteristics
A traffic signal essentially allocates time among conflicting traffic movements that seek to
use the same space. The way in which time is allocated significantly affects the operation
and the capacity of the intersection and its approaches.
Signal time design at an isolated intersection involves determination of the optimal cycle
length and length of the various phases to complete a cycle. The optimal cycle length at an
isolated intersection is traditionally the cycle length that minimizes the delay at the
intersection. The formula for calculating the minimum cycle length in HCM 2010 is given
as follows.
∑
Where,
=minimum cycle length (sec)
= critical v/c ratio for the intersection where ‘v’ is the flow at the lane group in vehicle
per hour and ‘c’ is the capacity of the lane group in vehicle per hour
= Cycle lost time (sec)
∑ = sum of the ratios of the actual flows to the saturated flows for critical lane
group
2.7 Demand Flow Rate
HCM defines the demand flow rate for an intersection traffic movement as the count of
vehicles arriving at the intersection during the analysis period divided by the analysis
period. It is expressed as an hourly flow rate but may represent an analysis period shorter
than 1 h. Demand flow rate represents the flow rate of vehicles arriving at the intersection.
When measured in the field, this flow rate is based on a traffic count taken upstream of the
6
queue associated with the subject intersection. This distinction is important for counts
during congested periods because the stop line count of vehicles departing from a
congested approach will produce a demand flow rate that is lower than the true rate(TRB,
2010).
2.8 Saturation Flow Rate at Signalized Intersection
As described in HCM, saturation flow rate for a lane group is the maximum hourly flow
from the lane group that can pass the intersection if given a perpetual green phase. It is
determined on the basis of the minimum headway that the lane group can sustain across
the stop line as the vehicles depart the intersection. Or, it is the maximum departure (queue
discharge) flow rate achieved during the green period of traffic signals (Akcelik &
Associates Pty Ltd, 2012). It is usually achieved after about 10 to 14 s of green, which
corresponds to the front axle of the fourth to sixth passenger car crossing the stop line after
the beginning of green (TRB, 2010).
The most significant parameter that influences the design of signalized intersection and its
signal plan is the “saturation flow”. Saturation flow is a key factor determining the
capacity and level of Service (LOS) of a signalized intersection. If the saturation flow rate
can be computed to the reasonable accuracy, the capacity of the signalized intersection can
be evaluated (Chand et al., n.d.).
Saturation flow rate is computed for each of the lane groups established for the analysis. If
a default value is selected for base saturation flow rate, it must be adjusted for a variety of
factors that reflect geometric, traffic and environmental conditions that prevails at the
intersection(TRB, 2010). Alternatively, the actual saturation flow rate (i.e. prevailing
saturation flow rate) reflecting the effects of existing geometric, traffic, environment
conditions, and driver behaviour can be measured directly in the field. The computed
adjusted saturation flow rate represents an estimate of the prevailing saturation flow rate.
Any potential bias in the estimate is minimized by local calibration of the default base
saturation flow rate(TRB, 2010). This is important in order to avoid double counting that
may lead to significant overestimation or underestimation of saturation units.
7
(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012 p. 4-180)
Figure 2.1: Saturation flow and the related signal timing parameters
Table 2.2: Default Basic Saturation flows in through car units (tcu) per hour
Default Basic Saturation flow,

Environment
sb (tcu/h)
Class Definition
SIDRA HCM
(Area type)
intersection versions
Near ideal conditions for free movement of vehicles
1 (Ideal) on both approach and exit sides indicated by good 1950 1900
intersection geometry, long distances to upstream and
downstream intersections, good visibility, small
numbers of pedestrians, and little interference due to
loading and unloading of goods vehicles, buses or
parking turnover.
Average to poor conditions indicated by adequate to
2 (Average to poor intersection geometry, usually closely-spaced 1800 1750
Poor) intersection environment, possibly poor visibility,
moderate to large numbers of pedestrians, and
interference from standing vehicles, loading and
unloading of goods vehicles, buses, parking turnover,
and vehicles entering and leaving premises.
(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012 p. Part 4-184)
Various Studies on Saturation flow at signalized intersections in mixed traffic

conditions
Tiwari, et al. (2011) studied the applicability of U.S. Highway Capacity Manual (US-
HCM) signalized intersection model for an Indian signalized intersection. His evaluation
revealed that the model suffers from serious gap when applied to the Indian context, where
8
signalized intersections experience heavy and non-homogeneous traffic flow so that
prediction of capacity is more sensitive to the vehicle mix than in Western countries where
the passenger car group largely dominates traffic composition. Measures were proposed
for the modification of the model, and factors were developed based on proposed
modifications in order to make it more suitable for Indian conditions. The factors
evaluated were the lane width adjustment factor and passenger car equivalency factors.
Mean right-turn width used is 3.6 m while the width provided was 3.3m. Equivalency
factors for motorized two-wheelers ranged from 0.4 to 1.3 and for motorized three-
wheelers from 5.6 to 9.1.
Anusha, et al. (2012) studied the effects of Two-Wheelers on Saturation Flow and hence
on the capacity of the signalized intersections in developing countries. They recognized
that two-wheelers (TW) constitute a major proportion of urban traffic in developing
countries and therefore their effect on the saturation flow at signalized intersections could
be substantial. They attempted to study and analyse the effect of two-wheelers on the
saturation flow of signalized intersections by collecting data at a few signalized
intersections in Bangalore, India. A strong correlation was observed between the field
measured saturation flow and the proportion of two-wheeler traffic, suggesting that two-
wheelers have significant impact and should be considered in the capacity analysis of
signalized intersections. It was concluded that while intersection capacity varied directly
with the increase in the volume of two-wheelers, it was inversely proportional to the
increase in volume of all other categories of vehicles. The saturation flow estimated using
the calibrated US-HCM 2000 model by incorporating the adjustment factor for two-
wheelers was closer to field measured values, which implied that the effects of two-
wheelers and approach volume are to be considered while modelling saturation flow in
Indian conditions.
Chand, et al. (n.d) carried out a study on saturation flow rate conducted at signalized
intersections with mixed traffic condition in Delhi, India as part of research study for
development of Indian Highway Capacity Manual (Indo-HCM) sponsored by Council of
Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India. In their analysis, it was reported that the
design, the capacity, and operation of a signalized intersection critically depend on
passenger car unit (PCU) and saturation flow. Operation and performance of signalized
intersections is influenced by the roadway parameters, traffic condition, operating
parameters and environmental conditions along with user’s behavioural characteristics,
which significantly differ among locations. These factors have been traditionally
measured, in most of the western countries, based on the research carried on test tracks
and on public roads where traffic is typically car-dominated with vehicles moving in
clearly defined lanes. The intersections on urban roads in India cater to heterogeneous
motorized traffic along with slow-moving traffic including pedestrians. It was therefore
necessary to consider passenger car unit (PCU) and saturation flow for mixed traffic
conditions to evaluate the overall operation of signalized intersections (Chand et al., n.d.).
In the study (Chand et al., n.d.), attempt was made to measure saturation flow in the field
by actually measuring the flow at the stop line during saturated green phase and to study
the impact of various influencing parameters such as road widths, traffic composition etc.
based on actual field studies/experiments of the typical Indian traffic conditions. Models
were developed for estimation of saturation flow for different approach widths and
different percentage of two wheelers and cars at signalized intersections for non-lane
based mixed traffic conditions of Delhi and Noida. The study further compared the results
of saturation flow as obtained from the derived model and actual field saturation flow
9
obtained using field estimated PCU values with that obtained using the U.K model and
PCU factors as per IRC-SP-41. It was found from the analysis that the derived model
gives better results.
2.9 Traffic Signal Controller Characteristics
For a given lane group at a signalized intersection, three signal indications are displayed:
green, yellow, and red. The red indication may include a short period during which all
indications are red, referred to as an all-red interval, which with the yellow indication
forms the change and clearance interval between two green phases(TRB, 2010).
The signal cycle for a given lane group has two simplified components: effective green
and effective red. Effective green time is the time that may be used by vehicles on the
subject lane group at the saturation flow rate and is given by the following formula.
Where, = Effective green time for phase i (sec); = Green time for phase i
(sec); = yellow time for phase i (sec); and = total lost time for phase i (sec)
Effective red time is defined as the cycle length minus the effective green time
Modern traffic signals allocate time in a variety of ways, from the simplest two-phase pre-
timed mode to the most complex multiphase actuated mode. There are three types of
traffic signal controllers as described in HCM-2010:
• Pre-timed, in which a sequence of phases is displayed in repetitive order. Each phase

has a fixed green time and change and clearance interval that are repeated in each
cycle to produce a constant cycle length.
• Fully actuated, in which the timing on all of the approaches to an intersection is

influenced by vehicle detectors. Each phase is subject to a minimum and maximum
green time, and some phases may be skipped if no demand is detected. The cycle
length for fully actuated control varies from cycle to cycle.
• Semi-actuated, in which some approaches (typically on the minor street) have

detectors and some of the approaches (typically on the major street) have no detectors.
2.10 Concepts of Delay at Signalized Intersection
Delay to a vehicle is the difference between interrupted and uninterrupted travel times
through the intersection as seen in figure 2.2, which shows the delay experienced by a
through vehicle stopping and starting at traffic signals (time-distance and speed-time
diagrams representing the acceleration and deceleration manoeuvres of the vehicle are
shown).
The average delay predicted by SIDRA intersection is for all vehicles, queued and un-
queued. Based on this definition, the total (aggregate) delay (vehicle-hours per hour) is the
product of average delay and the total demand flow rate.
10
Figure 2.2: Definition of delay experienced by a vehicle stopping at traffic signals

Figure 2.3: Delays experienced by vehicles in oversaturated conditions
SIDRA intersection delay is the average delay to vehicles arriving during a given flow
period including the delay experienced after the end of the flow period which is possible
11
under oversaturated traffic conditions. This corresponds to the path-trace (instrumented
car) method of measuring delays. An alternative delay measurement method is the queue-
sampling method which involves counting the number of vehicles in the queue at regular
intervals, e.g. every 10 to 20 seconds. As described in SIDRA INTERSECTION user
guide, delays obtained using the path-trace method agree with the queue sampling method
of measurement for low to medium degrees of saturation (v/c ratios), but the difference
between the two methods is significant for oversaturated conditions (degree of saturation >
1).
Figure 2.3 shows the delays experienced by individual vehicles (horizontal lines) and the
queue counts (vertical lines) for a deterministic oversaturation model. The delay
experienced by the last vehicle departing during the current flow period, which arrives at
point C (time T1) and departs at point E (time Tf) is d1. The delay experienced by the last
vehicle arriving during the current flow period, which arrives at point C (time Tf) and
departs at point D (time T2) is d2(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012).
In figure 2.3, the total delay for vehicles arriving during the current flow period (duration
Tf) is represented by the triangular area ACD. This includes the total delay experienced
after the current flow period (area CDE). End of oversaturation is at point F (achieved due
to a lower arrival rate after the current flow period).
As described in SIDRA intersection user guide (Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012), the
following are useful delay definitions, which are presented with the help of figure 2.4
which depicts a vehicle turning left at an intersection where the approach and exit cruise
speeds are the same (vac = vec), and the approach and exit negotiation speeds are the same
(van = ven):
Intersection control delay (dic): This is sum of stop-line and geometric delays (dic = dSL
+dig), thus it includes all deceleration and acceleration delays experienced in negotiating
the intersection. This is same as the overall delay with geometric delay.
Stop-line delay (dSL): This is calculated by projecting the time-distance trajectory of a

queued vehicle from the approach and exit negotiation speeds to the stop line (or give-way
/ yield line), which is shown as the time from C to F infigure 2.4. The stop-line delay is
equivalent to queuing delay plus main stop-start delay, and is represented by the first two
terms of the delay model (dSL = dq + dn = d1 + d2).
12
Figure 2.4: Definition of control delay, geometric delay, stop-line delay, and stopped delay
experienced by a turning vehicle at an intersection
Geometric delay (dig): This is the delay experienced by a vehicle going through
(negotiating) the intersection in the absence of any other vehicles, which is of particular
interest for satisfactory modelling of the performance of roundabouts and sign controlled
intersections.
Intersection geometric delay is due to a deceleration from the approach cruise speed down
to an approach negotiation speed (vac→van), travel at that speed (van), acceleration to an
exit negotiation speed (van→ven), travel the rest of exit negotiation distance at constant exit
negotiation speed (ven) and then acceleration to the exit cruise speed (ven→vec). Thus, this
delay includes the effects of the physical (geometric) characteristics of the intersection
(negotiation radius and distance, and the associated speeds), as well as the effects of basic
control features (e.g. a stop sign vs. a give-way / yield sign).
Queuing delay (dq): This is part of the stop-line delay that includes stopped delay and
queue move-up delay but does not include the main stop-start delay (dq = ds + dqm = dSL -
dn). The queue move-up delay is not shown in the example given infigure 2.4.
Stopped delay (di or ds): This is the stopped (idling) time at near-zero speed. It is the delay
excluding all deceleration and acceleration delays (i.e. not including any geometric, stop-
13
start and queue move-up delays), thus it is equivalent to queuing delay less queue move-up
delay (ds = dq - dqm).
Queue move-up delay (dqm): This is the delay associated with queue move-ups, i.e.
acceleration from zero speed to queue move-up speed and deceleration to zero speed.
Main stop-start delay (dn): This is associated with deceleration from the approach
negotiation speed to zero speed and acceleration back to the exit negotiation speed
2.10 Peak hour factor (PHF)
The hourly volume during the maximum-volume hour of the day divided by the peak 15-
min flow rate within the peak hour; a measure of traffic demand fluctuation within the
peak hour.
If 15-min periods are used, the PHF may be computed by
Where,
= Peak Hour Factor
= Hourly volume (veh/h), and
= volume during the peak 15 min of the peak hour (veh/15 min).
2.11 SIDRA intersection Software
The Signalized and Unsignalized Intersection Design and Research Aid (SIDRA
intersection) software is an intersection based program originally developed by the
Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) as an aid for capacity, timing and performance
analysis of isolated intersections (Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012). Since 2000,
Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd has been managing and selling this application software
worldwide and continuously improving it through their individual research.
SIDRA intersection Software is an advanced micro-analytical traffic evaluation tool that

employs lane-by-lane and vehicle drive-cycle models coupled with an iterative
approximation method to provide estimates of capacity and performance statistics (delay,
queue length, stop rate, etc.). SIDRA intersection traffic models can be calibrated for local
conditions. According toAkcelik and Associates Pty Ltd (2012), SIDRA intersection
Software can be used to:
• Analyse different types of signalized controllers (fixed-time / pre-timed and actuated),

signalized pedestrian crossings, single point interchanges (signalized), roundabouts,
roundabout metering, two-way stop sign control, all-way stop sign control, and give-
way / yield sign-control;
• Generate estimates of capacity and performance characteristics such as delay, queue
length, stop rate as well as operating cost, fuel consumption and pollutant emissions
for all intersection types;
14
• Analyse many design alternatives to optimize the intersection geometry, signal phasing
and timings specifying different strategies for optimization;
• Handle intersections with up to 8 legs, each with one-way or two-way traffic, one-lane
or multi-lane approaches, and short lanes, continuous lanes and turn bans as relevant;
• Determine signal timings (fixed-time / pretimed and actuated) for any intersection
geometry allowing for simple as well as complex phasing arrangements;
• Carry out design life analysis to assess impact of traffic growth;
• Carry out a parameter sensitivity analysis for calibration, optimization, evaluation and
geometric design purposes;
• Design intersection geometry including lane use arrangements taking advantage of the
unique lane-by-lane analysis method of SIDRA intersection;
• Design short lane lengths (turn bays, lanes with parking upstream, and loss of a lane at
the exit side);
• Analyse effects of heavy vehicles on intersection performance;
• Analyse complicated cases of shared lanes and opposed turns (e.g. permissive and
protected phases, slip lanes, turns on red);
• Analyse oversaturated conditions making use of the time-dependent delay, queue
length and stop rate models used in SIDRA intersection;
• Carry out sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of changes on parameters
representing intersection geometry and driver behaviour.
2.12 Model Calibration in SIDRA intersection
Important model parameters need to be identified for calibrating SIDRA intersection to

reflect local road and driver characteristics and particular intersection conditions (Akcelik
& Associates Pty Ltd, 2012). Capacity and performance characteristics (delay, queue
length, stops, etc.) of a traffic facility are influenced by both the intersection geometry and
driver behaviour. To a great extent, all input parameters (and other parameters that are not
available as input parameters but are accessible as default parameters) related to
intersection geometry and driver behaviour are therefore important for calibrating the
SIDRA intersection traffic model to represent particular intersection conditions. As
described by Akcelik and Associates Pty Ltd (2012) in SIDRA intersection user guide, for
practical purposes, the most important parameters for calibrating SIDRA intersection
capacity and performance models are:
i. saturation flow rate for signalised intersections, and

ii. gap-acceptance parameters (especially follow-up headway and critical gap) for
roundabouts and other Unsignalized intersections.
SIDRA intersection provides various tools to help the user in model calibration effort
(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012). These include:
• the sensitivity analysis facility for all intersection (Site) types,

• specific roundabout calibration parameters,
• lane utilisation factor, and
• various other facilities including the heavy vehicle equivalent for gap acceptance
parameter for all intersection (Site) types.
15
2.13 Review of relevant previous theses and study reports on intersection evaluation.
2.13.1 Comparison of Intersection Capacity with Traffic flow in Kabul Metropolitan

Area for 2008, 2014, and 2025
Quadratullah & Maruyama (2015) conducted a study of a congested intersection located in

the central business district of Kabul, which was unequipped with traffic signals and
controlled by traffic police officer standing at the middle of the intersection by using
traffic stop rod. The purpose of the study was to estimate the capacity of the intersection
and compare it with the traffic flow (demand) at the peak hour in order to find out the
congestion rates in 2008, 2014, and 2025. In this study, data collected during person trip
(PT) survey by Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) in 2008 had been used for
the estimation of traffic volume on the intersection in 2008 and forecasted to 2025.
Meanwhile, traffic counts (TC) and geometric surveys were conducted by the researcher in
the study intersection in 2014 and the observed data had been used to estimate the capacity
and the existing traffic demand volume on the intersection in 2014. "Four steps modelling
of travel demand" and intersection capacity analysis" were used to estimate the traffic
demand volume and capacity of the intersection respectively. The data collected during
traffic count (TC) and geometric surveys had been used to analyse the saturation flow,
capacity, degree of saturation, and signals timing of intersection. The method used in this
study followed the design and planning procedure presented in chapter 16 of the Highway
Capacity Manual (HCM 2000). The saturation flow rates were estimated for each of four
legs of the intersection with the following equation by using the base condition and traffic
data:
The capacity of the intersection was estimated for each approach using the signalized
intersection influence factors:
.
Since the green and red phases for the intersection were not constants due to the
intersection controlled by traffic police, the average of the green phase length and total
cycle length were used to analyse the capacity.
2.13.2 Detailed traffic study and design for grade separated intersections at five
major junctions in Kathmandu
In 2011, DoR/GoN had awarded a contract for consulting services to the joint venture of
Soil Test (P) Ltd. and AVIYAAN Consulting (P) Ltd., Kathmandu to conduct a detailed
traffic study, engineering survey, soil exploration, and design for grade separated
intersections at five major junctions in Kathmandu in order to improve level of service
(LOS) for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the entire network of intersections along
the arterial axes in Kathmandu valley and ultimately to contribute significantly towards
mitigating traffic congestion and traffic safety in the entire city. The proposed junctions to
be designed as grade separated intersection were:
• Old BaneshworChowk
• New BaneshworChowk
16
• Thapathali Chowk
• Tripureshwor Chowk, and
• Kalimati Chowk
The main scope of the survey and design for each of the selected junctions were
a) Detailed traffic survey and analyses for intersection capacity, peak traffic volume,
traffic pattern and peak hour average speed, congestion, non-traffic encroachments and
viability of grade separation
b) Detailed engineering surveys (topographical, hydrological, seismological and
geotechnical) of the selected intersections for subsequent design works of grade
separated intersections
c) Preparation of basic design and configuration of grade separation (Conceptual Design)
d) Detailed engineering design and drawings for the grade separated intersection at the
selected junctions including grade separated vehicle crossings, traffic safety system,
pedestrian crossings, public transport/pedestrian facilities, etc.
A v/c ratio of 0.95 had been used for the peak hour operation analysis of the design year
(2031, 20 years design period). On the basis of the base year traffic counting survey and
well founded traffic forecasting for the design year, the intersection performance had been
analysed for the following criteria to come up primarily with basic configuration and
support detailed engineering design for a grade separated intersection for each junction.
The intersection performance had been analysed with at least the following criteria,
including the pedestrian and non-motorized traffic: Peak hourly volume (veh/h),
Intersection LoS (A to F), Average intersection delay (sec), Degree of saturation
(Highest), Theoretical capacity of roads, Total vehicle delay (veh-h/h), Queue length (m or
veh). The steps followed for traffic projection were:
• The base year peak directional traffic volumes taken were the seven days’ averages for
the year 2011, which were determined with the analysis of long traffic video data
acquired for the project.
• The assumed growth rates were dynamic and averaged for five years’ blocks.
• Total projected traffic was further treated with exclusive diversion assumptions made
for each direction.
• Traffic at- and separated- grades were quantified as different entities but possible
relationships between them were also inserted.
The methodology for evaluating the threshold at grade followed a three step process:
• Estimate peak hour movement volumes on the major and minor legs for the design
year
• Estimate maximum average daily intersection entering volumes for intersection types
• Evaluate intersection LOS and iterate for thresholds for different options
17
(Soil Test-AVIYAAN Consulting (P) Ltd. JV, 2011)
Figure 2.5: Maximum daily entering volume thresholds for primary and secondary roads
at-grade
In this study, primarily SIDRA Intersection Version 5.1 had been used for alternative
intersection designs in terms of capacity, level of service and a wide range of performance
measures including delay, queue length, and stops for vehicles and pedestrians. The
iterative process of detailed engineering design for selected solution of grade separation
for each proposed option had been carried out in conjunction with micro simulation of
traffic for various criteria as listed above.
Traffic models for different configurations had been analysed for the various intersection
options in the Concept Design for each intersection. The analyses primarily focused on the
signalized traffic, which was mostly at grade.
In the traffic study of the Old Baneshwor Intersection, the traffic problems were identified
with a new traffic study more reliably and comprehensively with seven days long traffic
video. The second-by-second data captured had been processed for traffic movements (12
movement directions, 13 vehicle types including non-motorized vehicles and 5 directions
of pedestrian movements). The analysis of traffic situation had been carried out in terms of
traffic movement, intersection performance, and driving behaviour/enforcement issues.
The traffic study conducted for the Old Baneshwor intersection in this project on August,
2011 showed that about 58,000 vehicles crossed the intersection per day. In daily traffic
flow, about 70% of vehicles were motorized two wheelers (motorcycles and scooters),
25% light vehicles ( cars, four wheel drives, utility vehicles, micro buses and three
wheelers), 1% heavy vehicles (buses and trucks) and about 4% cycles. This showed that
the traffic crossing the intersection was mostly private passenger vehicles.
In Old Baneshwor intersection, high traffic flow was observed continuously for ten hours
in a weekday between 9 AM and 7 PM, averaging at about 3800 veh/h. The peak flow was
3007 PCU/h (4552 veh/h) which was about 8% of the daily traffic flow. By vehicle group,
the peak hour flow was different from the daily flow. Shares were higher for motorized
two wheelers in the peak hour and shares of heavy vehicles and cycles were less (in PCU).
18
This was particularly due to high flow of utility vehicles, trucks and cycles during early
morning that enter the intersection.
2.13.3 Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project (KSUTP)
Since 2012, the Ministry of Physical Infrastructure and Transport (MoPIT) under GoN,
have been executing the Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project (KSUTP) with
the loan assistance of Asian Development Bank (ADB) in order to improve traffic
circulation within the central area through intersection improvement including
signalization at strategic locations, access improvement and improved urban transport
system. The consultant in this project were SMEC International Pty, Ltd. Australia in
Association with Brisbane City Enterprise Pty., Australia Transportation Planning
(International) Ltd., UK, GEOCE Consultants (P) Ltd., Nepal. This project’s area is
mainly focused in the central area of Kathmandu bounded within Bishnumati River to the
west, Bagmati River to the south, Dhobi Khola River to the east and north boundary of the
Narayanhiti Royal Palace to the north. The main four corridors on which traffic analysis
was conducted are: Pushpalal Path, Kanti Path, Durbar Marg, and Ramshah Path. A total
of 36 intersections are included under KSTUP along these four road corridors. However,
detailed traffic analysis was carried out only for 22 numbers of key intersections. Old
Baneshwor intersection did not lie in the corridors studied by the project.
The project has acknowledged that full operational analysis involves assessment of
capacity both along the midblock segments (link) and at intersections (nodes). Analysis of
intersections was undertaken in greater detail than of the mid-block sections because
capacities of the project road corridors were largely determined by the capacities of
intersections. The study under the project found out that mid-blocks generally had spare
capacity compared to intersections. The approach taken for operational analysis was a five
stage process as follows:
Stage 1: Issue Identification;

Stage 2: Identification of Potential Solutions;
Stage 3: Assessment of Potential Solutions;
Stage 4: Development of Preferred Solutions; and
Stage 5: Analysis of Preferred/Recommended Solution
Stage 5 was about the capacity analysis of the preferred/developed solution. The intention
was to demonstrate that the proposed solutions/configurations of intersection would work
better than the existing configuration (although not necessarily resulting in desired level of
service).
As explained in the study, traffic growth rate averaged over the network is not useful for
the purpose of estimating future traffic for intersections. Growth rate for each link and
movement can be different and may vary over time and space. Information on growth rate
at this level of disaggregation is not available for roads in Kathmandu. In such situations,
scenario analysis with varying growth rate will be useful to see what would happen in each
case of traffic growth for policy analysis.
The study in KSUTP found that figures on traffic growth rate for Kathmandu are found to
vary across the studies. A vehicular traffic growth rate of up to 13% had been reported.
Growth rate for motorcycle was reported to be even much higher. Clearly, the growth rate
19
similar to those mentioned above was not sustainable and could not continue since the
growth in vehicular traffic needed to be controlled as one of the KSUTP’s key objectives.
A more realistic growth rate of 2% was adopted as a matter of policy, which can be
achieved by implementing walking, cycling and public transport favoured land use and
urban transport policy.
SIDRA intersection version 5.1 was used initially but later version 6.0 PLUS was used to
carry out analysis of both signalized and un-signalized intersections in KSUTP. The
results of the analysis were then used to gain an understanding on how the intersection
would perform after the improvements.
2.13.4 Development of Traffic diversion algorithm for the possible reduction of

Traffic demand at intersection: a case study of Thapathali intersection
Acharya (2015) conducted a case study of Thapathali intersection in Kathmandu in as her

M.Sc. thesis to reduce the traffic demand at Thapathali intersection by diverting certain
traffic to alternate routes so that the traffic management at that intersection would be better
than now. For that purpose, the traffic condition at Thapathali intersection in existing
scenario and the effect of traffic diversion at the intersection were determined. Volume
count data at Thapathali intersection were taken as secondary data from KSUTP funded by
ADB. A base line O-D survey was carried out by using the registration number plate
method in order to determine the existing traffic in the alternate diversion route. The
maximum traffic flow or capacity of the alternate route was determined by using Green
Shield and Greenberg models. The study demonstrated that traffic diversion analysis
algorithm can act as means for demand management at neighbouring intersection that is
oversaturated. SIDRA intersection version 5.1 was used for the analysis of the intersection
before and after the traffic diversion at the intersection.
2.13.5 Comparison of Probable Congestion Reduction Approaches at New

Baneshwor Intersection in Kathmandu
Sharma (2016) in his Master’s thesis conducted a study of the travel time and delay at
New Baneshwor intersection in Kathmandu to provide clear view of best approaches by
comparing the present condition with the different probable approaches which can help to
improve the intersection performance. This study focused on four techniques that included
application of pedestrian bridge (Alternative first), application of indirect U-turn through
the median (Alternative second), application of U-turn from below the existing bridges at
Bagmati river and Dhobi Khola (Alternative third) and application of flyover (Alternative
fourth). VISSIM simulation software was used for the modelling of heterogeneous traffic
condition prevailing in Kathmandu. Model was calibrated for local conditions using traffic
volume and vehicle speed. Validation of the model was done by comparing the output of
travel time and number of vehicles in the queue with the field data. After validation of the
model, the travel time and vehicle delay were calculated for all alternatives.
20
Chapter 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Research Design
This researchisa fieldresearch for the analysis of an isolated intersection to evaluate the
operational performance for vehicular traffic under the existing conditions and under the
future conditions. Field measurements, observations, and videography method of survey
were used to collect the primary data. Past survey data, literatures, codes, reports, and
manuals were used for secondary data. Traffic characteristics data such as traffic volume,
prevailing saturation flow, phasing and signal timing (operated by traffic police) for the
analysis under existing conditions were collected during the morning and evening peak
periods for three days (Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday), when the traffic is
maximum. 'Traffic Count' software developed by Softwel P. ltd. was used for playing the
video footage and recording the volume count data. The data was organized in MS Excel.
SIDRA intersection version 5.1 was used in evaluation of the intersection performance.
Problem Identification
Setting Research Questions and Objectives
Selection of Study Area
Identification of required data
Supervisor Consultation
Data Collection& Organization
Literature Review
Step-II
Primary Data Secondary Data

Geometric Design Default values
Traffic Characteristics Past traffic survey data & reports
Signal Control data based on
Observation of Police Control
Data Analysis
Step-
Interpretation of Results and Discussion
Conclusion and Recommendation
Figure 3.1: Flow Chart of Research Methodology
21
3.2 Research Approach
Field Measurement Video Recording Secondary data
Preparation of Input Parameters for calibration of SIDRA model
Development of Intersection Traffic model in SIDRA and Run the analysis
No Calibration of saturation flow rate

• Compare field measured & SIDRA estimated
saturation flow rates
• Calculate calibration factor
• Adjust the default basic saturation flow
SIDRA estimated
saturation flow
matched with the Re-run SIDRA intersection
observed
saturation flow?
Validation of SIDRA model
Comparison of control delay & back of queue
Yes estimates from SIDRA intersection with those
observed in the field
Modify
Yes Is model No appropriate
parameters in
satisfactory?
SIDRA
Evaluate Capacity & Performance Evaluate Capacity & Performance statistics

statistics in existing conditions in existingconditions with optimum signal
under police control timings disregarding the police control
Development of SIDRA model for various

Traffic flow projection for future year intersection improvement configurations
Evaluate Capacity & Performance Statistics under future traffic for

various intersection improvement configurations
Conclusion and Recommendation Comparison of Capacities & Performance

statistics of various improved configurations
Figure 3.2: Flow chart of research approach
22
3.3 Study Area
Old Baneshwor intersection in Kathmandu valley is taken as the study area in this research
study. The intersection is one of the main intersections, which is located in the eastern part
of the area surrounded by the existing ring road in the valley. The two main roads namely
Gaushala – Old Baneshwor – New Baneshwor road and Sinamangal – Old Baneshwor –
Ratna park road cross at this intersection. These urban roads, which are under the
jurisdiction of Department of Roads, are among the major arterial roads linking the exiting
ring road to the city core. The two intersecting roads have been recently widened under the
Kathmandu Valley Road Improvement Project, Department of Roads. Currently, the four
legged Old Baneshwor intersection is without traffic signals but the traffic police officer
has been controlling the intersection during peak hours. The intersection legs formed are:
1. North-road towards Gaushala (Gausala Leg)

2. South-road towards New Baneshwor (New Baneshwor Leg)
3. East-road towards Sinamangal (Sinamangal Leg)
4. West-road towards Maitidevi (Maitidevi Leg)
The east, west, and south legs have adequate width for three lanes. The width of north leg
is adequatefor four lanes. The north and south legs are staggered by approximately 18
meter. During peak hours of weekdays, traffic at the intersection is observed to be
congested with long queues of vehicles standing still for considerable period of time while
the vehicles speed up on segments between intersections. The Location of the study
intersection is shown in figure 3.3.
3.4 Sample Size and Sample Selection
As described in HCM-2010, capacity and other traffic analyses typically focus on the
peak-hour traffic volume because it represents the most critical period for operations and
has the highest capacity requirements.
As shown by a previous study (Soil Test/AVIYAAN P. ltd, 2011), the peak traffic flow
occurred during 8 am to 11 am in the morning and from 4 pm to 7 pm in the evening at old
Baneshwor. So, traffic volume counts were conducted from 8:00 to 11:00 in the morning
and 4:00 to 7:00 in the afternoon for three typical weekdays:Monday, May 7, Tuesday,
May 8, and Wednesday, May 9, 2018 at the study intersection. The peak hour and peak
15m within the peak hour were identified after organizing the data in order to determine
the actual peak hour factor.
3.5 Data Collection
There are three categories of data required for analysis: (a) geometric characteristics (b)
traffic characteristics and (c) signal control characteristics.
For this thesis, most of the data required is primary data. Values of some parameters like
critical gap, follow up headway, growth rate, passenger car units (PCU’s), vehicle
dimensions and queue space were adopted as secondary data.
23
(Internet/Google Earth, 2017)
Figure 3.3: Location of Old Baneshwor Intersection
24
Various relevant data required for developing SIDRA intersection model and methods
employed to collect these data are explained in the following sub-headings.
3.5.1 Intersection Geometry
The geometric data includes lane configuration data including lane discipline width of
median, numberof approach and exit lanes in each intersection leg, width and grade of
each lane, turn bay length (if any) for each movement, presence of on-street parking lane
(if any), lane type of each lane such as slip lane (give way/yield, stop controlled, or
continuous). These data were observed and measured in the field for developing the traffic
model of the existing intersection. The grade of approach and exit lanes were found out
from the detail topographic survey of the study area conducted by Soil Test/AVIYAAN
J/V (2011) for the study of the grade separated intersection design. For developing the
future intersection models of various improvement options, the various parameters of
geometric data were proposed as per viability.
3.5.2 Traffic Volume and Pedestrian Volume
Traffic volume includes turning movement counts at the stop line of the intersection and
the vehicle arrival counts, i.e.,demand flow rates, at upstream of the queue at each
intersection leg.Separate traffic count was taken at the upstream of the queue at each leg
because the stop line count of vehicles departing from a congested approach (degree of
saturation > 1) will produce a demand flow rate that is lower than the true rate.
Videography survey was used to collect the volumes of traffic and pedestrians. Five CC
cameras as shown in figure 3.5 were set up to capture the turningmovementsat the
intersection and arrival of vehiclesupstream of the queues in individual legs. Cameera-1
was set up at a vantage point on the terrace of a building at the intersection corner to
record all the turning movements at the intersection. Other four CC cameras (Camera-2 to
camera-5) were set up at vantage points on the terrace of road side buildings at the four
legs upstream of the queues associated with the legs in order to determine the demand
flow rate of vehicles arriving at the intersection.All the five cameras recorded videos
continuously in the five digital video recorders (DVR) as shown in figure 3.6for three
typical days from Monday, May 7 to Wednesday, May 9, 2018.
Later in office, the video footages were extracted from the each digital video recorder only
for the study periods of 8:00 am – 11:00 am and 4:00 pm – 7:00 pm in each day. Total five
persons were used to count the turning movements at the stop line and the arrival of
vehicles upstream of the queues in each leg by playing the recorded video footages. The
video footage was played with the “Traffic Count” Computer software, developed by
Softwel (P) Ltd, which had the features of entering the type of vehicles manually by
viewing in the video and records the video time of each vehicle to the nearest second as
the vehicle type is entered in the software. Figure 3.7 shows the screen shot of the user
interface of the “Traffic Count” Software. The recording of classified counts for each
direction of movement was done by playing the video footage once for each direction of
movement. Thus, the classified vehicle counts in the existing twelve movement directions
from the four legs of the intersection and classified vehicle arrival counts upstream of the
queues at the four legs were conducted for the study periods of 8:00 am – 11:00 am and
4:00 pm – 7:00 pm for three days. Vehicle movement data was exported from the “Traffic
Count” software in the form shown in table 3.1. The recorded second by second data of
classified counts of vehicle turning movements in each direction was reduced from this
25
table for 15 minute intervalsby using a macro program in MS-Excel developed by Softwel
(P) Ltd.
Figure 3.4: A plan showing the locations of CC Camera set up
(Softwel P. Ltd., 2017) (Softwel P. Ltd., 2017)

Figure 3.5: Infrared CC Camera to capture the video Figure 3.6: Digital Video Recorder to record the
video captured by CC Camera
26
(Softwel P. Ltd., 2017)
Figure 3.7: Screen shot of the user interface of “Traffic Count” Software
The pedestrian volume crossing each leg was counted for only the analysis peak hour for
two days after determining the peak traffic hour in order to have average estimate of
pedestrian volume crossing the road at the intersection during the analysis hour.
Table 3.1: Form of Movement Data exported from Traffic Count Software
Sta- Turning Video File Start Start Vehicle
Time
tion Movement Name Date Time Type
(Softwel P. Ltd., 2017)

3.5.3 Passenger Car Unit (PCU)
The traffic in our country is heterogeneous with many different types of vehicles
taking up different amounts of road space and having different operating capabilities.
It is, therefore, necessary to adopt a standard traffic unit to which other types of
vehicles may be related. For geometric design of roads this standard is the Passenger
Car Unit (PCU), which is that of a normal car (passenger car), light van, or pick-up.
Table 3.2 shows the PCU factors used for the observed vehicles in this research.
27
Table 3.2: Passenger Car Unit (PCU) of various types of Vehicles
S.N. Vehicle Type PCU Factor Remarks

1 Cycle 0.25 As per KSUTP, 2012
2 Motor Cycle 0.25 As per KSUTP, 2012
Car, Light van, Four Wheel
3 Drive, SUV, Utility Vehicle, 1.00 As per NRS, 2013
Three Wheeler
4 Micro Bus 1.25 As per KSUTP, 2012
5 Mini Bus 2.50 As per KSUTP, 2012
6 Standard Bus 3.00 As per NRS, 2013
7 Tractor, Light Truck 1.50 As per NRS, 2013
8 Heavy Truck 2.50 As per KSUTP, 2012
9 Multi Axle Truck 3.50 As per KSUTP, 2012
(NRS/DoR, 2013 &KSUTP/DoR, 2012)
3.5.4 Prevailing saturation flow rate
The prevailing saturation flow rate is the rate measured in the field (veh/h) for specific
lane. This saturation flow will have effects of all road and traffic factors (heavy vehicles,
turning vehicles, lane width, grade, local driver behaviour and so on). This field measured
prevailing saturation flow rate is used for the local calibration of the default basic
saturation flow in SIDRA. Any potential bias in the estimate of saturation flow rate is
minimized by local calibration of the basic saturation flow rate.
The saturated period count methodas described in the Overseas Road Note 11 (ORN 11)
published by Transport Research Laboratory of UK was used to find out the field
measured saturation flow rate of individual lanes. This method consists of measuring the
flow of traffic, during the entire period of saturation. It is determined as simply the
average flow for all saturated intervals (i.e. once the initial start-up period has been
completed, and while the flow is still being supplied from a queue). To allow saturation to
develop, a lag of ten seconds was allowed to pass between the start of go signal by police
and the first vehicle to be counted. The classified counts of vehicles that departed from the
stop line of the lane during saturated period were recorded for 25 cycles and the saturated
time period for each cycle was noted by observing in the recorded video footage of the
intersection. The observations were made during the morning and evening peak hours for
individual lanes. Motorcycles were converted into PCU and added to the number of other
light vehicles and heavy vehicles giving total number of vehicles that departed during
saturation. The saturation flow (veh/h) was calculated by dividing the total number of
vehicles in each saturated green period by its duration in hours. The average of all the
saturation flow rates observed was used for calibration of basic saturation flow of
individual lanes.
3.5.5 95 percentile back of queue
The 95 percentile back of queue was measured in the field for the validation of the SIDRA
model of the existing intersection under exiting geometric and traffic characteristics. The
95 percentile means that the queues are shorter than or equal to that value 95 % of the time
28
during a given time period. The classified counts of vehicles that stopped during the red
signal by the police including those that stopped after the green time started wererecorded
in the field for every cycle during the analysis hourfor individual lanes.Videography
survey was not used for this survey due to additional cameras required to cover the views
of the queues in all the lanes. Instead, four persons were used for the four approaches of
the intersection for this survey of back of queue during the morningand evening periods
for three days. The 95 percentile back of queue was calculated with the MS-Excel built in
worksheet function.
3.5.6 Vehicle Composition
There were various types of vehicles using the study intersection. Vehicles were defined
as per identification made during the classified traffic volume survey. Various types of
vehiclesidentified and their vehicle class input used for SIDRA intersection model are
shown in table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Vehicle Types
Vehicle Class input in

S.N. Vehicle Type
SIDRA Intersection 5.1
Car, Four Wheel Drive, Utility Vehicle, Three
1 Light vehicle (LV)
Wheeler, Micro Bus
2 Cycle, Motorcycle Light vehicle (LV)
Mini Bus, Standard Bus, Tractor, Light Truck,

3 Heavy vehicle (HV)
Heavy Truck, Multi Axle Truck
Motorcycles and cycle volumes cannot be input as separate class in SIDRA Intersection v
5.1. Therefore, volume of motor cycles and cycles were converted into equivalent number
of passenger cars by multiplying with their PCU factor of 0.25 and then specified as
normal light vehicles in the SIDRA model of the intersection.
3.5.7 Size of Vehicle and Queue Space
There are so many types of vehicle size which influence traffic characteristics due to their
various sizes and operating capability. Different types of vehicles used this intersection,
which makes traffic heterogeneous in nature. Size of vehicle was obtained from respective
website of the vehicle manufacturer. Table 3.4 shows the dimensions of various vehicles
plying in Kathmandu.
Table 3.4: Vehicle Dimensions
S.N Vehicle Type Nos. of Model Length (m) Width (m)

1 Bike 1 1 2.01 0.747
2 Car 5 3.325-4.70 1.5-2.069
3 Cycle 1 1.775 0.628
4 Tempo 1 3.561 1.88
5 Pick up 1 4.975 1.76
6 Micro Bus 1 5.38 1.88
29
S.N Vehicle Type Nos. of Model Length (m) Width (m)
7 Jeep 2 4.72-4.4891 2.075-2.13
8 Bus 1 10.854 2.60
9 Mini Bus 1 6.615 2.20
10 Truck 1 7 2.351
11 Mini Truck 1 6.26 2.115
12 M. A Truck 1 8.5 2.612
13 Van 1 5.415 1.975
14 Tanker 1 6.5 2.084
15 Maruti Van 1 3.37 1.41
(TATA Motors,2016 as cited in Sharma, 2016)
Queue space (also called jam spacing) is the vehicle spacing i.e. the distance between the
front ends of two successive vehicles in the traffic stream while queued at the intersection.
Table 3.5 shows the values of average vehicle length and queue space parameters adopted
for the light and heavy vehicle classes in developing the traffic model in this research.
Table 3.5: Values of vehicle length and Queue space parameters adopted
Vehicle Class in SIDRA

S.N. Average Vehicle Length (m) Average Queue Space (m)
Intersection v 5.1
1 Light vehicle (LV) 3.0 3.75
2 Heavy vehicle (HV) 7.0 8.0
(KSUTP/DoR, 2012)
3.5.8 Approach and Exit Cruise Speeds
The cruise speed is the average uninterrupted travel speed, i.e. the speed of a vehicle
without the effect of delay at the intersection. If there were posted speed limit, it would be
an appropriate value to use. Since, there was not any speed limit posted in the approach
roads of the study intersection, a speed survey was carried out on each leg of the
intersection during off-peak periods in good weather. Manual short-base method was used
for the survey of cruise speeds as described in Overseas Road Note 11: Urban Road
Traffic Surveys published by Transport Research Laboratory, UK. As per this method, a
short base length was created, over which vehicles could be timed. The length will depend
on speeds on the road, with longer bases needed for higher speeds. Table 3.6 relates
approximate lengths to average speeds.
Table 3.6: Short-base lengths
Average speed of traffic Short-base length

(km/h) (m)
Below 40 25
40- 65 50
Above 65 75
(TRL, 1993)
30
Another approximate guide to length is that no vehicle in the traffic stream should take
less than 2 seconds to traverse the short-base, in the traffic conditions prevailing during the
survey(TRL, 1993).
In this study, the ends of the short-base length of 30 meter were marked on the road
surface with red spray paint across the approach of each leg. The short-base was marked
upstream of the intersection in each approach where there was not any influence of the
intersection control. The short-base length was measured accurately with a tape-measure.
In addition a “sampling line” was marked upstream of the start line. The sampling line was
needed to select the sample vehicle before recording its travel time. With the use of stop
watch application in mobile phone, the time taken by sample vehicles to travel from the
upstream start line to the downstream end line was recorded along with the type of
vehicles.More than 75 observations of speeds in approach were taken for estimating the
speed within an acceptable error.The 85th percentile value was used for cruise speed, since
this excludes extremely fast drivers (and gross measuring errors) and gives an estimate of
what the majority of drivers consider a top limit (TRL, 1993). The exit cruise speed in
each leg was assumed to be the same as the approach cruise speed.
3.5.9 Negotiation Speed, Distance, and Radius
The intersection negotiation data (negotiation radius, negotiation speed, and negotiation
distance) are specified for each O-D movement through the intersection in SIDRA. These
parameters are important in determining the geometric delay, average speed, fuel
consumption, operating cost, and emission (Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012). The
intersection negotiation data should be considered as the exit negotiation data, i.e. related
to vehicle movement past the stop line as shown in figure 3.8.
A number of observations of negotiation speed for different types of vehicles were made
by timing the vehicles to travel the measured distance from approach stop line to exit side
stop line along the typical vehicle path for each movement by playing the recorded video
footage during the off-peak hours. The negotiation distance and negotiation radius were
measured along a typical negotiation path of vehicles based on field survey and Ruler
dialogue of the Google Earth application. Downstream distance was set to be calculated by
the SIDRA program. Approach travel distance and lane lengths for each approach were
also measured in Google Earth Image.
3.5.10 Phasing and Timing Data
It includes the phase plan, phase times, yellow time, and all red time for each phase. At
present the traffic signals are not installed at the study intersection. Traffic police controls
the intersection movements during periods of high traffic volume in the morning and
evening. So, the phasing and timing data assigned by the traffic police during the peak
hour study period were observed for more than 15 cycles for each phase in the recorded
video footage of the intersection. Fixed time (pretimed) signal analysis method with an
average phase time for each phase was adopted for SIDRA input for the evaluation of
performance statistics under the existing operation of the intersection. SIDRA default
values of Yellow time (4 sec) and All Red time (2 sec) were adopted.
31
Phasing and timing data for the existing traffic and geometric condition were
thenoptimized for signalized option with SIDRA program to find out the optimum
performance measures.
(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012)

Figure 3.8: Movement Path Data Definitions
3.5.11 Traffic Growth rate
Traffic growth rate is required for developing the future model of the intersection. The
study in KSUTP found that figures on traffic growth rate for Kathmandu are found to vary
across the studies. A vehicular traffic growth rate of up to 13% had been reported. Growth
rate for motorcycle was reported to be even much higher. Clearly, the growth rate similar
to those mentioned above was not sustainable and could not continue since the growth in
vehicular traffic needed to be controlled as one of the KSUTP’s key objectives. A more
realistic growth rate of 2% was adopted as a matter of policy, which can be achieved by
implementing walking, cycling and public transport favoured land use and urban transport
policy. Based on the report on KSUTP, a uniform growth rate of 2 % per year was adopted
in this research.
3.6 Processing of Data
In order to perform the analysis for the operational performance of the study intersection,
collected data were organized and critically examined in order to attain the objectives.The
processing comprised classification, tabulation,and developing of traffic data for the
intersection so that it would be easy for input in developing the intersectionmodel.
3.7 Identification of Peak hour and Peak hour factor for the analysis
The fifteen minute interval classified vehicle counts in each movement direction at the
interaction were converted to equivalent number of passenger cars by multiplying with the
corresponding PCU factors for various types of observed vehicles. The total PCU’s that
32
entered the intersection from all the four legs during each fifteen minute interval in the
morning and evening study periods were determined for each of the three days. Then,
average of the three days was found for each fifteen minute period. By summing the
successive four 15-minute period counts in PCU, three-day average hourly volumes in
PCU entering the intersection from all the four legs were determined for the morning and
evening periods. Thus, peak hour in each of the morning and evening periods were
identified. The higher one among the two peak hours of the morning and evening was
selected for the analysis and further study. The peak fifteen minute within the peak hour
was identified in order to get the peak hour factor (PHF). The peak hour factor accounts
for the peaking of traffic flow during the peak hour so that analysis is based on the peak
fifteen minute traffic flow.
3.8 Calibration of SIDRAIntersection Model
Calibration is the process used for getting adequate reliability or validity of the model by
assigning suitable values to various model parameters so that the developed model
represents particular intersection conditions as closely as possible. For SIDRA models
calibration should comprise checks of the input data to ensure that the base case (i.e. the
latest valid data representing the existing intersection) data is adequately represented in the
model.
The calibration process was based on various traffic data, including surveys and site
observations. This data, for traffic signals principally included traffic flow, saturation flow,
traffic signal phase sequences, phase green times, traffic signal timing settings for yellow, all
red and pedestrian phases, and geometric parameters.
An important parameter forcalibrating SIDRA intersection capacity and performance

model is the saturation flow rate for signalized intersections (Akcelik & Associates Pty
Ltd, 2012).
The following recommended method was followed to calibrate the saturation flow in
SIDRA intersection v. 5.1 as per the Akcelik & Associates:
(i) Field measured lane saturation flow, s' (veh/h) whichhad effects of all prevailing
road and traffic factors was determined as explained in aforementioned section
3.5.4 of data collection.
(ii) The field measured lane saturation flow, s' was comparedwith the lane saturation
flow s (veh/h) estimated by SIDRA intersection, given in Lane Flow and
Capacity Information table in the Detailed Output report. If they were
significantly different (given that all road and traffic factors had been specified as
input to SIDRA intersection correctly), a calibration factor s'/s was calculated.
(iii) The basic saturation flow (tcu/h) was then adjustedto s'b = (s'/s).sb where sb is the
basic saturation flow (tcu/h) specified as input in the Approach Lane Data of
Geometry dialogue, for estimating saturation flow s (veh/h).
(iv) SIDRA intersectionwas re-run to estimate saturation flow using the new basic
saturation flow (s'b); the process wasrepeatedif necessary.
The calibration factor (s'/s) can be used for future design options if it is believed that it
adjusts the SIDRA intersection default basic saturation flow for local driver behaviour
adequately.
33
The Sensitivity Analysis option in the Demand & Sensitivity input dialog of SIDRA
intersectionwas used by choosing the Basic Saturation Flow parameter for calibration
purposes.
The GEH statistic was used as an acceptance criterion in the calibration of saturation flow
rate. The GEH Statistic is a formula used in traffic engineering, traffic forecasting,
and traffic modelling to compare two sets of traffic volumes. The GEH formula gets its
name from Geoffrey E. Havers, who invented it in the 1970s while working as a transport
planner in London, England. Although its mathematical form is similar to a chi-squared
test, is not a true statistical test. Rather, it is an empirical formula that has proven useful
for a variety of traffic analysis purposes(WIKIPEDIA, n.d.).
The formula for the “GEH Statistic” is
Where M is the hourly traffic volume estimated by the traffic model (or new count) and C
is the real-world hourly traffic count (or the old count).
GEH statistics give an indication of a goodness of fit as outlined in table 3.7.
Table 3.7: GEH statistic values and its indications
GEH Statistic range Indication

GEH < 5.0 A good match between the modelled and observed hourly volumes.
5.0 ≤ GEH ≤ 10.0 This may warrant investigation.
High probability that there is a problem with either the model or the
GEH > 10.0 data (this could be something as simple as a data entry error, or as
complicated as a serious model calibration problem.
(WIKIPEDIA, n.d.)
3.9 Validation of base model
Validation should provide an additional check, independent of the calibration. Validation

should use the model calculated values in the base case model to check that the results are
representative of the observed situation. The principal values to be used should be the
Degree of Saturation (DoS) and the calculated 95 percentile queue length on the
approaches(DPTI, 2017). Both the DoS and 95thpercentile back of queuewere used for
validation of the base case model in this study. For this purpose, back of queues (veh)
were observed for more than 30 cycles in each shared lane of the four legs during the
analysis period (10:00 am – 11:00 am) for two days May 8 to May 9, 2018. Then, the 95th
percentile back of queue (veh) was determined for the observedlanesfrom the observed
data with the use of MS-Excel worksheet function“percentile.inc(array,k)”and compared
with the SIDRA generated 95th percentile back of queue (veh).
To check the closeness of match between the observed and model estimated validation
parameters, a measure of Root Mean Squared Normalized Error (RMSNE) was used.
RMSNE measures the percentage deviation of the estimated data from observed data. A
34
RMSNE of less than 0.15 is considered acceptable for traffic model calibration and
validation.
Mathematically, it is expressed as:
1 , ,
3.10 Data Analysis
Analyses of survey data such as traffic count and peak hour volume were carried out in
MS-excel. The analysis for the evaluation of operational performance was performed with
SIDRA Intersection 5.1. The samples speed data, field measured back of queue data, field
measured prevailing saturation flow data, and data of phasing and timing assigned by
traffic police were analysed in MS-excel for sample mean, maximum, minimum values
and percentile values. Standard error of mean of the samples was determined by using the
formula recommended by Overseas Road Note 11 (Urban Road Traffic Surveys):
√
Where
SEm = standard error of the mean
S = standard deviation of the sample values
n = number of samples (sample size)
There is a probability of 95.4 per cent that the true (population) value of the statistic lies
within confidence limits of plus or minus two standard errors of the sample value (TRL,
1993). Based on this fact, 95 % confidence limits of the sample mean were estimated.
The analysis of the collected information such as geometric data, traffic data, and
intersection control data were organized into their respective categories as needed for the
input toSIDRA intersection. After the calibration and validation of SIDRA model, itwas
used to evaluate the various relevant operational performance measures of the intersection
for vehicular traffic under existing conditions. Then various alternatives of improved
intersection configurations were proposed and evaluated for the performance measures
under the future conditions.
3.10.1 Evaluation of Operational Performance Measures
After the calibration and validation of the base case model, the various operational
performance measures were evaluated for the present base case under existing traffic
police control and under the phasing and signal timingsoptimized by SIDRA Intersection
program. Then the proposed improvement alternatives were analysed and evaluated in
terms of the various performance measures. The performance measures evaluated were as
follows:
i. Capacity
35
Capacity is the maximum sustainable hourly flow rate that can be achieved during a
specified time period under given (prevailing) intersection geometric, traffic, and
control conditions. Capacity is the main determinant of performance measure.
SIDRA Intersection computes the capacity of each approach lane separately and then
adds the lane capacities to obtain movement capacities.
ii. Degree of Saturation (DOS, v/c ratio)
Degree of saturation is defined as the ratio of demand (arrival) flow to capacity (also
known as volume to capacity, v/c ratio). Degrees of saturation above 1.0 represent
oversaturated conditions (demand flows exceed capacity), and degrees of saturation
below 1.0 represent under-saturated conditions (demand flows are below capacity).
iii. Delay
Delay to a vehicle is the difference between interrupted and uninterrupted travel

times through the intersection. The average delay predicted by SIDRA Intersection is
for all vehicles, queued and unqueued. Based on this definition, the total (aggregate)
delay (vehicle-hours per hour) is the product of average delay and the total demand
flow rate.The HCM models do not include geometric delays. SIDRA Standard delay
model was used to include geometric delays in the average control delay values as
used for LoS determination in this research.
iv. 95thpercentile Back of Queue (BOQ)
The back of queue is the maximum extent of the queue that occurs once each cycle.
95th percentile back of queue (i.e. queue length) is the value below which 95 per cent
of all observed cycle queue lengths fall, or 5 per cent of all observed queue lengths
exceed. In the Model Settings input dialog of SIDRA Intersection, the Percentile
Queue parameter was used for the percentile queue length value to be included in
output reports of SIDRA. The back of queue is a more useful performance measure
since it is relevant to the design of appropriate queuing space, e.g. for short lane
design to avoid queue spillback into adjacent lanes, for phasing design to avoid
blockage of upstream signals in paired intersection situations, and for signal
coordination offset design to prevent interruption of platoons by downstream queue.
v. Level of Service (LOS)
Automobile LOS for an intersection is a qualitative measure developed by the

transportation professionals to quantify driver perception for such elements as travel
time, number of stops, total amount of stopped delay, and impediments caused by
other vehicles (Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 2010). It provides a scale that is
intended to match the perception by motorists of the operation of the intersection. As
specified by HCM, SIDRA Intersection uses the average control delay as the LoS
measure for vehicles at signalized and unsignalized intersection.In this study, LoS
Method option used was Delay & v/c (HCM 2010).
vi. Performance Index (PI)
36
Performance Index (PI) is a measure that combines several other performance
statistics, and therefore can be used as a basis for choosing between various design
options (the best design is the one which gives the smallest value of PI)(Akcelik &
Associates Pty Ltd, 2012).
The Performance Index is defined as
PI = Tu + w1.D + w2.K.H/3600 + w3.N’
Where
Tu =total uninterrupted travel time (veh-h/h), Tu= qa.tu where qais the
arrival (demand) flow rate and tu is the uninterrupted travel time.
D = total delay due to traffic interruption (veh-h/h)
H = total number of effective stops (veh/h)
K = stop penalty
N’ = sum of the queue values (in vehicles) for all lanes, and
w1, w2, w3 = delay weight, stop weight, and queue weight values, respectively
A Stop Penalty parameter and various weight factors used for this purpose are
included in the defaults system.
37
3.7 Research Matrix
The research matrix for the study is shown in Table 3.8.
Table 3.8: Research Matrix
Objective Data needed Method of Data collection Analysis tools
i. Existing Geometric i. Field observation and

data past project data MS-Excel,
To evaluate the capacity
ii. Existing traffic ii. Video graphic survey Traffic Count
and various performance
characteristic data at peak hours & traffic Software, and
measures of the
iii. Existing manual count SIDRA
intersection for vehicular
traffic control iii. Video observation of intersection
traffic under the
pattern by traffic the traffic police v5.1 software
prevailing conditions
police controlling the
intersection
i. Geometric i. Various Geometric
To evaluate the capacity improvement option improvement options
and performance and details will be proposed
measures of the ii. Future traffic ii. Volume to be
intersection for vehicular characteristics at the forecasted based on MS Excel
traffic under the future intersection traffic growth from &SIDRA
traffic with various iii. Signal timing design past secondary data at intersection
options of improved for the signalization the site/similar project v5.1 software
geometry and option (fixed, iii. Based on signal
signalization of the actuated) timing design to be
intersection generated from
analysis
To identify the
Capacity and Various
deficiencies of the
Operational proposed
intersection, various
performance Output results from intersection
improvement options of
measures the SIDRA layouts and
enhancing the intersection
generated for intersection analysis signalization
capacity and performance
various run options
to an acceptable level, and
improvement (fixed,
recommend the best
options actuated)
viable option
38
Chapter 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Intersection Geometry
The exiting intersection is a four way intersection with the legs oriented almost in North –
South and East – West directions. Two urban roads,one from New Baneshwor to Gaushala
and the other from Maitidevi to Sinamangal intersect to form the Old Baneshwor junction.
The intersection legs formed are:
• North – Road to Gaushala
• South – Road to New Baneshwor
• East - Road to Sinamangal
• West – Road to Maitidevi/Bagbazaar
Based on the field measurement, observation, previous topographic survey data, and
Google Earth image, Figure 4.1 shows the present intersection geometry with existing
number of approach and exit lanes, approach and exit lane widths, lane disciplines,
carriageway widths, kerb to kerb road width including side drains, approach grade and
foot path widths in all the four legs.
(Source: Field survey, 2018)

Figure 4.1: Present Intersection Geometry of Old Baneshwor Intersection
39
4.2 Land use and Building uses
The land use pattern is mixed, which is characterized by high concentration of commercial
and residentialbuildings. Densely built building structures are very close to the urban
roads. Retail shops are thebackbone of business and social activities at the junction area.
4.3 Traffic and Pedestrian Volume

Classified traffic studies were conducted from 8:00 to 11:00 in the morning and from 4:00
to 7:00 in the afternoon for three days from Monday, May 7 to Wednesday, May 9, 2018
with the recorded traffic video footage of the intersection. A total of 12 vehicular
movement directions with 12 vehicle types including bicycles and 4 directions of
pedestrian movements were observedat the intersection. In order to find out the total
volume in PCU, the volume of each type of vehicles were multiplied with their respective
PCU factors.
The AM and PM peak hours were found out to be 10:00 - 11:00 and 5:15 - 6:15
respectively. The three day average of AM peak hour volumes of the intersection was
5387 veh/h (2370 PCU/h). Similarly, the PM peak hour volume of the intersection was
5486 veh/h (2363 PCU/h). Among the AM and PM peak hours, the hour with higher
volume in terms of PCU/h was selected for the analysis of the operational performance of
the intersection. Table 4.1 shows the hourly intersection total volume for three days.
Table 4.1: Hourly Intersection Departure Volume for 3 days
Hourly Intersection Total Volume for various days
Hourly
Mon, May 7, 2018 Tue, May 8, 2018 Wed, May 9, 2018 Average Remarks
Interval
Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU
AM Hours
8:00 - 9:00 3,405 1,813 4,222 2,191 3,485 1,856 3,704 1,953
8:15 - 9:15 3,859 1,936 4,427 2,262 3,799 1,885 4,028 2,028
8:30 - 9:30 4,230 1,999 4,766 2,359 4,139 1,983 4,378 2,113
8:45 - 9:45 4,478 2,049 5,186 2,446 4,561 2,101 4,742 2,199
9:00 - 10:00 4,736 2,096 5,374 2,446 4,832 2,189 4,981 2,244
9:15 - 10:15 4,982 2,159 5,572 2,452 5,146 2,354 5,233 2,322
9:30 - 10:30 5,182 2,224 5,573 2,453 5,182 2,306 5,312 2,328
9:45 - 10:45 5,260 2,240 5,682 2,490 5,241 2,325 5,394 2,352
10:00 - 11:00 5,289 2,276 5,647 2,513 5,225 2,322 5,387 2,370 AM Peak
PM Hours
16:00 - 17:00 4,514 2,204 5,123 2,464 4,851 2,318 4,829 2,328
16:15 - 17:15 4,586 2,216 5,116 2,446 5,170 2,417 4,957 2,360
16:30 - 17:30 4,865 2,254 5,156 2,370 5,400 2,421 5,140 2,348
16:45 - 17:45 5,034 2,271 5,290 2,395 5,515 2,418 5,280 2,361
17:00 - 18:00 5,241 2,318 5,374 2,360 5,590 2,411 5,402 2,363
17:15 - 18:15 5,368 2,336 5,458 2,357 5,632 2,398 5,486 2,363 PM Peak
17:30 - 18:30 5,188 2,252 5,534 2,355 5,504 2,343 5,409 2,317
17:45 - 18:45 5,063 2,227 5,525 2,336 5,487 2,325 5,358 2,296
18:00 - 19:00 4,726 2,155 5,648 2,394 5,419 2,322 5,264 2,290
(Source: Field survey, May 2018)
40
Table 4.2: Fifteen Minute Interval Intersection Departure Volume for 3 days
Fifteen May 7, 2018 May 8, 2018 May 9, 2018 Peak Hour

Average
minute Monday Tuesday Wednesday Volume PHF Remarks
Intervals Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU (PCU/h)
8:00 - 8:15 654 365 936 503.3 722 419.5 771 429.3
8:15 - 8:30 797 462 1,020 525.3 848 491.8 888 492.8
8:30 - 8:45 920 484 991 538.0 882 454.3 931 492.0
8:45 - 9:00 1,034 502 1,275 624.0 1,033 490.3 1,114 538.8
9:00 - 9:15 1,108 489 1,141 574.5 1,036 449.0 1,095 504.0
9:15 - 9:30 1,168 524 1,359 622.5 1,188 589.0 1,238 578.6
9:30 - 9:45 1,168 534 1,411 624.8 1,304 572.8 1,294 577.3
9:45 - 10:00 1,292 549 1,463 624.0 1,304 578.0 1,353 583.8
10:00 - 10:15 1,354 552 1,339 580.8 1,350 613.8 1,348 582.0
10:15 - 10:30 1,368 589 1,360 623.5 1,224 541.5 1,317 584.8 AM
Peak
10:30 - 10:45 1,246 550 1,520 661.5 1,363 591.8 1,376 601.2 2,370 0.98 Hour
10:45 - 11:00 1,321 585 1,428 647.5 1,288 574.8 1,346 602.5
AM Total: 13,430 6,185 15,243 7,150 13,542 6,366 14,072 6,567
16:00 - 16:15 1,098 533 1,326 623.3 1,022 508.0 1,149 554.8
16:15 - 16:30 1,096 559 1,266 633.5 1,259 624.5 1,207 605.5
16:30 - 16:45 1,118 546 1,266 609.0 1,227 570.3 1,204 575.2
16:45 - 17:00 1,202 566 1,265 597.8 1,343 614.8 1,270 592.9
17:00 - 17:15 1,170 545 1,319 606.0 1,341 607.3 1,277 586.1
17:15 - 17:30 1,375 596 1,306 556.8 1,489 628.5 1,390 593.8
17:30 - 17:45 1,287 563 1,400 634.0 1,342 567.8 1,343 588.3 PM
Peak
17:45 - 18:00 1,409 614 1,349 563.5 1,418 607.5 1,392 595.0 2,363 0.99 Hour
18:00 - 18:15 1,297 562 1,403 603.0 1,383 593.8 1,361 586.3
18:15 - 18:30 1,195 513 1,382 554.0 1,361 574.0 1,313 546.9
18:30 - 18:45 1,162 538 1,391 615.5 1,325 550.0 1,293 567.8
18:45 - 19:00 1,072 542 1,472 621.5 1,350 603.8 1,298 589.2
PM Total: 14,481 6,678 16,145 7,218 15,860 7,050 15,495 6,982
41
Hourly Total Intersection Volume (3-day average)
Vehicles PCU
6,000
Volume (Veh / PCU) 5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
Morning Time Interval Afternoon
Figure 4.2: Hourly Intersection Departure Volume (average of three days)

1,238
1,294
1,353
1,348
1,317
1,376
1,346
1,270
1,277
1,390
1,343
1,392
1,361
1,313
1,293
1,298
1,207
1,204
1,149
1,114
1,095
1,400
Veh or PCU / 15min.
931
1,200
493 888
429 771
1,000
606
603
601
595
594
593
589
588
586
586
585
584
582
579
577
575
568
555
547
539
800
504
492
600
400
200
‐
AM Time Interval PM
Veh/15 min PCU/15 min
Figure 4.3 Fifteen Minute Interval Intersection Departure Volumes (Average of 3 days)
4.4 Traffic Volume – Directional Vehicular Flows
Figure 4.4 shows the peak hour volume of each origin – destination (movement) at the
study intersection. During the AM peak hour, the highest volume of 1949 veh departed
from Gaushala leg at the North with left turn of 509 veh, 1045 through veh, and right turns
of 395 veh. During the same hour, the second highest volume of 1404 veh departed from
Sinamangal leg at the East with 412 veh left turning, 779 through veh, and 213 veh right
42
turning. Total 1157 vehicles departed from New Baneshwor leg at the South with 196 veh
left turning, 903 veh going through, and 58 veh right turning. The total traffic volume that
departed from Maitidevi Leg was 880 vehicles with 309 veh left turning, 510 vehgoing
through, and 61 vehright turning during the AM peak hour. Thus, the total vehicle that
departed from the intersection during the AM peak hour was 5390 vehicles.The volume
study showed that North – South road, i.e. Gaushala – New Baneshwor road has the major
traffic stream. Data of fifteen minute interval classified counts of turning movements are
given in appendix 1.1 to appendix 1.5.

Figure 4.4:AMPeak Hour Departure Volumes and Turning Movement at Old Baneshwor
Intersection (in veh/h)
Table 4.3 shows the AM peak hour direction wise departure volumes classified as heavy
vehicle (HV) and light vehicle (LV) along with the percentage of heavy vehicles in each
movement for input in SIDRA model of the existing intersection.Volume of motor cycles
and cycles were converted into equivalent number of passenger cars by multiplying with
their PCU factor of 0.25 and then added to other normal light vehicles to determine the
total number of light vehicles including motorcycles/cycles for input in the SIDRA model.
The overall percentage of HV’s departing from the intersection during the AM peak hour
is 1.25%.
The pedestrian volumes that crossed the road at the intersection during the AM peak hour
were 265 ped/h across the New Baneshwor leg, 163 ped/h across the Maitidevi leg, 143
ped/h across the Gaushala leg, 190 ped/h across the Sinamangal leg and amount to a total
volume of 761 ped/h.
43
Table 4.3: AM peak hour Turning Movement Volumes for input in SIDRA Intersection
base case model
HV LV Tot. LV Total % of HV
Designation
Movement
MC/
for excl. MC/ incl. MC LV + HV for
Movement Description
Turn
Cycle
ID
SIDRA MC/ Cycle for SIDRA for SIDRA SIDRA
in PCU
Input Cycle Input Input Input
From To (veh) (veh) (veh) (PCU) (veh) (veh) (% )

New Maitidevi L D1 1 31 164 41 72 73 1.37%
Baneshwor Gausala T D2 8 203 692 173 376 384 2.08%
Approach Sinamangal R D3 - 8 50 13 21 21 0.00%
Approach Total: 9 242 906 227 469 478 1.88%
Gausala L D6 - 102 207 52 154 154 0.00%

Maitidevi
Sinamangal T D5 2 136 372 93 229 231 0.87%
Approach
New Baneshwor R D4 1 7 53 13 20 21 4.71%
Approach Total: 3 245 632 158 403 406 0.74%
Sinamangal L D9 2 75 432 108 183 185 1.08%

Gausala
New Baneshwor T D8 11 241 793 198 439 450 2.44%
Approach
Maitidevi R D7 1 128 266 67 195 196 0.51%
Approach Total: 14 444 1,491 373 817 831 1.69%
New Baneshwor L D12 1 64 347 87 151 152 0.66%

Sinamangal
Maitidevi T D11 1 216 562 141 357 358 0.28%
Approach
Gausala R D10 1 49 163 41 90 91 1.10%
Approach Total: 3 329 1,072 268 597 600 0.50%
Intersection Total: 29 1,260 4,101 1,025 2,285 2,314 1.25%
500
439
Heavy Vehicle (HV) Light Vehicle (LV)
400 376
357
Volume (veh/h)
300
229
183 195
200
154 151
90
100 72
8 21 20 11

1 ‐ ‐ 2 1 2 1 1 1 1
-
D1 D2 D3 D6 D5 D4 D9 D8 D7 D12 D11 D10
L T R L T R L T R L T R
To To To To To To To To To To To To
Maitidevi Gausala Sinamangal Gausala Sinamangal New Sinamangal New Maitidevi New Maitidevi Gausala
Baneshwor Baneshwor Baneshwor
New Baneshwor Leg Maitidevi Leg Gausala Leg Sinamangal Leg
Figure 4.5: AM peak hour Turning Movement Volumes classified as HV and LV for input
in SIDRA Intersection base case model
44
800 793
692
700
Volume (veh/h)
562
600 HV LV MC/Cycle
500 432
372 347
400 266
300 207 241 216
164 203 136 128 163
200 102 75 64
50 53 49
100 1 31 8 0 8 0 2 1 7 2 11 1 1 1 1
0
D1 D2 D3 D6 D5 D4 D9 D8 D7 D12 D11 D10
New Baneshwor leg Maitidevi Leg Gaushala Leg Sinamangal Leg
Figure 4.6: Classified Volume of directional vehicular movements (AM peak hour)
1,200 1,045
1,000 903
Volume (Veh/h)
779
800
600 510 509
395 412
400 309
196 213
200 58 61
0
D1 D2 D3 D6 D5 D4 D9 D8 D7 D12 D11 D10
Figure 4.7: AM Peak hour directional vehicular flows
1,400
1,154 PM Peak Hour Volume of Turning Movements
1,200
1,000 839
Vehicles
800 696 700

588
600
285 355
400 222 241 191
200 98 117
0
D1 D2 D3 D6 D5 D4 D9 D8 D7 D12 D11 D10
Figure 4.8: PM Peak hour directional vehicular flows
45
4.5 Traffic demand (arrival) flow
Based on the traffic volume study at the upstream of the queues in the approach of each
leg with the recorded video footage at the upstream of the intersection, table 4.4 shows the
AM and PM peak hour demand, i.e. vehicle arrival volumes in each leg in vehicles and
PCU. During AM peak hour, approach from Gaushala leg has the highest vehicle arrival
rate of 1793 veh/h (803 PCU/h).During the PM peak hour, approach from New Baneshwor
leg has the highest vehicle arrival rate in terms of veh/h (1533 veh/h, 643 PCU/h) while
Gaushala leg has the highest vehicle arrival rate in terms of PCU/h (1380 veh/h, 662
PCU/h). This was due to higher number of motorcycles and less number of heavy vehicles
in the New Baneshwor leg than in the Gaushala leg during the PM peak hour. Total arrival
volume from all the legs of the intersection is 5545 veh/h (2419 PCU/h) in average of
three days during the AM peak hour and 5410 veh/h (2365 PCU/h) during the PM peak
hour. Data of 15 minute interval vehicle arrival counts for each leg are given in appendix
1.6 to appendix 1.10.
Table 4.4: Peak hour Demand (Vehicle arrival) Volume for each leg
Approach Demand (Vehicle Arrival) Volume
Total Intersection
North South (New East West
Time Interval Demand Volume
(Gausala Leg) Baneshwor Leg) (Sinamangal Leg) (Maitidevi Leg)
Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU Veh. PCU
AM Peak Hour: 10:00 ‐ 11:00
Monday, May 7, 2018 1,716 797 1,151 484 1,421 577 896 416 5,184 2,274
Tuesday, May 8, 2018 1,918 835 1,288 574 1,743 706 1,027 468 5,976 2,584
Wednesday, May 9, 2018 1,745 777 1,205 513 1,647 685 877 426 5,474 2,401
3‐day average 1,793 803 1,215 524 1,604 656 933 437 5,545 2,419
PM Peak Hour: 17:15 ‐ 18:15
Monday, May 7, 2018 1,290 589 1,642 682 1,557 733 1,057 417 5,546 2,421
Tuesday, May 8, 2018 1,473 731 1,448 612 1,309 530 1,077 446 5,307 2,319
Wednesday, May 9, 2018 1,378 667 1,509 633 1,270 544 1,219 512 5,376 2,357
3 days average in PM: 1,380 662 1,533 643 1,379 602 1,118 458 5,410 2,365
7,000
Vehicles PCU
5,888
5,836
5,724
5,545
5,512
5,464
5,438
5,430
5,410
5,308
5,306
5,263
6,000
5,148
5,125
5,075
4,985
4,969
4,825
4,800
4,763
4,764
4,727
Vehicles or PCU per hour
4,347
5,000
3,945
3,550
3,229
4,000
2,502
2,503
2,460
2,435
2,436
2,419
2,416
2,397
2,382
2,365
2,360
2,353
2,338
2,333
2,328
2,328
2,320
2,312
2,275
2,243
2,236
3,000
2,165
2,151
2,038
1,935
1,814
2,000
1,000
-
9:00 - 10:00
9:15 - 10:15
9:30 - 10:30
9:45 - 10:45
10:00 - 11:00
10:15 - 11:15
10:30 - 11:30
15:30 - 16:30
15:45 - 16:45
16:00 - 17:00
16:15 - 17:15
16:30 - 17:30
16:45 - 17:45
17:00 - 18:00
17:15 - 18:15
17:30 - 18:30
17:45 - 18:45
18:00 - 19:00
18:15 - 19:15
18:30 - 19:30
7:30 - 8:30
7:45 - 8:45
8:00 - 9:00
8:15 - 9:15
8:30 - 9:30
8:45 - 9:45
Morning Time Interval Afternoon

Figure 4.9: Hourly Intersection Total Demand (Vehicle arrival) Volume observed at u/s of
the intersection queues
46
.
%
2
3 %
7
.3
0 2
%
6
.7 F
rD
u
o
lv
ic
h
e
V t,/4
U liy
W
re
h
T
%
8
.6
%
.6
5
le
y
trc
o
M %
0
.3
1
,7
4.6 Peak hour and Peak hour factor
The selection of the Peak hour for analysis was based on the hourly total departure
volumes from the intersection in PCU. The peak hour total departure volume from the
intersection was 2370 PCU (5387 veh) and the peak 15-minute volume was 602.5 PCU/15
min (1346 veh/15 min). The peak hour factor was found out to be 0.98 based on departure
flows in PCU. Figure 4.10 and 4.11 show the variation of departure flow in PCU and
vehicles respectively within the AM peak hour.
650.0 1,600
601.2 602.5
1,400 1,348 1,317 1,376 1,346
600.0 582.0 584.8
PCU/15 min
veh/15 min
1,200
550.0
1,000
500.0
800
450.0 600
400.0 400
10:00 ‐ 10:15 ‐ 10:30 ‐ 10:45 ‐ 10:00 ‐ 10:15 ‐ 10:30 ‐ 10:45 ‐
10:15 10:30 10:45 11:00 10:15 10:30 10:45 11:00
15 minute Interval 15 minute Intervals
Figure 4.10: Flow variation within th Peak Hour in Figure 4.11: Flow variation within th Peak Hour in
PCU/15 min vehicles/15min
4.7 Traffic Composition
Figures 4.12 and 4.13 show the composition of traffic streams departing from the
intersection by vehicle types and by vehicle class respectively.
Figure 4.12: Traffic composition at Old Baneshwor Intersection by vehicle types
47
),25.4%
V
(L
ot
M rcyle/C
o
cle
7w h3.6%
o(
w
elr),T aficC
rT e
yV
b
ostin
p
m as
icleC
h
During the classified traffic study, the total 12 types of vehicles were identified. The
traffic at the intersection were composed of heavy truck, light truck, tractor, standard bus,
minibus, micro bus, four wheel drive, utility vehicles, car, electric three wheeler,
motorcycle, and cycle. The motorcycles were found out to have the highest percentage
(71.3%) in the traffic mix at the intersection. The second highest composition (13 %) in
the traffic volume was cars and taxis.
Figure 4.13: Traffic composition at Old Baneshwor Intersection by vehicle class
4.8 Cruise Speeds
The approach cruise speed of various vehicles were determined from direct field
observations by manual short-base method, which is described in section 3.5.8 in Data
Collection Section of this report. The speed survey data are included in the appendix 2.1 to
appendix 2.4. The table 4.5 shows the resultsof approach cruise speed study for each leg of
the study intersection.
Table 4.5: Summary of Approach Cruise Speed Study
th 95%
85 Standard Standard
Name of No. of Mean Min. Max. Confidence
deviation of error of the
Intersection Speed Speed percentile Speed Speed Limit of the
Speed samples mean
Leg Samples mean
km/h km/h km/h km/h km/h km/h km/h
Gausala Leg 85 30.6 38.6 18.6 50.5 7.75 0.80 ± 1.6
Maitidevi Leg 88 30.9 38.6 15.9 60.0 8.71 0.90 ± 1.8
Sinamangal Leg 129 26.9 33.5 13.3 46.8 6.09 0.50 ± 1.0
New Baneshwor Leg 108 19.4 24.5 8.9 38.0 5.23 0.50 ± 1.0
The 85th percentile speed was used for cruise speed, since this excludes extremely fast
drivers (and gross measuring errors) and gives an estimate of what the majority of drivers
consider a top limit (TRL, 1993). The exit cruise speed in each leg was assumed to be the
same as the approach cruise speed.
48
The approach cruise speed in New Baneshwor leg was observed to be very low as
compared to other legs because the pavement surface in this leg left damaged by the
Melamchi Water Supply project during the pipe laying works had not been reconstructed
yet. For the analysis of the operational performance of the exiting base case intersection,
actual observed 85th percentile speed of 24.5 km/h was used for the New Baneshwor leg.
But for the analysis of the improvement options, and assuming that the damaged pavement
in New Baneshwor leg will be reconstructed in the near future, the 85th percentile cruise
speed in New Baneshwor leg was adoptedequal to that in Sinamangal leg, i.e. 33.5 km/h
(which is similar to New Baneshwor leg in road side activities, road width, grade, and
parking activities).
4.9 Intersection Path Data Parameters
The table 4.6 shows the results of various path data parameters used for developing
SIDRA intersection base case model, based on field survey, videography survey and
Google Earth.
Table 4.6: Path Data of various Movements at the Intersection in the Existing Base Case
Condition
Approach Name => New Baneshwor Maitidevi Gausala Sinamangal
Leg Leg Leg Leg
Movement ID => D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 Remarks
Turn designation => L T R R T L R T L R T L
Parameter Unit
th
Cruise Speed km/h 24.5 38.6 38.6 33.5 85 percentile
speed
Approach Travel Measured in
m 1000 390 700 580
Distance Google Earth
Mean Speed
Negotiation Speed km/h 10.0 13.0 12.0 12.0 17.4 13.0 12.5 11.5 13.0 16.0 22.0 13.0
adopted
Measured in
Negotiation Distance m 16.0 29.0 40.5 17.0 43.3 28.5 39.5 31.6 22.5 28.2 43.3 35.3
ACAD
To be calculated by
Downstream Distance m Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog Prog
Program
Measured in
Negotiaton Radius m 3.50 7.38 9.00 9.00 S 7.25 10.00 7.63 5.00 10.00 S 5.25
ACAD
Measured in
Turn radius m 3.50 7.38 9.00 9.00 S 7.25 10.00 7.63 5.00 10.00 S 5.25
ACAD
Notes: L: Left Turn, T: Through, R: Rigth Turn, S: Straight
4.10 Prevailing (field measured) Saturation Flow Rate observation
The observation results of field measured saturation flow for various approach lanes based
on saturated period count are given in appendix 4.1 to appendix 4.4. A summaryofthe
measured saturation flow ratestudy based on saturated period count for a number of cycles
are shown in the table 4.7.
Since exclusive left turn lanes in New Baneshwor approach and Maitidevi approach did
not have any considerable saturated (queued) discharge of vehicles, their saturation flow
rate could not be measured at field. So, their prevailing saturation flow rates were assumed
based on the saturation flow rate of exclusive left turn lane of Gausala approach and the
other characteristic as turning radii.
49
Table 4.7: Summary of lane saturation flow studyat the existing intersection
Mean 95%
No. of Standard Standard
Lane Lane Saturation confidence
Approach Name samples Deviation Error Remarks
No. discipline Flow limit
observed (veh/h) (veh/h)
(veh/h) (veh/h)
1 L 935 Exclusive lane
New Baneshwor Leg
2 TR 25 1,309 443 89 ± 178 Shared lane
Sinamangal Leg 1 LTR 21 1,715 180 39 ± 78 Shared lane
1 L 10 1,114 319 121 ± 242 Exclusive lane
Gausala Leg
2 TR 25 1,395 367 73 ± 146 Shared lane
1 L 1,150 Exclusive lane
Maitidevi Leg
2 TR 25 1,278 130 28 ± 56 Shared lane
4.11 Back of queue observation
Field observation results of back of queue (BoQ) in all the cycles during the AM peak
hour from 10:00 to 11:00 are given in the appendix 3.1 to appendix 3.4. Table 4.8 shows a
summary of the back of queue study for the analysis peak hour.
Table 4.8: Summary of back of queue survey during the AM Peak hour
th
95 Standard Standard 95%
No. of Mean
deviation of error of the Confidence Limit
Approach Lane Speed BoQ percentile
BoQ samples mean of the mean
Samples
veh. veh. veh. veh. veh.
Gausala Leg
33 20 45 13 2 ±4
(shared lane-TR)
Maitidevi Leg
19 9 18 6 1 ±2
(Shared lane-TR)
Sinamangal Leg
30 15 30 8 1 ±2
(Shared lane-LTR)
New Baneshwor Leg
14 7 15 6 2 ±4
(Shared lane-TR)
4.12 Phasing and Signal timing
Observed phase timesas assigned by the traffic police in various cycles during the AM
peak hour (10:00 – 11:00) at the intersection based on observation of video footage is
given in appendix 5.1 and appendix 5.2. There were basically two phases assigned by the
traffic police in each cycle. Fixed time signal control was assumed for analysis. Figure
4.14 shows the phasing plan assigned by the traffic police. Table 4.9 shows the summary
of traffic police assigned phase time observation. Table 4.10 shows mean phase time and
green time for each phase for the observed cycles.SIDRA Default values of Yellow time
and All-red time was adopted. The average cycle time was found out to be 179 sec.
50
Figure 4.14: Phasing Plan assigned by Traffic Police in existing condition
Table 4.9: Summary traffic police assigned phase time observations

Standard 95%
Mean Standard error
Phase Observation No. of deviation Confidence Limit
Phase time of the mean
Designation Hour samples of samples of the mean
sec sec sec sec
Phase-A 10:00 - 11:00 39 110 48 8 ± 16
Phase-B 10:00 - 11:00 36 69 26 4 ±9

Mean Cycle Time = 179 sec (sum of all the mean phase times)
Table 4.10: Phase Timing Results based on observation of Traffic Police Control
4.13 Calibration of Basic Saturation Flow
Local calibration of the default basic saturation flow (tcu/h) was performed by comparing
the field measured saturation flow (veh/h) with the saturation flow (veh/h) estimated by
51
the developed SIDRA model of the intersection. GEH statistic was used as an acceptance
criterion during calibration. SIDRA model was rerun until the GEH statistic was less than
5 during each run. Table 4.11 shows the final results of the local calibration of default
basic saturation flows for various lanes.
Table 4.11: Comparison of Field measured and Model estimated Saturation Flows with
GEH statistics
Field measured Model Estimated adjusted basic
Lane Lane GEH
Approach Name Saturation Flow Saturation Flow Saturation Flow
No. discipline Statistic
(veh/h) (veh/h) (tcu/h)
1 L 935 959 0.78 1,800
New Baneshwor Leg
2 TR 1,309 1,296 0.36 1,651
Sinamangal Leg 1 LTR 1,715 1,669 1.12 3,116
1 L 1,114 1,163 1.45 1,656
Gausala Leg
2 TR 1,395 1,346 1.32 1,983
1 L 1,150 1,150 0.00 1,534
Maitidevi Leg
2 TR 1,278 1,252 0.73 1,317
L: Exclusive Left turn, TR: Shared through & right turn, LTR: Shared left turn, through, & right turn
4.14 Validation of base case model
The validation of the base case model of the existing intersection was carried out by using
95th percentile back of queue (BoQ) and Degree of Saturation (DoS).
Table 4.12: Comparison of observed and model estimated 95th percentile back of queue
th
95 Percentile BoQ
Approach Lane Observed Model estimated
(veh) (veh)
New Baneshwor Leg (Shared lane-TR) 15 26.2
Sinamangal Leg (Shared lane-LTR) 30 85
Gausala Leg (shared lane-TR) 45 76.1
Maitidevi Leg (Shared lane-TR) 18 32.5
The SIDRA estimated back of queue equals the queue at the end of red plus the vehicles
moving or in queue at a given time during the green interval.But, the vehicles arriving and
moving at the back of queuewithout coming to a complete stop during the green time were
not observed during field survey. That is why the observed 95th percentile BOQ’s are
considerably less than those estimated by the SIDRA model.
However, when the degree of saturation (DoS)in three approach lanes and for the overall
intersection were used for validation as shown in table 4.13, a good match was obtained
between the observed and the model estimated DoS as indicated by the RMSNE measure.
Based on the fact that the observed departure volume equals the capacity during
oversaturated conditions (demand volume > departure volume), the observed departure
volumesof Sinamangal, Gausala, Maitidevi legs, and overall intersection, whichhad
observed departure volumemore thanobserved demand volume,were taken as the observed
capacity for calculation of observed DoS.
52
Table 4.13: Comparison of observed and model estimated degree of saturation (DoS) for
the AM peak hour.
Observed Observed RMSNE
Observed Model
Approach Lane Lane demand departure for all
DoS estimated
Name no. discipline (arrival) vol vol obs. & est.
(v/c ratio) DoS
(veh/h) (veh/h) data sets
Sinamangal Leg 1 Shared LTR 649 600 1.082 1.160
Gausala Leg 2 Shared TR 680 646 1.053 1.004
0.116
Maitidevi Leg 2 Shared TR 266 252 1.055 1.088
Intersection (Total) 2461 2314 1.063 1.160
4.15 Evaluation of Operational Performance of the Intersection at present under

traffic police control
The present model of the intersection for the AM peak hour was developed with adequate
calibration of all the relevant geometric parameters, traffic flow, saturation flow, and
traffic police assigned phase sequence and phase green times, and other relevant traffic
characteristics based on the collected data. The model was then processed in SIDRA
Intersection to determine the various operational performance statistics. Table 4.14 shows
the results of operational performance measures foreach lane of the intersection under
police control at present.
Table 4.14: Summary ofoperational performance of the intersection at present under traffic
police control.
Performance
th
Average 95
Demand
Index
Approach Lane Lane HV Capacity Delay percentile
flow DoS LOS
Name ID use per veh BoQ
veh/h % veh/h (sec) (veh)
New Baneshwor 1 L 78 1.4 747 0.104 8.8 0.8 A
Leg 2 TR 432 2.0 688 0.628 39.3 26.2 D
Sinamangal Leg 1 LTR 649 0.5 559 1.160 169.9 85 F
1 L 195 1.1 1013 0.192 8.4 1.2 A
Gausal Leg
2 TR 680 1.9 677 1.004 101.5 76.1 F
1 L 162 0.0 1040 0.156 10.1 1 B
Maitidevi Leg
2 TR 266 1.2 245 1.088 156.8 32.5 F
Intersection 2462 1.3 2123 1.160 98.3 85 F 258.4
Figure 4.15 shows the lane configuration with LOS for various lanes at present during the
peak hour.
The total intersection demand flow rate is 2462 veh/h with average 1.3% heavy vehicles.
The overall degree of saturation of the intersection is 1.16, which suggest that the
53
intersection is operating in oversaturated condition in overall at present under traffic police
control. Average delay per vehicle in the intersection is 98.3 sec.
Shared approach lanes of Sinamangal leg, Gausala leg, and Maitidevi leg are all
oversatruated during the peak hour with demand flow more than capcity in these lanes.
Vehcles in all these three lanes experience LoS F and have high delay. The average
control delay in approach lane of Sinamangal leg is the highest with 169.9 sec among
these three lanes. Shared lane in New Baneshwor leg operates at LoS D. All exclusive left
turn lanes operate under LoS B or better. 95 percentile back of queue is higest in
Sinamangal approach lane with 85 veh (320.6 m) and 32.5 veh (123.6 m) in Maitidevi leg.
Figure 4.15: Lane Configuration and LoS of various lanes of the intersection under police
control at present in the AM Peak hour
Figure 4.16 shows the performance measures for the various movements and lanes of the
intersection at present.
54
Demand flow (veh/h), HV%, Pedestrian flows Capacity (veh/h)
Degree of Saturation Average Delay per vehicle & pedestrian delay (sec)
95 percentile BoQ (veh) LOS

Figure 4.16: Peak hour flow, Capacity, Degree of saturation, average control delay, 95
percentile back of queue, and LoS at the present condition under police control
55
4.16 Evaluation ofvarious Lane Configuration Optionswith signalization of the
Intersection for the base year 2018
The intersection at present condition with the existing lane configuration and traffic police
control suffers from poor performance with lower capacity, oversaturation, higher delay,
long queues, and very poor LOS, especially in the shared lanes of Sinamangal, Gausala,
and Maitidevi legs. Therefore, six options with threedifferent lane configurationsand
traffic signalization of the intersection without any geometric improvement except
rearrangement of lane discipline and adjustment of lane widths were proposed for analysis.
Lane configuration A:
Figure 4.17 shows the lane configuration A with proposed lane disciplines and lane widths
of various approach and exit lanes. Two approach lanes, one with exclusive left turn, the
other with shared through and right turns, and single exit lane of 3.5 m have been
proposed in the Sinamangal.Lane assignments in other legs are the same as in the present
condition. No geometric improvement other than rearrangement of lane widths and lane
discipline has been done.
Figure 4.17: Lane Configuration A
56
Lane configuration B:
Figure 4.18 shows the lane configuration B with proposed lane disciplines and lane widths
of various approach and exit lanes. Features of this configuration are: two approach lanes
in Sinamangal leg, one with exclusive right turn, the other with shared left turnand
through, and a single exit lane of 3.25m width;three approach lanes in Gausala leg, one
exclusive right turn, one exclusive through, and one exclusive left turn lanes, and a single
exit lane of 3.5m width.Lane assignments in other legs are the same as in the present
condition except an adjustment of lane widths.
Figure 4.18: Lane Configuration B
Lane configuration C:
Figure 4.19 shows the lane configuration C with proposed lane disciplines and lane widths
of various approach and exit lanes. Features of this configuration are: Two approach lanes
in Sinamangal leg, one withan exclusive left turn and the other with shared right turn and
through and a single exit lane of 3.25 m width;three approach lanes in Gausala leg, one
exclusive right turn, one exclusive through, and one exclusive left turn with single exit
lane of 3.50 m width. All approacheshave exclusive left turns in this configuration. No
geometric improvement other than rearrangement of lane widths and lane discipline has
been done.
57
Figure 4.19: Lane Configuration C
The following six different options of combination of lane configuration and signal
phasing plan were developed for analysis:
Option A1: Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan, Default basic saturation flow
used
Option A2: Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan, Local calibration of default basic
saturation flow performed
Option B1: Lane configuration B,Onlyprotected right turns from Sinamangal and Gausala
legs, 4 signal phasing plan
Option B2: Lane configuration B,Protected and permitted right turns from Sinamangal and
Gausala legs,Exclusive left turns allowed in all phases, 3 signal phasing plan
Option C1: Lane configuration C,Protected and permitted right turns from Sinamangal and
Gausala legs,Exclusive left turns allowed in all phases, 3signal phasing plan
Option C2: Lane configuration C, Protected and permitted right turns from Sinamangal
and Gausala legs,Exclusive left turns allowed in all phases,2signal phasing
plan
58
4.16.1 Evaluation of Option A1 (Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan, Default
basic saturation flow used)
Signal – Fixed Time

Cycle Time = 75 sec
(Optimum Cycle Time –
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.20: Phasing Summary for Option A1
Table 4.15: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option A1
59
Figure 4.21: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option A1
60
4.16.2 Evaluation of Option A2 (Lane configuration A, 2 signal phasing plan, Local
calibration of default basic saturation flow performed)

Cycle Time = 75 sec
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.22: Phasing summary of Option A2
Table 4.16: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option A2

61

Figure 4.23: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option A2
62
4.16.3 Evaluation of Option B1 (Lane configuration B, Protected right turns from
Sinamangal and Gausala legs, 4 signal phasing plan)

Cycle Time = 120 sec
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.24: Phasing Summary of Option B1

Table 4.17: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option B1
63
Figure 4.25: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option B1
64
4.16.4 Evaluation of Option B2 (Lane configuration B, Protected and permitted right
turns from Sinamangal and Gausala legs, Exclusive left turns allowed in all
phases, 3 signal phasing plan)

Cycle Time = 65 sec
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.26: Phasing Summary of Option B2
Table 4.18: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option B2
65
Figure 4.27: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option B2
66
4.16.5 Evaluation of Option C1 (Lane configuration C, Protected and permitted
right turns from Sinamangal and Gausala legs, Exclusive left turns allowed in
all phases, 3 signal phasing plan)

Cycle Time = 70 sec
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.28: Phasing Summary of Option C1
Table 4.19: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option C1
67
Figure 4.29: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C1
68
4.16.6 Evaluation of Option C2 (Lane configuration C, Protected and permitted
right turns from Sinamangal and Gausala legs, Exclusive left turns allowed in
all phases,2 signal phasing plan)

Cycle Time = 60 sec
Minimum Delay)
Figure 4.30: Phasing Summary of Option C2
Table 4.20: Summary of performance of the intersection for Option C2
69
Figure 4.31: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C2
70
4.16.7 Comparison of Various Options
Table 4.21: Comparison of Overall Performance Measures of the Intersection for various
options(For the base year 2018)
Base Case
Description of Performance Measures Option Option Option Option Option Option
with Police
(PM) A1 A2 B1 B2 C1 C2
control
Total Itersection Demand Flows (veh/h) 2462 2462 2462 2462 2462 2462 2462
Percent of Heavy Vehicles 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3%
Cycle Time (sec) 179 75 75 120 65 70 60
Effective Intersection Capacity (veh/h) 2123 1852 1700 2194 2450 2768 2649
Degree of Saturation (DOS) 1.16 1.330 1.449 1.122 1.005 0.889 0.929
Control delay per vehicle (Average) (sec) 98.3 102.3 127.6 88.1 47.5 34.8 32.6
Control delay per vehicle (Worst lane) (sec) 169.9 201.4 260.2 139.2 69.9 46.5 44.2
th
95 percentile Back of Queue - Vehicles
85 64.5 74.8 46.5 25.5 18.6 19.4
(worst lane)
th
95 percentile Back of Queue - Distance, m
320.6 246.9 286.4 175.1 96.1 70.7 73
(worst lane)
Intersection LOS for Vehicles (Overall) F F F F D C C
Worst Lane LOS for Vehicles F F F F F D D
Pedestrian LOS at the intersection D B B C B B B
Overall Performance Index (PI) 258.4 207.8 235.7 221.4 142.6 123.3 116.5
Performance index, being a measure that combines several other performance statistics,
was used as a basis for choosing between various options (the best option is the one which
gives the smallest value of PI). So, option C2 having the smallest PI of 116.5 is considered
as the best performing option for the base year 2018.
4.18 Evaluation of Option C2 for the future year 2023 (5 yearsdesign life)
The evaluation of various lane configuration options with traffic signalization showed that
option C2 performed the best for the base year 2018 with an overall intersection LOS C
and none of the lanes operating below LOS D. Then, option C2 was further analysed to
check whether the intersection performs with an acceptable LOS for the design life of 5
years up to the year 2023. A traffic growth for the future analysis was assumed to be at a
compound rate of 2 % per year. The evaluation results showed that the intersection in this
option in overall will perform with LOS E in future year 2023. However, the shared
through/right lanes in New Baneshwor, Sinamangal, and Maitidevi approaches, and the
right turn lane in the Gausala approach will perform at LOS F. The other remaining lanes
will perform at LOS D or better. The average control delay will be 72.4 sec/veh for the
intersection and 125.2 sec/veh for the worst lane. The overall degree of saturation for the
intersection will be 0.993. The summary of evaluation of the option C2 for the future year
2023 (5 years design period) is shown in Table 4.22. Figure 4.32 shows the summary of
the signal phasing applied. Figure 4.33 shows the summary of LOS for the future year
2023.
71
Cycle Time = 180 sec
(Practical Cycle Time)
Figure 4.32: Phasing Summary of Option C2 for the year 2023
Table 4.22: Summary of performance evaluation of Option C2 (Year 2023)
72
Figure 4.33: Lane Configuration and LOS summary of Option C2 (Year 2023)
4.19 Geometric Improvement Proposed for the Intersection
As the evaluation of optimum lane configuration and phasing plan of option C2 at the end
of five years design life in the year 2023 showed that the intersection performs with an
unacceptable LOS F, a geometric improvement of the intersection was proposed with
improvement only in the corner kerbturning radii, since the intersection has very sharp
kerb turning radii (varying from 1.5m to 5.5m) at the corners at present and the North and
South legs are staggered by 18.0 m. So, the minimum corner kerb turning radii based on
minimum radius of 9 to 15m for trucks & busses on urban arterial streets as per the IRC
SP-41 (Guideline for the design of at-grade intersections in Rural & Urban areas) was
proposed in geometric improvement in order to increase the turning and negotiation radii
of the turning vehicle path.This should result in higher negotiation speeds and saturation
flows of vehicles with more efficient traffic operation at the intersection. Addition of
73
auxiliary lanes and increase in carriageway widthwere not proposed. The details of corner
kerb radiiare given in the table 4.23. The lane configuration and geometric improvement
proposed are shown in figure 4.34. As the North and South legs are staggered by 18.0 m,
the South-East, and North-West corners were proposed with a higher radii of 15.0 m than
other corners for an efficient traffic flow in the major North-South Road (Gausala – New
Baneshwor). Only four houses at the four corners will be affected by this improvement,
and have to be properly compensated for land acquisition for the proposed geometric
improvement.
Table 4.23: Details of the corner kerb radius

Description Existing radius (m) Proposed radius (m)
South-West corner kerb 1.50 10.0
North-Eat corner kerb 3.10 10.0
South-East corner kerb 3.50 15.0
North-West corner kerb 5.50 15.0
Figure 4.34: Lane configuration-C with improvement of corner kerb radii
74
4.20 Evaluation of Performance of the Intersection with Proposed Geometric
Improvement
In order to see if the intersection with the proposed geometric improvement with only the
corner kerb turning radii improvement will perform at an acceptable LOS, analysis was
performed for the base year 2018 and future years 2020, 2023, and 2028. A traffic growth
for the future analysis was assumed to be at a compound rate of 2 % per year.
4.20.1 Evaluation of proposed geometric improvement for the base year 2018
Gausala Leg
New Baneshwor Leg
Figure 4.35: LOS summary of geometric improvement for the base year 2018
Table 4.24: Evaluation results of geometric improvement for the base year 2018
75
4.20.2 Evaluation of proposed geometric improvement for the year 2020
Gausala Leg
New Baneshwor Leg
Figure 4.36: LOS summary of geometric improvement for the year 2020
Table 4.25: Evaluation results of geometric improvement for the year 2020
76
Gausala Leg
New Baneshwor Leg
77
Gausala Leg
New Baneshwor Leg

78
4.20.5 Summary of performance evaluation of the proposed geometric improvement
of the Intersection for various years
The intersection with the proposed geometric improvement with increase of only corner
kerb turning radii performs at LOS B in overall with LOS C in the worst lane in the
baseyear 2018. In 5 years (Year 2023), the intersection performs at LOS C in overall with
LOS C in the worst lane. In 10 years (Year 2028), the intersection with the proposed
geometric improvement performs at LOS C in overall with LOS D in the worst lane. Table
4.28 shows the summary of various performance measures for the intersection with the
proposed geometric improvement for the base year and various future years.
As per the design life analysis for worst lane level of service target of LOS C, the
intersection will perform with no lanes operating below LOS C for 7 years from the base
year, i.e. up to the year 2025. After 2025, some lanes will begin to operate at LOS D.The
intersection LOS will be C with some lanes performing at LOS D by the year 2028.
Table 4.28: Summary of performance evaluation of proposed geometric improvement of

the intersection for various years
2018
2020 2023 2028
Description of Performance Measures (PM) (Base
(2 yrs.) (5 yrs.) (10 yrs.)
yr.)
Intersection Total Demand Flows (veh/h) 2462 2562 2718 3001
Per cent Heavy Vehicles 1.3% 1.3% 1.3% 1.3%
Cycle Time determined by SIDRA (sec) 45 50 50 90
Effective Intersection Capacity (veh/h) 2941 3083 3073 3349
Intersection Degree of Saturation (DOS) 0.837 0.831 0.885 0.896
Control delay per vehicle (Average) (sec) 16.7 18.2 21.2 30.4
Control delay per vehicle (Worst lane) (sec) 21.6 24.2 28.8 43.4
95th percentile Back of Queue - Vehicles
(worst lane) 12.4 13.8 16.6 30.1
th
95 percentile Back of Queue - Distance, m
(worst lane) 46.8 52.3 62.7 113.4
Intersection LOS for Vehicles (Overall) B B C C
Worst Lane LOS for Vehicles C C C D
Pedestrian LOS at the intersection (Overall) B B B B
Overall Performance Index (PI) 89.4 97.4 110.2 155.4
79
Chapter 5
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Conclusion
This research was carried out to investigate the operational performance of the Old
Baneshwor intersection at the peak hour in the existing condition and to propose measures
of improvement to enhance the capacity and performance of the intersection to an
acceptable level of service.
Videography survey was conducted for 8:00 – 11:00 in the morning and 4:00 – 7:00 in the
evening for 3 typical days from Monday, May 7 to May 9, 2018 at the intersection and
upstream of the queues in each approach of the four legs of the intersection. Classified
counts of turning movements at the intersection were used to determine the vehicle
departure volumefrom the intersection per 15 minutes. Demand (vehicle arrival) volumeat
the intersection per 15 minute was also determined with classified counts at the upstream
of the intersection queues. The peak hour and peak hour factor were based on the total
vehicle departures in PCU from the intersection. The peak hour at this intersection was
found out to occur from 10:00 – 11:00 in AM with the peak hour factor of 0.98 based on
PCU. The total departure volume from all the approaches of the intersection was 5387
veh/h (2370 PCU/h) and the total demand (arrival) flow was 5545 veh/h (2419 PCU/h)
during the peak hour, which indicated that the intersection is oversaturated in overall at the
present geometric and traffic condition under traffic police control. The directional volume
study showed that North – South road, i.e. Gausala – New Baneshwor road has the major
traffic stream.
Surveys for cruise speed study, negotiation speed study, prevailing saturation flow study,
back of queue (queue length) study, phasing and signal timing assigned by traffic police
were conducted for the calibration and validation of the intersection base case model.
Local calibration of the default basic saturation flow was conducted and validation of the
base case model was done by using 95 percentile back of queue and degree of saturation
for the analysis of present condition of the intersection. In the validation using 95
percentile back of queue, considerable variations in the observed and model estimated
back of queues were due to not observing the vehicles arriving and moving at the back of
queueafter the go signal indication by traffic police during the queue field survey and
SIDRA estimated back of queue includes the queue at the end of red plus the vehicles
moving or in queue during the green interval. However, in the validation using degree of
saturation, a good match was obtained between the observed and the model estimated
degrees of saturation for the oversaturated lanes and the intersection as a whole. Thus the
base case model of the intersection was concluded to be valid.
SIDRA Intersection 5.1 was used for developing and analysing the base case and future
intersection models. The default basic saturation flow of 1800 tcu/h for environment class
2, i.e. average to poor (area type 2), as suggested in literatures was used for analysing
future models of intersection with improvements in lane configuration and geometry.It
was assumed in analysis that there was not be any parking or vehicle stopping within 75 m
from the stop linein the approach and exit lanes in each intersection leg. The performance
of the intersection wasstudied at the present condition with traffic police control without
any improvement and with various six options of combinations of lane configurations
80
andsignal phasing for traffic signalization of the intersection without geometric
improvement. Further, analysis of the intersection with geometric improvement in only the
corner kerb turning radii was performed for future year performance. The performance
measures for evaluation were capacity, degree of saturation (v/c ration), average delay,
LOS, back of queue (queue length), and overall performance index.
The overall performance level of the intersection at present condition with traffic police
control without any improvement was found to be at LOS F and oversaturated (DoS =
1.16) with PI = 258.4, average overall intersection delay of 98.3 sec/veh, and greatest
average delay varying from 101 sec/veh to 170 sec/veh in the shared lanes of Gausala,
Sinamangal, and Maitidevi approaches during the peak hour.
Fixed time signal method was used for traffic signalization and six options of
combinations of three lane configurations and various optimum signal phasing were
studied to find the operational performance of the intersection at present without any
geometric improvement.The analysis of these options showed that inadequate lane
assignments in the approaches of the Gausala and Sinamangal legs with higher traffic
demand and inefficient phasing of the traffic police during the peak hour were the main
causes of poor performance of the intersection at present with traffic police control.
Hence, it was concluded that improvement in lane configuration with rearrangement of
lane assignments and minor adjustment of lane widths within the existing carriageway and
optimum traffic signalization are necessary for improving the operational performance of
the intersection.
Among the six options A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, and C2 that were evaluated with signalization,
options A1, A2, and B1 did not have significant improvements in performance although
they are slightly better than base case with police control as indicated by the PI of 207.8,
235.7, and 221.4 respectively. But all these first three options performed at LOS F. There
were significant improvements in all the performance measures of the intersectionwith the
last three options B2, C1, and C2 with LOS D, LOS C, and LOS C respectively. Among
these last three options, option C2 had the least PI = 116.5 and least delay of 32.6/veh. The
capacity and degree of saturation for option C2 are 2649 veh/h and 0.929 respectively. The
worst lane in this option gets LOS D. Hence, it w concluded this option is best performing
in terms of all performance parameters for signalization at the base year. Further
evaluation of option C2 at end of the design life of 5 years in the year 2023 at a compound
traffic growth rate of 2 % per year revealed that the intersection with this option will
perform at an unacceptable LOS E in overall with four approach lanes at LOS F.
So, a geometric improvement in the option C2 was proposed by increasing the radii of the
existing very sharp corner kerbs to radii of 9 m to 15 m in order to increase the turning and
negotiation radii of the turning vehicle paths for more efficient traffic operation. Analysis
of this geometric improvement for various future years showed intersection performance is
enhanced to an acceptable LOS threshold of LOS C with the worst lane performing at
LOS D by the year 2028. Design life analysis for worst lane level of service target of LOS
C revealed that the intersection with the proposed geometric improvement in the Option
C2 will perform with no lanes operating below LOS C for 7 years up to 2025. After 2025,
some lanes will begin to get LOS D with overall intersection having LOS C up to the year
2028, which is an acceptable performance. So grade separation will not be required up to
year 2028 provided the traffic growth rate is maintained at 2 % per year, which can be
81
achieved by implementing walking, cycling and public transport favoured land use and
urban transport policies.
.
5.1 Recommendation
It is recommended to improve the intersection with rearrangement of lane assignments and

minor adjustment of lane widths as per the lane configuration C with installation of traffic
signalization for short term up to the year 2020. Then the proposed geometric
improvement by increasing the radii of the corner turning kerbs along with traffic
signalization is recommended to be implemented up to year 2028. Proper compensation of
affected four houses at the four corners and required land acquisition is proposed for the
geometric improvement for the efficient operation of the intersection.
Kerb Parking and stopping of public vehicles shall not be allowed within 75 – 100 m from
the stop line in the approach and exit lanes of each leg of the intersection for efficient
departures of the vehicles from the intersection, since proposed lane configuration has
single exit lanes.
5.3 Scope for Future Works
It is very difficult to cover all aspect of topic in a limited time period with limited
resources. The recommendations for further studies in similar topic are as follows:
• In areas where there are heavy volumes of motorcycles,this study can be done with
an alternative method of allowing for motorcycles as suggested in user guide of the
SIDRA Intersection 5.1 by adjusting the basic saturation flow and Light Vehicle
queue space parameters to allow for motorcycles. The motorcycle volumes can
then be specified as normal Light Vehicle (LV). Or, a new version of SIDRA
Intersection which allows inputting motorcycles as a separate class can be used to
perform this study and comparison be made.
• Similar types of study can be done by using traffic simulation tools such as
VISSIM, which is effective in evaluating the dynamic evolution of traffic
congestion problems on transportation systems and can model the variability in
driver/vehicle characteristics and the result compared with that of SIDRA
Intersection.
82
REFERENCES
Acharya, B., 2015. Development of Traffic diversion algorithm for the possible reduction
of Traffic demand at intersection: a case study of Thapathali intersection. MSc. Nepal
Engineering College-Centre for Postgraduate Studies (nec-CPS), Pokhara University.
Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012. SIDRA intersection 5.1 User Guide. [Online]
Greythorn, Australia: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd Available at:
https://sidrasolutions.com [Accessed 15 June 2017].
Anusha, C.S., Verma, A. & Kavitha, G., 2013. Effects of Two-Wheelers on Saturation
Flow at Signalized Intersections in Developing Countries. [Online] USA: American
Society of Civil Engineers Available at:
https://ascelibrary.org/doi/pdf/10.1061/%28ASCE%29TE.1943-5436.0000519 [Accessed
July 2017].
Bell, M.G.H., 1997. Signal Control at Intersections. In C.A. O'Flaherty, ed. Transport
Planning and Traffic Engineering. New Delhi: Reed Elsevier India Private Limited. Ch.
26.
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., 2010. Polson Area Transportation Plan. Existing
Intersection Level of Service. Helena, Montana: Montana Department of Transportation.
Chand, S., Gupta, N.J. & Kumar, N., n.d. Analysis of Saturation Flow at Signalized
Intersections in Urban Area. (Abstract Number: 239), pp.1-10.
DoR, 2013. Nepal Road Standard 2070. [Online] Kathmandu, Nepal: Department of
Roads (DoR) Available at: http://dor.gov.np/home/publication/general-documents/nepal-
road-standard-2-7 [Accessed 1 August 2017].
DPTI, 2017. Traffic Modelling Guidelines - SIDRA INTERSECTION 7. Australia:

Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure (DPTI), Government of South
Australia.
Ekman, A.K., 2013. Calibration of traffic models in SIDRA, [online]. Available at:
http://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:633004/FULLTEXT01.pdf [Accessed 3 March
2018].
Kadiyali, L.R., 2012. Capacity of Urban Streets. In Kadiyali, L.R. Traffic Engineering and
Transport Planning. 7th ed. New Delhi, India: Khanna Publishers. p.531.
Mathew, T.V., 2017. Uncontrolled Intersection. [Online] Bombay: Indian Institute of

Technology (IIT) Available at: https://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/tvm/nptel/tselnp51.pdf
[Accessed 15 February 2018].
Meyer, M.D. et al., 1989. A Toolbox for Alleviating Traffic Congestion. Washington , DC:
Institute of Transportation Engineers.
83
O'Flaherty, C.A., 1997. Intersection design and capacity. In C.A. O'Flaherty, ed. Transport
Planning and Traffic Engineering. New Delhi: Reed Elsevier India Private Limited. Ch.
20.
Quadratullah & Maruyama, T., 2015. Comparison of Intersection Capacity with Traffic
Flow in Kabul Metropolitan Area: 2008, 2014 and 2025. International Journal of
Architecture, Planning and Building Engineering, [online] 02(02), pp.37-41. Available at:
http://basharesearch.com/IJAPBE/7020202.pdf [Accessed 15 July 2017].
Sharma, A.K., 2016. Comparison of Probable Congestion Reduction Approaches at New

Baneshwar Intersection in Kathmandu. MSc. nec-CPS, Pokhara University.
SMEC International Pty, Ltd. Australia In Association with Brisbane City Enterprise Pty.,
Australia Transportation Planning (International) Ltd., UK, GEOCE Consultants (P) Ltd.,
Nepal, 2014. Traffic Management Working Paper 2: Traffic Analysis. Volume 1: Main
Text. Detailed Project Report. Kathmandu: GoN, MoPIT, Project Management and
Coordination Office.
Soil Test-AVIYAAN Consulting (P) Ltd. JV, 2011. Detailed Traffic Study, Engineering
Survey, Soil Exploration, Design, Drawing and Preparation of Tender Documents for
Grade Separated Intersection. Basic Configuration Design Report. Vol I: Main Report.
Detailed Project Report. Kathmandu: GoN/DoR.
Tiwari, G. et al., 2011. Modification of Highway Capacity Manual Model for Evaluation
of Capacity and Level of Service at a Signalized Intersection in India. Journal of Eastern
Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 9, pp.1-14.
TRB, 2000. Signalized Intersection. In TRB HCM2000 Highway Capacity Manual.

Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board (TRB). Ch. 16.
TRB, 2010. Signalized Intersection. In TRB HCM2010 Highway Capacity Manual.

Washington DC, USA: Transportation Research Board (TRB). Ch. 18.
TRB, 2010. Signalized Intersections: Supplemental. In TRB HCM2010 Highway Capacity

Manual. Washington DC: TRB. Ch. 31.
TRB, 2010. Traffic Flow and Capacity Concepts. In TRB HCM2010 Highway Capacity
Manual. Washington DC, USA: TRB. Ch. 4.
TRL, 1993. Overseas Road Note 11, Urban Road Traffic Surveys. Crowthorne, Berkshire,
United Kingdom: Transport Research Laboratory (TRL).
WIKIPEDIA, n.d. GEH statistic. [Online] Available at:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GEH_statistic [Accessed 14 June 2018].
84
APPENDICES
85
Appendix-1.1: Fifteen Minute Classified Counts of Turning movements in the AM Peak
Hour (Average of 3 days)
Movmnt. Turn Vehicle 10:00 - 10:15 - 10:30 - 10:45 - Total % Vol. wrt
From To
ID Desig. Category 10:15 10:30 10:45 11:00 (veh) Tot. Int. Vol.
HV 0 0 1 0 1
Maitidevi D1 L LV 10 7 5 9 31
MC/Cycle 42 46 35 41 164
Total for movement : 52 53 40 50 196 3.6%
HV 2 3 1 1 8
New
Gausala D2 T LV 43 56 54 50 203
Baneshwor
Leg MC/Cycle 182 156 186 168 692
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Sinamangal D3 R LV 2 1 2 3 8
MC/Cycle 11 12 12 15 50
Total for Leg: 293 281 294 288 1157 21.5%
HV 0 0 1 0 1
New
D4 R LV 1 3 1 2 7
Baneshwor
MC/Cycle 14 16 13 9 53
HV 1 0 1 0 2
Maitidevi Sinamangal D5 T LV 31 35 40 30 136
Leg MC/Cycle 92 93 97 90 372
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Gausala D6 L LV 23 23 27 28 102
MC/Cycle 52 50 53 53 207
Total for Leg: 214 220 233 213 880 16.3%
HV 0 0 0 0 1
Maitidevi D7 R LV 27 30 32 39 128
MC/Cycle 56 44 81 86 266
HV 3 1 3 3 11
New
Gausala D8 T LV 64 60 55 62 241
Baneshwor
Leg MC/Cycle 222 199 197 175 793
Total for movement : 289 261 255 240 1,045 19.4%
HV 1 0 1 0 2
Sinamangal D9 L LV 17 21 18 19 75
MC/Cycle 111 110 111 101 432
Total for Leg: 501 465 497 485 1949 36.2%
HV 0 0 0 0 1
Gausala D10 R LV 15 6 13 15 49
MC/Cycle 43 43 37 40 163
HV 0 0 0 1 1
Sinamangal Maitidevi D11 T LV 50 60 52 53 216
Leg MC/Cycle 137 146 135 144 562
HV 0 0 0 1 1
New
D12 L LV 16 14 17 17 64
Baneshwor
MC/Cycle 79 81 98 89 347
Total for Leg: 340 351 353 360 1404 26.0%
Total for the Intersection: 1,348 1,317 1,376 1,346 5,390 100.0%
86
Appendix-1.2: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements (Average of three days)
Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements

Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection
Average of Three Days
Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning Movements

From: New Baneshwor Leg (South) From: Maitidevi Leg (West) From: Gausala Leg (North) From: Sinamangal Leg (East)
for the Intersection

To: Maitidevi To: Gausala To: Sinamangal To: New Baneshwor To: Sinamangal To: Gausala To: Maitidevi To: New Baneshwor To: Sinamangal To: Gausala To: Maitidevi To: New Baneshwor
Time (West) (North) (East) (South) (East) (North) (West) (South) (East) (North) (West) (South)
Total
(veh)
Interval Left Turn Through Right Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn ThroughLeft Turn Total
Total Total Total
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 (veh)
MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total
HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV Total HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV
Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh)
8:00 - 8:15 2 10 14 26 5 52 84 141 1 3 18 22 189 0 1 6 8 0 23 60 84 3 19 24 46 137 2 28 33 63 2 37 68 108 1 10 39 50 221 1 13 20 34 1 38 79 118 1 13 58 71 224 771
8:15 - 8:30 2 7 10 18 3 55 106 164 0 5 19 24 207 0 3 7 10 1 29 76 106 1 27 24 51 167 0 25 35 60 6 47 85 137 0 17 55 72 269 1 13 31 45 3 50 72 124 4 11 61 76 245 888
8:30 - 8:45 0 4 26 30 5 59 123 186 0 5 13 17 234 1 2 8 11 2 31 58 91 0 20 26 46 148 2 27 47 76 5 37 102 144 1 12 61 73 293 1 18 29 48 2 43 78 122 3 20 63 86 256 931
8:45 - 9:00 0 3 29 32 2 69 140 211 0 2 14 16 259 0 2 10 12 0 33 77 110 0 20 38 57 179 2 23 58 83 2 60 147 209 1 15 57 73 366 0 10 38 48 0 56 107 163 1 21 78 99 310 1,114
9:00 - 9:15 0 4 30 34 2 65 161 229 0 2 6 8 271 0 1 9 10 1 28 56 85 0 20 30 49 144 1 22 51 74 4 42 153 200 1 17 71 89 363 1 10 36 47 1 34 139 174 1 17 78 96 316 1,095
9:15 - 9:30 0 7 28 35 2 53 148 203 0 2 18 20 258 0 1 9 10 1 34 78 114 0 21 34 55 179 1 27 47 75 6 57 181 244 1 19 85 106 424 1 16 37 53 0 51 163 214 1 21 88 110 377 1,238
9:30 - 9:45 0 5 36 41 2 52 147 201 1 1 14 15 257 0 2 14 16 1 31 101 133 1 25 40 66 215 1 27 46 74 1 58 199 258 1 20 77 98 430 0 15 34 49 0 58 155 213 0 16 116 132 393 1,294
9:45 - 10:00 0 7 49 56 1 55 172 228 0 2 16 19 302 0 1 14 15 0 31 106 137 0 23 37 60 212 0 28 41 69 2 53 209 264 0 19 91 110 443 0 15 39 54 0 58 170 229 0 19 94 113 396 1,353
10:00 - 10:15 0 10 42 52 2 43 182 228 0 2 11 13 293 0 1 14 15 1 31 92 124 0 23 52 74 214 0 27 56 83 3 64 222 289 1 17 111 129 501 0 15 43 58 0 50 137 187 0 16 79 94 340 1,348
10:15 - 10:30 0 7 46 53 3 56 156 215 0 1 12 13 281 0 3 16 19 0 35 93 128 0 23 50 73 220 0 30 44 74 1 60 199 261 0 21 110 130 465 0 6 43 49 0 60 146 207 0 14 81 95 351 1,317
10:30 - 10:45 1 5 35 40 1 54 186 240 0 2 12 14 294 1 1 13 15 1 40 97 138 0 27 53 80 233 0 32 81 113 3 55 197 255 1 18 111 129 497 0 13 37 50 0 52 135 187 0 17 98 115 353 1,376
10:45 - 11:00 0 9 41 50 1 50 168 219 0 3 15 18 288 0 2 9 11 0 30 90 120 0 28 53 82 213 0 39 86 125 3 62 175 240 0 19 101 120 485 0 15 40 55 1 53 144 198 1 17 89 107 360 1,346
AM Total: 5 78 385 468 30 663 1,773 2,466 2 29 168 199 3,133 3 18 131 152 8 377 984 1,369 6 275 459 740 2,260 9 335 623 968 40 631 1,937 2,608 9 205 967 1,180 4,756 5 159 426 590 9 603 1,525 2,136 11 202 982 1,195 3,922 14,072
16:00 - 16:15 2 4 40 45 4 49 178 231 0 5 16 22 298 1 5 21 26 2 30 101 133 2 24 40 66 226 0 25 38 62 5 43 109 157 3 23 89 115 335 1 13 30 45 1 46 97 144 2 15 85 101 290 1,149
16:15 - 16:30 1 10 38 49 4 73 184 261 2 5 17 24 334 0 3 20 23 3 39 101 143 1 21 37 59 225 0 26 35 61 3 52 132 187 4 19 90 114 361 3 13 27 42 2 46 113 161 1 16 66 83 287 1,207
16:30 - 16:45 0 8 43 51 1 58 164 223 1 6 23 30 304 0 3 25 29 1 37 104 142 3 22 31 55 226 0 23 44 68 3 53 136 191 1 19 78 98 357 2 12 31 45 2 50 126 178 2 20 72 94 317 1,204
16:45 - 17:00 0 9 42 52 2 68 184 255 1 7 21 29 335 0 1 22 23 1 33 109 143 0 23 44 67 233 1 21 48 70 3 58 145 206 2 21 105 128 404 1 21 27 49 2 46 111 159 0 11 79 90 298 1,270
17:00 - 17:15 1 14 39 53 3 65 191 259 1 5 24 29 341 0 4 30 34 1 31 119 151 0 22 48 70 255 0 23 40 63 3 50 146 198 0 21 99 120 381 2 15 29 46 0 49 113 162 2 17 74 92 300 1,277
17:15 - 17:30 0 10 45 55 2 61 212 275 0 6 18 23 353 0 3 25 28 0 33 132 165 0 14 60 74 268 1 25 38 64 2 51 169 222 1 31 129 160 447 0 12 35 47 0 44 130 174 0 17 84 101 322 1,390
17:30 - 17:45 1 5 41 47 1 64 206 271 0 5 19 24 342 0 3 23 26 0 34 150 184 0 20 39 60 270 0 20 36 56 5 46 161 212 1 24 114 140 407 0 13 40 53 1 58 127 186 0 16 69 85 324 1,343
17:45 - 18:00 0 10 49 59 6 139 166 310 0 2 19 21 390 0 4 27 31 0 31 136 168 0 16 64 80 279 0 27 42 69 3 51 149 202 0 24 124 148 419 0 16 32 48 0 48 127 175 0 14 65 80 303 1,392
18:00 - 18:15 1 9 51 61 6 137 154 297 0 4 26 30 388 0 5 26 31 1 30 148 179 0 22 49 71 282 0 22 30 52 2 57 145 203 0 20 119 140 394 0 11 32 43 1 48 116 165 0 15 74 89 297 1,361
18:15 - 18:30 0 9 54 63 7 125 131 262 0 7 27 34 359 0 7 25 32 1 33 159 192 1 16 52 69 293 1 18 43 62 2 45 143 189 0 18 120 139 390 0 9 32 41 1 36 102 139 0 17 73 90 270 1,313
18:30 - 18:45 0 13 48 61 6 143 138 288 0 5 26 31 379 0 6 20 26 0 43 163 206 0 15 52 68 300 0 23 31 54 0 45 125 170 1 21 117 139 363 0 15 36 51 1 47 74 122 0 19 59 78 251 1,293
18:45 - 19:00 0 11 53 65 5 145 117 267 0 6 33 39 371 0 5 20 25 0 39 129 169 0 19 57 75 269 0 30 41 72 2 47 121 170 1 24 120 145 387 0 13 33 46 1 53 82 136 0 19 71 90 272 1,298
PM Total: 5 112 543 660 47 1,128 2,024 3,199 5 61 269 335 4,195 2 48 284 334 10 413 1,552 1,975 8 234 573 815 3,125 3 284 466 753 32 596 1,681 2,309 14 266 1,305 1,585 4,647 9 161 386 556 11 571 1,319 1,901 8 194 871 1,073 3,529 15,495
87
Appendix-1.3: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on Monday, May 7, 2018

Date: Monday, May 7, 2018


Total
Interval Left Turn Through Right Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Total
Total Total Total
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12 (veh)
MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total MC/ Total
HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV Total HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV HV LV
Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh) Cycle (veh)
8:00 - 8:15 2 8 9 19 3 45 84 132 2 0 17 19 170 0 1 7 8 0 23 47 70 3 18 13 34 112 1 24 21 46 2 26 54 82 1 12 40 53 181 1 10 27 38 0 33 72 105 1 13 34 48 191 654
8:15 - 8:30 2 7 11 20 3 52 97 152 0 8 24 32 204 0 3 4 7 1 27 67 95 1 27 20 48 150 0 27 36 63 5 42 46 93 1 20 50 71 227 1 11 21 33 5 35 73 113 4 14 52 70 216 797
8:30 - 8:45 0 4 21 25 4 44 110 158 0 11 19 30 213 1 1 6 8 1 35 70 106 0 17 22 39 153 1 28 45 74 6 51 82 139 0 14 89 103 316 0 22 27 49 0 36 66 102 3 20 64 87 238 920
8:45 - 9:00 0 6 30 36 1 61 132 194 0 1 17 18 248 0 3 10 13 0 27 86 113 0 23 35 58 184 0 34 42 76 1 49 99 149 1 16 59 76 301 0 11 43 54 0 50 101 151 1 21 74 96 301 1,034
9:00 - 9:15 0 3 29 32 3 53 158 214 0 1 1 2 248 0 1 9 10 1 38 46 85 0 20 23 43 138 3 27 48 78 3 51 177 231 2 20 88 110 419 1 11 40 52 0 0 187 187 1 10 53 64 303 1,108
9:15 - 9:30 0 6 24 30 3 57 142 202 0 0 20 20 252 0 0 16 16 1 37 83 121 0 17 20 37 174 0 37 45 82 2 46 215 263 1 14 74 89 434 1 18 41 60 0 28 138 166 0 20 62 82 308 1,168
9:30 - 9:45 0 6 32 38 1 52 146 199 1 2 15 18 255 0 1 13 14 1 30 105 136 0 24 37 61 211 1 25 51 77 0 57 211 268 0 15 55 70 415 0 14 25 39 0 53 109 162 1 22 63 86 287 1,168
9:45 - 10:00 0 4 45 49 1 43 174 218 0 0 19 19 286 0 0 12 12 0 37 102 139 0 27 35 62 213 0 27 51 78 4 61 241 306 0 12 95 107 491 0 14 29 43 1 42 133 176 0 12 71 83 302 1,292
10:00 - 10:15 0 10 33 43 3 39 172 214 0 1 12 13 270 0 0 13 13 1 33 91 125 0 20 47 67 205 0 28 69 97 3 57 277 337 1 12 123 136 570 1 12 42 55 0 36 122 158 0 8 88 96 309 1,354
10:15 - 10:30 0 12 32 44 4 57 167 228 0 0 9 9 281 0 2 18 20 0 27 82 109 0 22 48 70 199 0 32 58 90 2 59 231 292 0 21 131 152 534 0 5 45 50 0 53 145 198 0 15 91 106 354 1,368
10:30 - 10:45 0 7 33 40 3 49 173 225 0 3 8 11 276 0 1 11 12 1 39 98 138 0 24 34 58 208 0 33 67 100 3 35 178 216 2 23 111 136 452 0 11 46 57 1 46 124 171 0 17 65 82 310 1,246
10:45 - 11:00 0 6 41 47 1 35 162 198 0 2 7 9 254 0 1 13 14 0 36 86 122 0 28 43 71 207 0 44 66 110 6 72 180 258 0 20 119 139 507 0 7 41 48 1 38 167 206 0 18 81 99 353 1,321
AM Total: 4 79 340 423 30 587 1,717 2,334 3 29 168 200 2,957 1 14 132 147 7 389 963 1,359 4 267 377 648 2,154 6 366 599 971 37 606 1,991 2,634 9 199 1,034 1,242 4,847 5 146 427 578 8 450 1,437 1,895 11 190 798 999 3,472 13,430
16:00 - 16:15 1 4 33 38 6 42 145 193 0 4 21 25 256 2 7 19 28 0 26 107 133 3 24 36 63 224 0 22 50 72 7 55 112 174 6 29 98 133 379 1 9 20 30 0 24 105 129 3 10 67 80 239 1,098
16:15 - 16:30 1 11 40 52 1 69 126 196 4 2 16 22 270 0 2 12 14 1 33 106 140 0 21 36 57 211 0 18 40 58 3 47 110 160 3 17 90 110 328 2 20 29 51 4 54 107 165 1 19 51 71 287 1,096
16:30 - 16:45 0 6 36 42 1 63 138 202 0 7 20 27 271 0 2 21 23 1 36 105 142 2 21 36 59 224 0 18 38 56 1 52 102 155 1 17 87 105 316 3 16 29 48 2 52 114 168 1 23 67 91 307 1,118
16:45 - 17:00 0 8 33 41 2 64 165 231 1 9 18 28 300 0 0 11 11 1 31 112 144 1 23 45 69 224 0 13 48 61 3 57 124 184 2 20 104 126 371 1 20 33 54 1 49 97 147 1 15 90 106 307 1,202
17:00 - 17:15 0 9 28 37 3 58 184 245 1 1 20 22 304 0 5 19 24 1 24 133 158 0 22 26 48 230 0 16 34 50 2 46 108 156 0 18 97 115 321 3 17 31 51 1 55 117 173 2 21 68 91 315 1,170
17:15 - 17:30 0 10 32 42 1 55 236 292 0 9 12 21 355 0 1 27 28 0 36 134 170 0 11 56 67 265 2 25 27 54 3 42 136 181 0 35 168 203 438 0 12 29 41 0 61 118 179 0 20 77 97 317 1,375
17:30 - 17:45 0 5 38 43 0 58 198 256 0 3 6 9 308 0 4 38 42 0 24 117 141 0 13 39 52 235 0 15 37 52 5 43 135 183 1 26 125 152 387 0 18 43 61 1 73 141 215 0 15 66 81 357 1,287
17:45 - 18:00 1 12 45 58 3 67 258 328 0 1 9 10 396 0 8 39 47 0 28 111 139 0 25 57 82 268 0 20 47 67 4 43 139 186 0 24 153 177 430 0 14 30 44 0 59 130 189 1 19 62 82 315 1,409
18:00 - 18:15 1 9 45 55 1 64 266 331 0 0 5 5 391 0 9 36 45 0 23 154 177 0 24 57 81 303 0 24 34 58 1 48 94 143 0 19 136 155 356 0 11 29 40 0 56 75 131 0 17 59 76 247 1,297
18:15 - 18:30 0 9 41 50 2 49 206 257 0 3 25 28 335 0 12 32 44 1 36 135 172 0 13 44 57 273 1 18 35 54 3 43 137 183 1 21 137 159 396 0 6 25 31 0 31 70 101 0 17 42 59 191 1,195
18:30 - 18:45 0 8 46 54 2 64 207 273 0 2 21 23 350 0 13 32 45 0 54 156 210 1 14 61 76 331 0 12 29 41 1 31 72 104 0 19 113 132 277 0 20 23 43 2 57 44 103 0 16 42 58 204 1,162
18:45 - 19:00 0 9 32 41 0 68 156 224 0 0 9 9 274 0 12 23 35 0 38 82 120 0 18 55 73 228 0 22 27 49 2 51 72 125 2 34 161 197 371 0 12 15 27 2 66 61 129 0 12 31 43 199 1,072
PM Total: 4 100 449 553 22 721 2,285 3,028 6 41 182 229 3,810 2 75 309 386 5 389 1,452 1,846 7 229 548 784 3,016 3 223 446 672 35 558 1,341 1,934 16 279 1,469 1,764 4,370 10 175 336 521 13 637 1,179 1,829 9 204 722 935 3,285 14,481
88
Appendix-1.4: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on Tuesday, May 8, 2018

Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018


Total
Interval Left Turn Through Right Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn
Total Total Total Total
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12
MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/
HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total
Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle
8:00 - 8:15 2 5 14 21 6 63 92 161 0 1 11 12 194 1 2 4 7 0 25 71 96 4 18 30 52 155 2 40 62 104 1 44 101 146 2 11 41 54 304 1 16 8 25 2 49 100 151 0 16 91 107 283 936
8:15 - 8:30 2 8 10 20 3 53 132 188 0 3 17 20 228 0 2 10 12 2 23 74 99 1 23 25 49 160 1 21 51 73 6 55 139 200 0 19 52 71 344 1 11 36 48 2 64 83 149 3 7 81 91 288 1,020
8:30 - 8:45 1 3 27 31 6 83 142 231 0 2 8 10 272 1 4 12 17 2 27 46 75 0 23 32 55 147 1 27 65 93 9 39 102 150 0 9 41 50 293 1 17 31 49 2 52 80 134 3 19 74 96 279 991
8:45 - 9:00 0 2 28 30 4 88 168 260 0 1 12 13 303 0 1 8 9 1 36 68 105 0 17 46 63 177 2 15 103 120 5 73 161 239 1 17 66 84 443 0 13 39 52 0 69 115 184 1 26 89 116 352 1,275
9:00 - 9:15 0 7 34 41 3 83 172 258 0 3 4 7 306 0 1 12 13 0 22 57 79 0 28 38 66 158 1 15 54 70 10 67 128 205 1 19 68 88 363 1 9 37 47 1 56 98 155 0 15 97 112 314 1,141
9:15 - 9:30 1 9 21 31 1 51 177 229 0 3 13 16 276 0 0 8 8 1 31 80 112 0 27 38 65 185 3 16 54 73 3 67 179 249 1 20 94 115 437 1 18 40 59 1 68 185 254 1 20 127 148 461 1,359
9:30 - 9:45 0 4 31 35 2 58 150 210 0 0 9 9 254 0 1 15 16 1 32 86 119 1 24 47 72 207 1 27 36 64 2 63 198 263 2 23 99 124 451 0 14 35 49 1 65 185 251 0 15 184 199 499 1,411
9:45 - 10:00 0 8 50 58 1 63 205 269 0 0 8 8 335 0 1 17 18 0 27 110 137 0 18 35 53 208 0 27 31 58 0 55 168 223 0 23 104 127 408 0 12 46 58 0 74 221 295 0 25 134 159 512 1,463
10:00 - 10:15 0 11 41 52 3 39 209 251 0 1 3 4 307 0 2 15 17 1 25 107 133 0 20 52 72 222 0 18 34 52 5 74 180 259 0 16 118 134 445 0 14 41 55 0 60 157 217 0 16 77 93 365 1,339
10:15 - 10:30 0 6 35 41 4 57 186 247 0 1 5 6 294 0 5 13 18 1 41 112 154 0 24 41 65 237 0 26 22 48 2 64 172 238 0 22 100 122 408 0 8 39 47 1 80 195 276 0 13 85 98 421 1,360
10:30 - 10:45 2 6 27 35 0 66 232 298 0 1 7 8 341 1 0 12 13 1 49 96 146 0 28 57 85 244 1 33 110 144 5 69 196 270 0 17 116 133 547 0 12 37 49 0 40 135 175 0 16 148 164 388 1,520
10:45 - 11:00 0 8 38 46 3 61 189 253 0 2 18 20 319 1 1 6 8 0 30 99 129 0 33 66 99 236 0 40 115 155 3 50 144 197 1 16 85 102 454 0 21 40 61 1 66 144 211 2 20 125 147 419 1,428
AM Total: 8 77 356 441 36 765 2,054 2,855 0 18 115 133 3,429 4 20 132 156 10 368 1,006 1,384 6 283 507 796 2,336 12 305 737 1,054 51 720 1,868 2,639 8 212 984 1,204 4,897 5 165 429 599 11 743 1,698 2,452 10 208 1,312 1,530 4,581 15,243
16:00 - 16:15 1 4 42 47 5 55 267 327 1 4 18 23 397 0 2 15 17 4 33 98 135 2 22 52 76 228 0 33 30 63 4 36 122 162 1 21 81 103 328 2 18 34 54 2 59 109 170 3 20 126 149 373 1,326
16:15 - 16:30 1 8 28 37 9 77 240 326 2 5 22 29 392 0 1 12 13 5 39 101 145 1 26 36 63 221 1 34 32 67 2 45 127 174 5 20 85 110 351 3 7 26 36 1 41 115 157 1 18 90 109 302 1,266
16:30 - 16:45 0 12 43 55 2 61 222 285 1 3 23 27 367 0 2 12 14 0 37 96 133 4 26 22 52 199 0 28 48 76 5 49 119 173 1 23 76 100 349 2 11 34 47 2 48 132 182 2 25 95 122 351 1,266
16:45 - 17:00 1 8 54 63 2 74 218 294 1 3 23 27 384 1 0 9 10 2 33 92 127 0 26 42 68 205 1 24 55 80 4 60 126 190 3 22 107 132 402 0 17 24 41 3 39 102 144 0 7 82 89 274 1,265
17:00 - 17:15 1 11 47 59 2 75 200 277 0 4 21 25 361 0 3 21 24 2 35 113 150 0 25 56 81 255 1 30 46 77 2 46 128 176 0 25 107 132 385 1 11 30 42 0 54 125 179 1 13 83 97 318 1,319
17:15 - 17:30 0 8 53 61 1 66 208 275 0 5 17 22 358 0 1 16 17 0 32 133 165 0 12 55 67 249 0 17 41 58 2 52 94 148 1 33 117 151 357 0 14 39 53 0 37 145 182 1 10 96 107 342 1,306
17:30 - 17:45 1 6 33 40 3 82 248 333 0 4 20 24 397 0 1 11 12 0 36 163 199 0 25 39 64 275 0 24 38 62 4 50 122 176 2 22 125 149 387 0 10 40 50 1 64 131 196 0 20 75 95 341 1,400
17:45 - 18:00 0 9 51 60 12 291 4 307 0 2 26 28 395 0 2 8 10 1 36 145 182 0 11 78 89 281 0 33 46 79 3 46 113 162 0 21 113 134 375 0 13 27 40 0 38 133 171 0 8 79 87 298 1,349
18:00 - 18:15 0 9 38 47 15 295 13 323 0 0 36 36 406 0 1 11 12 1 31 138 170 1 16 54 71 253 0 30 24 54 4 60 147 211 0 24 119 143 408 0 6 34 40 0 46 151 197 0 13 86 99 336 1,403
18:15 - 18:30 0 6 38 44 16 277 5 298 0 7 23 30 372 0 2 25 27 1 36 186 223 1 14 68 83 333 0 13 48 61 1 27 105 133 0 20 111 131 325 0 8 26 34 2 44 143 189 0 20 109 129 352 1,382
18:30 - 18:45 0 24 33 57 17 313 5 335 0 4 11 15 407 0 2 12 14 1 39 169 209 0 16 56 72 295 0 32 26 58 0 59 114 173 1 28 144 173 404 0 9 43 52 0 39 88 127 0 25 81 106 285 1,391
18:45 - 19:00 0 14 40 54 14 300 10 324 0 2 41 43 421 0 0 16 16 0 43 174 217 0 26 83 109 342 0 30 63 93 2 29 130 161 0 19 107 126 380 0 14 28 42 0 45 99 144 0 28 115 143 329 1,472
PM Total: 5 119 500 624 98 1,966 1,640 3,704 5 43 281 329 4,657 1 17 168 186 17 430 1,608 2,055 9 245 641 895 3,136 3 328 497 828 33 559 1,447 2,039 14 278 1,292 1,584 4,451 8 138 385 531 11 554 1,473 2,038 8 207 1,117 1,332 3,901 16,145
89
Appendix-1.5: Fifteen Minute Intersection Counts of Turning movements on Wednesday, May 9, 2018

Date: Wednesday May 9, 2018


(West) (North) (East) (South) (East) (North) (West) (South) (East) (North) (West) (South)
Time
Total
Interval Left Turn Through Right Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn Right Turn Through Left Turn
Total Total Total Total
D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 D7 D8 D9 D10 D11 D12
MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/ MC/
HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total HV LV Total
Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle Cycle
8:00 - 8:15 2 18 18 38 7 47 75 129 0 9 26 35 202 0 1 7 8 1 22 62 85 3 20 28 51 144 2 21 16 39 4 41 50 95 1 8 35 44 178 1 14 25 40 1 32 66 99 1 10 48 59 198 722
8:15 - 8:30 2 5 8 15 3 60 90 153 0 4 17 21 189 0 3 8 11 1 36 87 124 1 30 26 57 192 0 26 17 43 6 43 69 118 0 12 63 75 236 1 17 35 53 2 50 59 111 5 13 49 67 231 848
8:30 - 8:45 0 6 29 35 4 50 116 170 0 1 11 12 217 1 2 5 8 2 31 58 91 0 20 24 44 143 3 25 32 60 1 20 122 143 2 13 52 67 270 1 16 30 47 3 40 87 130 4 20 51 75 252 882
8:45 - 9:00 0 1 29 30 2 57 120 179 0 3 14 17 226 0 1 12 13 0 35 77 112 0 19 32 51 176 4 21 29 54 1 58 181 240 2 12 45 59 353 0 5 32 37 0 49 106 155 0 16 70 86 278 1,033
9:00 - 9:15 0 2 28 30 0 60 154 214 1 1 14 16 260 0 0 6 6 2 25 65 92 0 11 28 39 137 0 24 51 75 0 9 154 163 1 12 57 70 308 1 10 30 41 1 46 132 179 1 27 83 111 331 1,036
9:15 - 9:30 0 5 39 44 2 52 125 179 1 2 20 23 246 0 2 3 5 1 35 72 108 1 19 44 64 177 0 28 42 70 13 58 148 219 2 23 88 113 402 0 12 29 41 0 56 166 222 1 23 76 100 363 1,188
9:30 - 9:45 0 5 45 50 3 46 144 193 1 0 17 18 261 0 3 15 18 1 31 112 144 1 26 37 64 226 0 30 50 80 1 54 189 244 0 23 76 99 423 1 16 41 58 0 55 170 225 0 11 100 111 394 1,304
9:45 - 10:00 0 10 51 61 0 59 137 196 0 7 22 29 286 0 1 14 15 0 30 105 135 0 23 41 64 214 0 29 41 70 2 43 219 264 0 23 73 96 430 0 19 41 60 0 59 157 216 1 19 78 98 374 1,304
10:00 - 10:15 0 10 51 61 1 52 166 219 0 5 18 23 303 0 2 14 16 0 36 79 115 0 28 56 84 215 0 36 64 100 1 62 208 271 1 24 91 116 487 0 18 47 65 0 55 131 186 0 23 71 94 345 1,350
10:15 - 10:30 0 4 70 74 1 55 115 171 0 2 21 23 268 0 2 18 20 0 37 84 121 0 24 60 84 225 0 33 51 84 0 57 195 252 0 19 98 117 453 1 6 44 51 0 47 99 146 0 15 66 81 278 1,224
10:30 - 10:45 0 1 45 46 0 46 152 198 0 2 20 22 266 2 1 17 20 0 32 97 129 0 30 67 97 246 0 29 65 94 1 60 218 279 0 13 105 118 491 0 17 28 45 0 71 145 216 0 18 81 99 360 1,363
10:45 - 11:00 0 12 45 57 0 53 154 207 0 5 21 26 290 0 3 9 12 0 24 84 108 1 24 51 76 196 1 33 76 110 1 63 200 264 0 21 99 120 494 0 17 39 56 0 55 122 177 0 13 62 75 308 1,288
AM Total: 4 79 458 541 23 637 1,548 2,208 3 41 221 265 3,014 3 21 128 152 8 374 982 1,364 7 274 494 775 2,291 10 335 534 879 31 568 1,953 2,552 9 203 882 1,094 4,525 6 167 421 594 7 615 1,440 2,062 13 208 835 1,056 3,712 13,542
16:00 - 16:15 3 4 44 51 2 51 121 174 0 7 10 17 242 0 5 28 33 2 31 99 132 2 25 33 60 225 0 19 33 52 5 38 93 136 2 20 88 110 298 1 12 37 50 0 54 78 132 0 14 61 75 257 1,022
16:15 - 16:30 1 10 47 58 3 72 186 261 1 7 12 20 339 1 6 36 43 3 44 97 144 1 16 40 57 244 0 26 32 58 5 63 158 226 5 20 96 121 405 3 12 25 40 1 42 118 161 2 10 58 70 271 1,259
16:30 - 16:45 0 6 51 57 0 50 131 181 1 7 27 35 273 0 6 43 49 2 37 112 151 3 18 34 55 255 1 24 47 72 2 57 187 246 2 17 70 89 407 1 8 31 40 3 49 132 184 3 11 54 68 292 1,227
16:45 - 17:00 0 11 40 51 2 67 170 239 1 9 21 31 321 0 2 46 48 0 36 122 158 0 19 45 64 270 1 26 41 68 3 58 184 245 0 22 104 126 439 1 25 25 51 1 51 134 186 0 11 65 76 313 1,343
17:00 - 17:15 1 21 41 63 3 62 189 254 1 9 31 41 358 0 3 51 54 0 33 111 144 0 20 61 81 279 0 22 40 62 4 57 202 263 1 19 92 112 437 2 17 26 45 0 37 96 133 2 16 71 89 267 1,341
17:15 - 17:30 0 12 49 61 4 63 192 259 0 3 24 27 347 0 7 32 39 0 31 130 161 1 20 68 89 289 0 34 47 81 0 60 278 338 1 24 102 127 546 0 9 37 46 0 34 127 161 0 21 79 100 307 1,489
17:30 - 17:45 1 5 53 59 0 53 172 225 0 7 31 38 322 0 5 19 24 1 42 169 212 1 22 40 63 299 0 20 34 54 5 44 227 276 0 25 93 118 448 0 11 38 49 0 36 110 146 0 12 66 78 273 1,342
17:45 - 18:00 0 9 51 60 2 58 235 295 0 3 22 25 380 0 3 34 37 0 30 153 183 0 13 56 69 289 0 28 33 61 1 64 194 259 0 28 105 133 453 0 20 40 60 1 48 117 166 0 15 55 70 296 1,418
18:00 - 18:15 1 9 70 80 2 53 183 238 0 13 37 50 368 1 5 31 37 1 37 152 190 0 25 37 62 289 0 12 31 43 0 62 193 255 0 18 103 121 419 0 15 34 49 2 42 122 166 0 15 77 92 307 1,383
18:15 - 18:30 0 12 82 94 2 48 181 231 0 11 33 44 369 0 6 18 24 0 27 155 182 1 22 45 68 274 1 24 46 71 1 64 187 252 0 14 113 127 450 0 13 46 59 1 34 93 128 0 14 67 81 268 1,361
18:30 - 18:45 0 7 64 71 0 53 203 256 0 8 46 54 381 0 3 17 20 0 35 163 198 0 16 39 55 273 0 26 37 63 0 45 189 234 1 16 94 111 408 0 15 42 57 0 45 91 136 0 15 55 70 263 1,325
18:45 - 19:00 0 11 88 99 1 67 185 253 0 16 49 65 417 0 2 21 23 0 37 132 169 0 12 32 44 236 0 39 34 73 3 60 162 225 0 18 93 111 409 0 12 57 69 0 49 87 136 0 16 67 83 288 1,350
PM Total: 7 117 680 804 21 697 2,148 2,866 4 100 343 447 4,117 2 53 376 431 9 420 1,595 2,024 9 228 530 767 3,222 3 300 455 758 29 672 2,254 2,955 12 241 1,153 1,406 5,119 8 169 438 615 9 521 1,305 1,835 7 170 775 952 3,402 15,860
90
Appendix-1.6: 15 minute Interval Intersection Total Demand (Arrival) Volume at the U/S
of intersection Queues
Intersection Demand Volume per 15 Minute Interval
May 7, 2018 May 8, 2018 May 9, 2018 Peak Hour
3 days Average
Time Interval Volume PHF
Monday Tuesday Wednesday
in PCU
7:30 - 7:45 731 424 701 399 738 426.0 723 416.4
7:45 - 8:00 738 411 774 449 761 447.0 758 435.4
8:00 - 8:15 760 425 829 437 802 463.3 797 441.7
8:15 - 8:30 945 517 967 522 940 521.5 951 520.2
8:30 - 8:45 1,046 525 1,074 550 1,015 538.8 1,045 537.7
8:45 - 9:00 1,215 555 1,200 563 1,042 499.3 1,152 538.9
9:00 - 9:15 1,200 579 1,215 574 1,181 552.3 1,199 568.3
9:15 - 9:30 1,332 584 1,338 602 1,323 608.3 1,331 598.3
9:30 - 9:45 1,368 585 1,615 693 1,414 620.0 1,466 632.6
9:45 - 10:00 1,412 596 1,590 674 1,547 641.8 1,516 637.3
10:00 - 10:15 1,397 579 1,663 679 1,508 643.5 1,523 633.9 2,503 0.98
10:15 - 10:30 1,280 566 1,482 628 1,388 604.8 1,383 599.7
10:30 - 10:45 1,288 588 1,349 617 1,269 562.3 1,302 588.9
10:45 - 11:00 1,219 541 1,482 659 1,309 590.8 1,337 596.9
11:00 - 11:15 1,401 638 1,365 639 1,459 671.8 1,408 649.3
11:15 - 11:30 1,210 564 1,328 601 1,239 579.8 1,259 581.3
AM Total: 18,542 8,675 19,972 9,285 18,935 8,971 19,150 8,977
15:30 - 15:45 1,187 606.0 1,161 587 1,174 618.8 1,174 603.8
15:45 - 16:00 1,263 581.5 1,178 571 1,177 567.5 1,206 573.3
16:00 - 16:15 1,209 602.0 1,178 589 1,214 645.0 1,200 612.1
16:15 - 16:30 1,128 548.3 1,221 595 1,200 569.3 1,183 570.7
16:30 - 16:45 1,189 552.0 1,207 584 1,235 581.5 1,210 572.4
16:45 - 17:00 1,262 599.5 1,173 558 1,259 574.5 1,231 577.3
17:00 - 17:15 1,337 579.5 1,395 618 1,350 601.3 1,361 599.7
17:15 - 17:30 1,293 554.0 1,343 564 1,332 569.5 1,323 562.6
17:30 - 17:45 1,471 639.8 1,321 596 1,388 603.8 1,393 613.0
17:45 - 18:00 1,434 629.0 1,355 593 1,372 599.5 1,387 607.2
18:00 - 18:15 1,348 598.0 1,288 566 1,284 583.8 1,307 582.7
18:15 - 18:30 1,308 568.3 1,435 617 1,311 596.3 1,351 593.7
18:30 - 18:45 1,072 526.3 1,330 561 1,252 547.5 1,218 544.8
18:45 - 19:00 1,068 556.5 1,308 564 1,220 541.5 1,199 553.9
19:00 - 19:15 1,165 567.5 1,194 513 1,244 550.3 1,201 543.4
19:15 - 19:30 1,065 487.3 1,195 529 1,178 510.8 1,146 508.9
PM Total: 19,799 9,195 20,282 9,202 20,190 9,261 20,090 9,219
Source: Field survey, May 2018
91
Appendix-1.7:Hourly Intersection Total Demand (Arrival) Volume at the U/S of
intersection Queues

Hourly Vehicle Deamand (Arrival) Volume for the Intersection
May 7, 2018 May 8, 2018 May 9, 2018 3 days Average
Hour Interval
Monday Tuesday Wednesday
7:30 - 8:30 3,174 1,777 3,271 1,807 3,241 1,858 3,229 1,814
7:45 - 8:45 3,489 1,877 3,644 1,957 3,518 1,971 3,550 1,935
8:00 - 9:00 3,966 2,021 4,070 2,071 3,799 2,023 3,945 2,038
8:15 - 9:15 4,406 2,176 4,456 2,208 4,178 2,112 4,347 2,165
8:30 - 9:30 4,793 2,243 4,827 2,289 4,561 2,199 4,727 2,243
8:45 - 9:45 5,115 2,303 5,368 2,432 4,960 2,280 5,148 2,338
9:00 - 10:00 5,312 2,344 5,758 2,543 5,465 2,422 5,512 2,436
9:15 - 10:15 5,509 2,344 6,206 2,649 5,792 2,514 5,836 2,502
9:30 - 10:30 5,457 2,326 6,350 2,675 5,857 2,510 5,888 2,503
9:45 - 10:45 5,377 2,329 6,084 2,598 5,712 2,452 5,724 2,460
10:00 - 11:00 5,184 2,274 5,976 2,584 5,474 2,401 5,545 2,419
10:15 - 11:15 5,188 2,332 5,678 2,543 5,425 2,430 5,430 2,435
10:30 - 11:30 5,118 2,330 5,524 2,515 5,276 2,405 5,306 2,416
15:30 - 16:30 4,787 2,338 4,738 2,341 4,765 2,401 4,763 2,360
15:45 - 16:45 4,789 2,284 4,784 2,338 4,826 2,363 4,800 2,328
16:00 - 17:00 4,788 2,302 4,779 2,326 4,908 2,370 4,825 2,333
16:15 - 17:15 4,916 2,279 4,996 2,355 5,044 2,327 4,985 2,320
16:30 - 17:30 5,081 2,285 5,118 2,324 5,176 2,327 5,125 2,312
16:45 - 17:45 5,363 2,373 5,232 2,336 5,329 2,349 5,308 2,353
17:00 - 18:00 5,535 2,402 5,414 2,371 5,442 2,374 5,464 2,382
17:15 - 18:15 5,546 2,421 5,307 2,319 5,376 2,357 5,410 2,365
17:30 - 18:30 5,561 2,435 5,399 2,371 5,355 2,383 5,438 2,397
17:45 - 18:45 5,162 2,322 5,408 2,337 5,219 2,327 5,263 2,328
18:00 - 19:00 4,796 2,249 5,361 2,307 5,067 2,269 5,075 2,275
18:15 - 19:15 4,613 2,219 5,267 2,254 5,027 2,236 4,969 2,236
18:30 - 19:30 4,370 2,138 5,027 2,166 4,894 2,150 4,764 2,151
Source: Field survey, May 2018
92
Appendix-1.8:Fifteen Minute Interval Vehicle Arrival Counts (Counted at upstream of the Intersection queues) on Monday, May 7, 2018
Date: Monday, May 7, 2018
Leg Demand Volume Total Intersection
North (Gausala Leg) South (New Baneshwor Leg) East (Sinamangal Leg) West (Maitidevi Leg) Demand Volume
Time Interval LV with LV with LV with LV with LV with
Veh. PCU 2-Wheeler HV Veh. PCU 2-Wheeler HV Veh. PCU 2-Wheeler HV Veh. PCU 2-Wheeler HV Veh. PCU 2-Wheeler HV
in PCU in PCU in PCU in PCU in PCU
7:30 - 7:45 252 149.8 121.0 12.0 177 97.0 86.0 4.0 173 99.0 78 9 129 78.3 66 4 731 424.0 351 29
7:45 - 8:00 231 138.5 110.0 12.0 176 86.5 81.0 1.0 198 108.5 91.0 7.0 133 77.0 68.0 3.0 738 410.5 350 23
8:00 - 8:15 257 143.0 125.0 6.0 184 102.3 91.0 4.0 206 113.3 95.0 8.0 113 66.5 61.0 2.0 760 425.0 372 20
8:15 - 8:30 312 182.3 152.0 13.0 216 117.8 103.0 5.0 248 119.8 104.0 7.0 169 97.5 86.0 4.0 945 517.3 445 29
8:30 - 8:45 338 170.3 159.0 5.0 230 116.8 106.0 5.0 319 147.0 137.0 4.0 159 90.5 79.0 4.0 1,046 524.5 481 18
8:45 - 9:00 375 177.8 166.0 4.0 278 126.3 117.0 3.0 361 159.5 151.0 4.0 201 91.0 89.0 - 1,215 554.5 523 11
9:00 - 9:15 385 195.8 169.0 11.0 274 130.3 124.0 3.0 374 157.8 152.0 2.0 167 95.5 89.0 2.0 1,200 579.3 534 18
9:15 - 9:30 432 187.3 178.0 3.0 286 122.8 122.0 - 420 183.8 179.0 2.0 194 90.5 88.0 - 1,332 584.3 567 5
9:30 - 9:45 425 193.8 183.0 3.0 298 130.3 120.0 4.0 428 166.5 164.0 1.0 217 94.0 90.0 1.0 1,368 584.5 557 9
9:45 - 10:00 431 192.8 187.0 1.0 313 125.0 120.0 3.0 416 161.8 159.0 1.0 252 116.5 114.0 - 1,412 596.0 580 5
10:00 - 10:15 487 210.3 197.0 4.0 285 113.0 110.0 1.0 392 151.3 149.0 1.0 233 104.5 101.0 1.0 1,397 579.0 557 7
10:15 - 10:30 424 200.0 186.0 4.0 296 133.8 127.0 3.0 364 145.0 143.0 1.0 196 87.5 87.0 - 1,280 566.3 543 8
10:30 - 10:45 420 206.5 185.0 8.0 301 128.8 123.0 4.0 329 138.5 138.0 1.0 238 113.8 110.0 1.0 1,288 587.5 556 14
10:45 - 11:00 385 180.3 172.0 2.0 269 108.5 105.0 1.0 336 142.0 139.0 1.0 229 110.0 108.0 - 1,219 540.8 524 4
11:00 - 11:15 478 216.8 199.0 7.0 331 156.0 146.0 5.0 363 162.3 162.0 - 229 102.5 101.0 - 1,401 637.5 608 12
11:15 - 11:30 369 174.5 170.0 1.0 297 142.3 132.0 6.0 324 145.0 142.0 1.0 220 102.0 100.0 - 1,210 563.8 544 8
AM Total: 6,001 2,919 2,659 96 4,211 1,937 1,813 52 5,251 2,301 2,183 50 3,079 1,518 1,437 22 18,542 8,675 8,092 220
15:30 - 15:45 356 193.0 171.0 10.0 298 146.3 125.0 8.0 287 140.8 132.0 3.0 246 126.0 120.0 2.0 1,187 606.0 548 23
15:45 - 16:00 301 141.3 131.0 5.0 392 177.5 167.0 5.0 326 151.5 143.0 3.0 244 111.3 96.0 6.0 1,263 581.5 537 19
16:00 - 16:15 343 190.8 166.0 11.0 306 160.0 132.0 12.0 335 142.0 129.0 5.0 225 109.3 96.0 5.0 1,209 602.0 523 33
16:15 - 16:30 307 141.0 132.0 4.0 309 157.5 138.0 8.0 291 147.3 136.0 4.0 221 102.5 98.0 1.0 1,128 548.3 504 17
16:30 - 16:45 239 109.5 106.0 1.0 311 147.5 139.0 3.0 399 179.3 159.0 8.0 240 115.8 105.0 4.0 1,189 552.0 509 16
16:45 - 17:00 317 148.8 137.0 4.0 355 177.8 163.0 6.0 355 168.8 151.0 7.0 235 104.3 98.0 2.0 1,262 599.5 549 19
17:00 - 17:15 294 129.3 126.0 2.0 384 161.5 154.0 4.0 416 183.3 175.0 3.0 243 105.5 102.0 1.0 1,337 579.5 557 10
17:15 - 17:30 318 140.5 126.0 7.0 362 152.3 149.0 1.0 356 159.5 159.0 - 257 101.8 100.0 1.0 1,293 554.0 534 9
17:30 - 17:45 374 170.0 149.0 8.0 424 169.5 169.0 - 436 210.5 200.0 4.0 237 89.8 89.0 - 1,471 639.8 607 12
17:45 - 18:00 306 141.8 132.0 4.0 423 174.5 167.0 3.0 409 194.8 190.0 3.0 296 118.0 118.0 - 1,434 629.0 607 10
18:00 - 18:15 292 136.5 133.0 2.0 433 185.8 181.0 2.0 356 168.5 167.0 - 267 107.3 107.0 - 1,348 598.0 588 4
18:15 - 18:30 379 172.3 161.0 4.0 402 166.5 156.0 5.0 203 93.0 90.0 1.0 324 136.5 137.0 - 1,308 568.3 544 10
18:30 - 18:45 245 122.5 119.0 1.0 331 142.5 142.0 - 197 117.3 114.0 1.0 299 144.0 141.0 1.0 1,072 526.3 516 3
18:45 - 19:00 278 149.0 141.0 3.0 292 136.8 136.0 - 232 140.3 135.0 3.0 266 130.5 130.0 - 1,068 556.5 542 6
19:00 - 19:15 274 122.8 119.0 1.0 345 143.5 142.0 1.0 241 164.0 164.0 - 305 137.3 137.0 - 1,165 567.5 562 2
19:15 - 19:30 251 125.5 119.0 2.0 314 148.8 145.0 1.0 236 104.0 104.0 - 264 109.0 109.0 - 1,065 487.3 477 3
PM Total: 4,874 2,334 2,168 69 5,681 2,548 2,405 59 5,075 2,465 2,348 45 4,169 1,849 1,783 23 19,799 9,195 8,704 196
Soruce: Field survey, 2018
93
Appendix-1.9:Fifteen Minute Interval Vehicle Arrival Counts (Counted at upstream of the Intersection queues) on Tuesday, May 8, 2018
Date: Tuesday, May 8, 2018
Leg Demand Volume Total Intersection
North (Gausala) South (New Baneshwor) East (Sinamangal) West (Maitidevi) Demand Volume
7:30 - 7:45 238 141.5 113 11 179 93.3 91 - 178 99 80 8 106 66.0 60 2 701 399.3 344 21
7:45 - 8:00 239 154.0 122 14 190 97.8 77 8 222 123 100 9 123 74.3 61 5 774 448.8 360 36
8:00 - 8:15 235 122.0 108 6 201 110.3 98 4 235 121 110 4 158 83.5 73 4 829 436.8 389 18
8:15 - 8:30 307 182.5 151 13 238 123.5 111 5 264 134 109 10 158 82.0 73 3 967 521.8 444 31
8:30 - 8:45 306 172.3 149 9 270 127.0 124 1 345 159 148 4 153 91.3 84 2 1,074 549.8 505 16
8:45 - 9:00 373 192.0 167 10 275 131.0 126 1 369 157 146 4 183 83.0 79 1 1,200 563.0 518 16
9:00 - 9:15 360 185.5 167 7 295 136.5 132 1 386 165 162 1 174 87.0 84 - 1,215 573.5 545 9
9:15 - 9:30 465 217.0 198 8 259 112.3 106 2 422 180 172 4 192 92.8 88 1 1,338 602.3 564 15
9:30 - 9:45 556 235.5 223 4 331 151.5 145 2 500 200 198 1 228 106.3 101 2 1,615 693.3 667 9
9:45 - 10:00 566 259.5 247 4 302 124.8 121 1 501 197 193 2 221 92.5 91 - 1,590 674.0 652 7
10:00 - 10:15 636 254.0 241 5 290 124.3 116 3 494 200 193 4 243 101.0 98 1 1,663 679.3 648 13
10:15 - 10:30 412 177.3 167 4 340 150.5 140 4 460 171 167 2 270 129.0 125 1 1,482 628.0 599 11
10:30 - 10:45 417 195.5 174 8 319 142.3 134 3 360 156 146 6 253 123.5 118 2 1,349 617.0 572 19
10:45 - 11:00 453 208.5 201 2 339 157.0 149 3 429 179 173 4 261 114.5 111 1 1,482 659.3 634 10
11:00 - 11:15 383 186.0 173 7 355 162.3 162 - 395 180 168 5 232 110.8 109 - 1,365 638.5 612 12
11:15 - 11:30 402 183.3 175 4 324 151.5 146 2 367 151 150 - 235 115.3 108 2 1,328 600.5 579 8
AM Total: 6,348 3,066 2,776 116 4,507 2,096 1,978 40 5,927 2,571 2,415 68 3,190 1,553 1,463 27 19,972 9,285 8,632 251
15:30 - 15:45 322 172.0 156 8 299 154.3 129 10 329 149 136 5 211 111.5 107 1 1,161 586.5 528 24
15:45 - 16:00 324 169.0 153 5 282 128.3 124 1 330 148 143 2 242 125.5 115 3 1,178 570.8 535 11
16:00 - 16:15 338 170.5 142 10 305 142.8 127 6 299 147 131 6 236 128.8 111 7 1,178 589.3 511 29
16:15 - 16:30 317 154.5 142 4 343 168.5 148 8 310 144 127 7 251 127.8 113 5 1,221 594.5 530 24
16:30 - 16:45 338 172.3 152 7 327 150.0 141 4 312 140 129 4 230 121.3 109 4 1,207 583.8 531 19
16:45 - 17:00 315 173.8 150 10 349 151.5 144 3 299 136 126 4 210 97.3 94 1 1,173 558.0 514 18
17:00 - 17:15 372 178.3 161 7 396 170.5 166 2 337 136 129 3 290 133.3 128 2 1,395 618.3 584 14
17:15 - 17:30 356 164.5 152 4 362 143.3 140 1 367 149 146 1 258 107.5 103 2 1,343 564.3 541 8
17:30 - 17:45 393 203.8 191 4 368 154.5 150 2 311 131 128 1 249 106.3 106 - 1,321 595.5 575 7
17:45 - 18:00 392 188.8 176 4 379 164.3 151 5 304 122 122 - 280 118.0 112 2 1,355 593.0 561 11
18:00 - 18:15 332 174.3 162 4 339 150.3 144 2 327 128 126 1 290 114.3 111 1 1,288 566.3 543 8
18:15 - 18:30 373 163.5 157 2 408 172.8 162 5 323 144 139 2 331 136.0 133 1 1,435 616.5 591 10
18:30 - 18:45 371 157.8 153 1 355 155.8 149 3 302 119 119 - 302 128.0 122 2 1,330 560.8 543 6
18:45 - 19:00 319 144.5 138 2 375 153.8 150 2 302 126 126 - 312 139.8 138 - 1,308 563.8 552 4
19:00 - 19:15 314 151.0 146 2 340 139.0 129 5 271 108 107 1 269 114.5 114 - 1,194 512.5 496 8
19:15 - 19:30 297 142.8 143 - 332 140.5 138 1 265 116 116 - 301 129.5 127 1 1,195 528.8 524 2
PM Total: 5,473 2,681 2,474 74 5,559 2,440 2,292 60 4,988 2,143 2,050 37 4,262 1,939 1,843 32 20,282 9,202 8,659 203
94
Appendix-1.10:Fifteen Minute Interval Vehicle Arrival Counts (Counted at upstream of the Intersection queues) on Wednesday, May 9, 2018
Date: Wednesday, May 9, 2018
Approach Demand Volume Total Intersection
North (Gausala) South (New Baneshwor) East (Sinamangal) West (Maitidevi) Demand Volume
7:30 - 7:45 263 150.8 127 9 182 105.5 91 6 186 104.5 87 7 107 65.3 63 1 738 426.0 368.0 23.0
7:45 - 8:00 251 161.8 125 14 196 104.5 99 2 203 111.5 92 8 111 69.3 54 7 761 447.0 370.0 31.0
8:00 - 8:15 244 152.0 121 11 192 121.5 94 11 217 111.3 94 8 149 78.5 69 4 802 463.3 378.0 34.0
8:15 - 8:30 289 163.5 143 7 230 123.3 114 4 247 135.0 115 8 174 99.8 90 3 940 521.5 462.0 22.0
8:30 - 8:45 326 188.3 156 11 236 108.8 102 3 287 140.8 123 7 166 101.0 87 6 1,015 538.8 468.0 27.0
8:45 - 9:00 323 168.5 146 8 235 111.8 108 1 325 139.8 131 4 159 79.3 77 - 1,042 499.3 462.0 13.0
9:00 - 9:15 362 175.3 160 5 290 134.3 128 2 386 175.0 162 7 143 67.8 64 1 1,181 552.3 514.0 15.0
9:15 - 9:30 417 211.3 189 8 262 117.8 112 2 425 167.3 165 1 219 112.0 100 5 1,323 608.3 566.0 16.0
9:30 - 9:45 470 204.3 197 3 293 126.0 119 3 436 185.5 181 2 215 104.3 100 1 1,414 620.0 597.0 9.0
9:45 - 10:00 482 196.3 192 1 323 131.0 129 1 540 219.5 214 4 202 95.0 92 1 1,547 641.8 627.0 7.0
10:00 - 10:15 480 207.8 201 2 341 145.3 144 - 470 183.8 184 - 217 106.8 102 2 1,508 643.5 631.0 4.0
10:15 - 10:30 452 196.0 192 1 306 133.0 126 2 423 171.8 170 1 207 104.0 100 2 1,388 604.8 588.0 6.0
10:30 - 10:45 369 164.0 158 2 277 112.8 112 - 388 171.3 159 8 235 114.3 109 2 1,269 562.3 538.0 12.0
10:45 - 11:00 444 209.3 200 4 281 122.0 120 1 366 158.5 149 6 218 101.0 94 3 1,309 590.8 563.0 14.0
11:00 - 11:15 469 211.0 205 2 322 145.0 142 1 381 163.5 153 6 287 152.3 144 3 1,459 671.8 644.0 12.0
11:15 - 11:30 322 155.0 147 4 331 141.5 141 - 385 177.0 171 3 201 106.3 98 3 1,239 579.8 557.0 10.0
AM Total: 5,963 2,915 2,659 92 4,297 1,984 1,881 39 5,665 2,516 2,350 80 3,010 1,557 1,443 44 18,935 8,971 8,333 255
15:30 - 15:45 346 191.8 180 4 316 168.8 141 12 291 153.3 137 7 221 105.0 94 4 1,174 618.8 552.0 27.0
15:45 - 16:00 356 177.8 169 3 309 143.3 132 5 309 145.0 136 4 203 101.5 90 4 1,177 567.5 527.0 16.0
16:00 - 16:15 323 178.8 149 11 349 187.8 158 15 299 155.0 131 12 243 123.5 107 6 1,214 645.0 545.0 44.0
16:15 - 16:30 352 172.8 160 5 299 145.3 131 5 319 136.0 126 4 230 115.3 102 5 1,200 569.3 519.0 19.0
16:30 - 16:45 344 174.5 160 6 325 148.0 139 5 330 149.8 129 10 236 109.3 98 4 1,235 581.5 526.0 25.0
16:45 - 17:00 331 160.0 139 8 323 146.0 136 5 359 163.5 151 6 246 105.0 104 - 1,259 574.5 530.0 19.0
17:00 - 17:15 342 162.8 151 4 369 170.8 162 4 390 165.5 152 7 249 102.3 101 - 1,350 601.3 566.0 15.0
17:15 - 17:30 368 169.8 162 3 364 153.5 143 4 322 128.3 124 2 278 118.0 115 1 1,332 569.5 544.0 10.0
17:30 - 17:45 367 171.0 159 4 380 161.0 153 4 320 135.0 131 2 321 136.8 133 1 1,388 603.8 576.0 11.0
17:45 - 18:00 326 162.3 152 3 384 154.0 151 1 335 156.3 151 3 327 127.0 124 1 1,372 599.5 578.0 8.0
18:00 - 18:15 317 164.3 158 2 381 164.8 154 5 293 124.8 112 7 293 130.0 128 1 1,284 583.8 552.0 15.0
18:15 - 18:30 348 183.3 170 5 355 150.0 145 2 310 138.0 134 2 298 125.0 119 2 1,311 596.3 568.0 11.0
18:30 - 18:45 285 149.3 139 4 382 156.3 156 - 296 126.3 123 2 289 115.8 115 - 1,252 547.5 533.0 6.0
18:45 - 19:00 284 147.3 135 4 362 163.0 159 2 318 128.3 128 - 256 103.0 102 - 1,220 541.5 524.0 6.0
19:00 - 19:15 248 122.0 120 1 353 156.8 157 - 352 137.5 138 - 291 134.0 131 1 1,244 550.3 546.0 2.0
19:15 - 19:30 302 139.8 137 1 353 146.5 144 1 251 117.8 115 1 272 106.8 106 - 1,178 510.8 502.0 3.0
PM Total: 5,239 2,627 2,440 68 5,604 2,516 2,361 70 5,094 2,260 2,118 69 4,253 1,858 1,769 30 20,190 9,261 8,688 237
95
Appendix-2.1:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Gausala (North) Approach
Baseline length = 30.0 m Date: May 16, 2018
Clock Time Vehicle Time Speed
S.N Notes
(hh:mm) Type Taken (s) (kph)
1 12:23 PM MC 3.61 29.90 K
2 12:23 PM C 4.70 23.00 K
3 12:25 PM MC 3.50 30.90 K
4 12:25 PM MC 2.80 38.60 K
5 12:25 PM MC 2.50 43.20 K
6 12:25 PM U 3.16 34.20 K
7 12:26 PM C 2.61 41.40 K
8 12:26 PM 3W 4.20 25.70 K
9 12:26 PM MC 4.40 24.50 K
10 12:27 PM C 3.30 32.70
11 12:27 PM MC 3.00 36.00 P
12 12:28 PM C 4.70 23.00
13 12:28 PM MC 2.50 43.20
14 12:29 PM MC 2.50 43.20
15 12:29 PM MC 3.01 35.90
16 12:30 PM MC 2.20 49.10
17 12:30 PM MC 2.91 37.10
18 12:30 PM C 3.71 29.10
19 12:31 PM MC 4.80 22.50 X
20 12:31 PM MC 5.40 20.00 X
21 12:31 PM 3W 4.70 23.00
22 12:33 PM 3W 4.50 24.00 K
23 12:35 PM FW 4.20 25.70 K
24 12:35 PM MC 2.90 37.20 K
25 12:35 PM U 3.70 29.20 K
26 12:36 PM FW 3.60 30.00 K
27 12:37 PM C 4.00 27.00 K
28 12:37 PM U 5.00 21.60 K
29 12:37 PM C 2.30 47.00 K
30 12:39 PM MICRO 3.14 34.40 K
31 12:40 PM MC 2.70 40.00 K
32 12:40 PM U 3.40 31.80 K
33 12:41 PM B 5.70 18.90 K
34 12:41 PM 3W 4.30 25.10 K
35 12:42 PM 3W 4.00 27.00 K
36 12:42 PM MC 4.90 22.00 K
37 12:42 PM C 3.70 29.20 K
38 12:42 PM C 5.16 20.90 K
39 12:44 PM MC 3.14 34.40 K
40 12:45 PM MC 4.80 22.50 K
96
Appendix-2.1:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Gausala (North) Approach (contd…)

S.N Notes
41 12:46 PM FW 3.20 33.80 K
42 12:46 PM C 2.80 38.60 K
43 12:47 PM MC 2.80 38.60 K
44 12:51 PM C 4.90 22.00 K
45 12:52 PM MC 3.60 30.00 K
46 12:52 PM U 2.20 49.10 K
47 12:53 PM FW 2.90 37.20 K
48 12:54 PM C 3.30 32.70 K
49 12:55 PM MC 3.91 27.60 X
50 12:55 PM MC 4.80 22.50 X
51 12:56 PM FW 5.70 18.90 X
52 12:57 PM C 5.80 18.60 X
53 12:57 PM C 4.01 26.90 K
54 12:58 PM 3W 5.00 21.60 K
55 1:02 PM C 3.70 29.20 K
56 1:02 PM MC 4.30 25.10 K
57 1:03 PM C 3.60 30.00 K
58 1:04 PM MC 4.60 23.50 K
59 1:04 PM 3W 3.90 27.70
60 1:04 PM FW 3.10 34.80
61 1:05 PM 3W 4.60 23.50
62 1:05 PM C 3.70 29.20
63 1:05 PM MC 2.14 50.50
64 1:06 PM C 2.70 40.00
65 1:06 PM MC 3.20 33.80
66 1:06 PM C 3.60 30.00 K
67 1:07 PM MIB 3.30 32.70 K
68 1:07 PM 3W 4.40 24.50 K
69 1:08 PM 4W 4.40 24.50 K
70 1:09 PM 3W 5.70 18.90 K
71 1:10 PM MC 2.40 45.00 K
72 1:10 PM 3W 4.80 22.50 K
73 1:11 PM C 3.70 29.20 K
74 1:11 PM C 3.80 28.40 K
75 1:11 PM MC 3.30 32.70 K
76 1:11 PM MC 3.50 30.90 K
77 1:12 PM 3W 4.00 27.00 K
78 1:12 PM MC 3.30 32.70 K
79 1:12 PM C 2.70 40.00 K
80 1:12 PM C 3.30 32.70 K
97
Appendix-2.1:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Gausala (North) Approach (contd…)

S.N Notes
81 1:12 PM MC 2.80 38.60 K
82 1:13 PM C 4.00 27.00 K
83 1:13 PM MC 3.20 33.80 K
84 1:13 PM FW 3.60 30.00 K
85 1:14 PM 3W 5.20 20.80
Minimum Speed = 18.60 km/h
Maximum Speed = 50.50 km/h
Number of Samples, N = 85.00
Sample Mean speed, xm = 30.60 km/h
Standard deviation of sample values, s = 7.75 km/h
Standard Error of the mean, SEm = 0.80 km/h
Value of two standard errors (2xSEm) = 1.60 km/h
30.60 km/h ± 1.6 km/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean speed = confidence
95th percentile speed = 44.64 km/h
th
85 percentile speed = 38.60 km/h
Source: Field survey,2018
Vehicle Types
Code Description Code Description
B: Bicycle MIB: Minibus
MC: Motorcycle SB: Std. bus
C: Car/Vans LT: Light truck
FW: Four Wheel Drive HT: Heavy truck
3W: Three-wheeler MAT Multi Axle Truck
U: Utility Vehicle Tract: Tractor
Micro: Microbus
Reasons for Delay (with codes where used)
S = Signals Accident - Breakdown
Floods - Weather
J = Other Junction extremes
P = Pedestrians Encroachments
B = Bus or Para transit Police Intervention
Roadworks -
K = Affected by Parking Diversion
X = Part of platoon - not at free speed Unknown - other
D = Damaged Pavement surfacing
98
Appendix-2.2:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Maitidevi (West) Approach

S.N Notes
1 1:44 PM C 3.90 27.7
2 1:44 PM MC 2.80 38.6
3 1:45 PM MC 3.30 32.7
4 1:45 PM MC 3.14 34.4
5 1:46 PM MC 2.90 37.2
6 1:46 PM C 3.90 27.7 TAXI
7 1:46 PM MC 3.60 30.0
8 1:46 PM MC 2.20 49.1
9 1:46 PM C 4.71 22.9
10 1:47 PM U 4.30 25.1
11 1:47 PM MC 4.60 23.5
12 1:47 PM U 4.40 24.5 X
13 1:48 PM MC 2.80 38.6
14 1:48 PM C 5.60 19.3
15 1:48 PM MC 2.60 41.5
16 1:48 PM MC 3.30 32.7
17 1:49 PM MC 2.40 45.0
18 1:49 PM FW 2.91 37.1
19 1:49 PM MC 3.30 32.7
20 1:49 PM MC 2.91 37.1
21 1:50 PM FW 3.11 34.7
22 1:50 PM MC 3.40 31.8
23 1:50 PM MC 3.20 33.8
24 1:51 PM C 3.11 34.7
25 1:51 PM MC 3.00 36.0
26 1:51 PM C 3.91 27.6
27 1:52 PM MC 2.90 37.2
28 1:52 PM 3W 5.30 20.4
29 1:52 PM C 2.70 40.0
30 1:53 PM MC 3.00 36.0
31 1:53 PM 3W 5.18 20.8 MC PARKED
32 1:54 PM MC 2.60 41.5 MC PARKED
33 1:54 PM C 4.00 27.0
34 1:54 PM C 3.20 33.8
35 1:54 PM MC 1.80 60.0
36 1:55 PM MICRO 5.30 20.4
37 1:55 PM MC 3.51 30.8
38 1:56 PM 3W 5.00 21.6
39 1:56 PM 3W 6.51 16.6
40 1:56 PM MICRO 4.40 24.5
41 1:56 PM U 3.20 33.8
42 1:57 PM MC 3.50 30.9
43 1:58 PM MC 5.30 20.4
44 1:58 PM MC 2.80 38.6
45 1:59 PM MC 2.50 43.2
99
Appendix-2.2:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Maitidevi (West) Approach (contd…)

S.N Notes
46 2:00 PM MC 2.60 41.5
47 2:00 PM MC 2.40 45.0
48 2:01 PM MC 5.00 21.6 X
49 2:01 PM 3W 6.30 17.1
50 2:07 PM MC 3.41 31.7
51 2:08 PM 3W 5.41 20.0
52 2:08 PM C 4.17 25.9
53 2:08 PM C 4.80 22.5 TURNING VEHICLE
54 2:09 PM MC 3.20 33.8
55 2:09 PM MC 3.20 33.8
56 2:10 PM LT 4.60 23.5
57 2:10 PM MC 3.00 36.0
58 2:10 PM MC 2.40 45.0
59 2:10 PM MC 2.70 40.0
60 2:10 PM MC 2.81 38.4
61 2:11 PM 3W 5.80 18.6
62 2:11 PM C 4.00 27.0
63 2:12 PM FW 4.40 24.5
64 2:12 PM MC 2.40 45.0
65 2:12 PM MC 2.80 38.6
66 2:13 PM MC 2.30 47.0
67 2:13 PM C 4.00 27.0
68 2:14 PM 3W 4.00 27.0
69 2:14 PM C 3.51 30.8
70 2:14 PM C 3.12 34.6
71 2:14 PM C 3.20 33.8
72 2:15 PM MC 4.20 25.7
73 2:16 PM 3W 6.81 15.9
74 2:16 PM 3W 5.60 19.3
75 2:18 PM C 3.19 33.9
76 2:18 PM 3W 5.13 21.1
77 2:18 PM C 4.30 25.1
78 2:19 PM MC 2.80 38.6
79 2:19 PM C 3.20 33.8
80 2:19 PM MICRO 4.40 24.5
81 2:20 PM U 5.20 20.8
82 2:20 PM MC 3.70 29.2
83 2:21 PM 3W 5.60 19.3
84 2:21 PM C 4.60 23.5
85 2:21 PM MC 3.19 33.9
86 2:21 PM 3W 3.30 32.7
87 2:21 PM 3W 6.00 18.0
88 2:22 PM C 4.40 24.5
100
Appendix-2.2:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Maitidevi (West) Approach (contd…)

S.N Notes
km/h ± 1.8 km/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean speed = 30.9 confidence
th
Source: Field survey, 2018
Vehicle Types
Micro: Microbus
J = Other Junction Floods - Weather extremes
K = Affected by Parking Roadworks - Diversion
101
Appendix-2.3:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Sinamangal (East) Approach
S.N Notes
1 8:14 AM MC 2.71 39.9
2 8:14 AM C 6.40 16.9
3 8:14 AM C 5.90 18.3
4 8:14 AM MC 3.90 27.7 TAXI
5 8:15 AM 3W 6.30 17.1
6 8:16 AM MIB 3.80 28.4
7 8:16 AM MC 3.50 30.9
8 8:16 AM 3W 5.00 21.6
9 8:17 AM MC 4.01 26.9
10 8:17 AM MC 2.31 46.8
11 8:17 AM C 4.00 27.0
12 8:18 AM MC 4.20 25.7
13 8:18 AM C 4.40 24.5
14 8:19 AM C 3.00 36.0
15 8:19 AM MICRO 2.71 39.9
16 8:19 AM MC 4.30 25.1
17 8:19 AM 3W 4.01 26.9 GAS TEMPO
18 8:20 AM U 2.60 41.5
19 8:20 AM MIB 4.20 25.7
20 8:22 AM MC 4.70 23.0 X
21 8:22 AM MC 3.20 33.8
22 8:23 AM C 4.30 25.1 K
23 8:23 AM MC 4.60 23.5
24 8:24 AM MC 4.77 22.6
25 8:24 AM MC 2.60 41.5
26 8:24 AM MC 6.30 17.1 D
27 8:25 AM MC 5.30 20.4
28 8:25 AM C 4.80 22.5
29 8:25 AM 4W 4.30 25.1
30 8:25 AM C 3.30 32.7 SMALL VAN
31 8:26 AM 3W 6.01 18.0 GAS TEMPO
32 8:26 AM MC 3.70 29.2
33 8:27 AM C 4.20 25.7 K
34 8:27 AM MC 4.50 24.0
35 8:27 AM MC 3.90 27.7
36 8:27 AM MC 3.41 31.7
37 8:28 AM C 3.40 31.8
38 8:28 AM MC 4.00 27.0
39 8:28 AM C 4.60 23.5
40 8:29 AM MC 4.00 27.0
41 8:29 AM C 3.50 30.9 TAXI
42 8:30 AM MC 2.50 43.2
43 8:30 AM 4W 4.30 25.1
44 8:30 AM C 3.11 34.7
45 8:31 AM 3W 6.17 17.5 ELECTRIC
102
Appendix-2.3:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Sinamangal (East) Approach (contd…)
S.N Notes
46 8:31 AM C 5.00 21.6
47 8:32 AM C 4.90 22.0
48 8:32 AM MC 5.00 21.6
49 8:33 AM U 5.00 21.6
50 8:33 AM MC 4.60 23.5 P
51 8:33 AM MC 3.50 30.9 P
52 8:34 AM C 3.91 27.6
53 8:34 AM MC 3.30 32.7
54 8:34 AM MINI 3.91 27.6
55 8:34 AM C 4.11 26.3 TAXI
56 8:35 AM 3W 5.00 21.6 ELECTRIC
57 8:35 AM MC 3.90 27.7
58 8:35 AM 4W 4.15 26.0
59 8:36 AM MC 3.20 33.8
60 8:36 AM C 3.18 34.0 P
61 8:37 AM C 4.20 25.7 X
62 8:37 AM MC 3.19 33.9
63 8:37 AM MINI 4.80 22.5 P
64 8:38 AM MC 3.90 27.7 P
65 8:38 AM MINI 5.50 19.6 P
66 8:38 AM C 3.41 31.7
67 8:38 AM C 3.90 27.7 X
68 8:39 AM MC 3.80 28.4 X
69 8:39 AM MC 3.80 28.4
70 8:40 AM C 3.40 31.8
71 8:40 AM MC 3.21 33.6
72 8:40 AM C 3.77 28.6
73 8:41 AM C 4.40 24.5 VAN
74 8:41 AM 4W 3.90 27.7
75 8:41 AM C 5.00 21.6
76 8:42 AM C 4.70 23.0
77 8:42 AM C 4.90 22.0 P
78 8:43 AM C 3.70 29.2
79 8:45 AM MICRO 4.60 23.5 P
80 8:47 AM C 5.50 19.6 X
81 8:47 AM MC 5.90 18.3
82 8:47 AM 3W 5.50 19.6
83 8:48 AM MC 3.80 28.4
84 8:48 AM MC 4.00 27.0
85 8:48 AM C 3.00 36.0
86 8:49 AM C 4.21 25.7 K
87 8:50 AM C 5.40 20.0 P
88 8:50 AM U 6.20 17.4 K
89 8:51 AM C 5.90 18.3 K
90 8:51 AM MC 4.60 23.5 K
91 8:51 AM MC 4.80 22.5 K
92 8:52 AM MC 4.30 25.1
93 8:52 AM 3W 8.13 13.3 ELECTRIC & P
103
Appendix-2.3:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of Sinamangal (East) Approach (contd…)
S.N Notes
94 8:53 AM MC 2.90 37.2
95 8:53 AM MC 2.77 39.0
96 8:54 AM C 3.20 33.8
97 8:54 AM 4W 3.71 29.1
98 8:54 AM C 3.50 30.9
99 8:55 AM MC 3.51 30.8
100 8:55 AM C 3.77 28.6
101 8:56 AM C 3.91 27.6
102 8:56 AM C 3.50 30.9
103 8:56 AM 4W 4.40 24.5
104 8:57 AM MC 3.60 30.0
105 8:57 AM MC 3.00 36.0
106 8:57 AM 4W 4.30 25.1
107 8:58 AM C 5.80 18.6 X
108 8:58 AM C 4.90 22.0
109 8:58 AM 3W 5.40 20.0 ELECTRIC
110 8:59 AM MC 3.60 30.0
111 8:59 AM U 5.50 19.6
112 8:59 AM MC 3.50 30.9
113 9:00 AM 3W 5.00 21.6 GAS TEMPO
114 9:01 AM MC 3.90 27.7
115 9:01 AM C 3.60 30.0
116 9:01 AM C 3.20 33.8
117 9:01 AM MINI 4.50 24.0
118 9:02 AM C 4.20 25.7
119 9:02 AM 3W 5.00 21.6 ELECTRIC
120 9:02 AM MC 4.30 25.1
121 9:03 AM 4W 3.60 30.0 K
122 9:03 AM C 5.60 19.3 K
123 9:03 AM 4W 3.90 27.7 K
124 9:04 AM MC 4.50 24.0
125 9:05 AM MC 3.50 30.9
126 9:05 AM C 3.00 36.0
127 9:05 AM C 4.40 24.5 K
128 9:06 AM 3W 4.40 24.5 ELECTRIC
129 9:07 AM C 4.11 26.3
km/h ± 1 km/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean speed = 26.9
confidence
th
104
Appendix-2.4:Approach Cruise Speed Survey of New Baneshwor (South) Approach
Clock
Vehicle Time Speed
S.N Time Notes
Type Taken (s) (km/h)
(hh:mm)
1 7:58 AM MC 5.03 21.5
2 7:58 AM MC 4.73 22.8
3 7:59 AM C 6.27 17.2
4 7:59 AM C 6.99 15.5
5 7:59 AM MC 5.58 19.4
6 8:01 AM C 5.79 18.7
7 8:01 AM 3W 7.46 14.5
8 8:02 AM U 6.54 16.5
9 8:02 AM MC 4.34 24.9
10 8:08 AM C 5.48 19.7
11 8:09 AM C 6.08 17.8
12 8:10 AM 3W 6.54 16.5
13 8:10 AM MC 3.14 34.4
14 8:10 AM MC 3.85 28.1
15 8:11 AM MIB 6.98 15.5
16 8:12 AM MC 4.46 24.2
17 8:12 AM MC 4.38 24.7
18 8:13 AM C 7.48 14.4
19 8:14 AM 3W 7.32 14.8
20 8:14 AM C 4.72 22.9
21 8:15 AM C 5.65 19.1
22 8:16 AM C 5.40 20.0 X
23 8:16 AM C 6.71 16.1 X
24 8:17 AM MC 7.96 13.6
25 8:17 AM 3W 6.05 17.9
26 8:18 AM 3W 6.53 16.5
27 8:18 AM C 5.22 20.7
28 8:19 AM C 6.07 17.8
29 8:19 AM U 5.53 19.5
30 8:20 AM MC 4.41 24.5
31 8:21 AM MC 4.76 22.7
32 8:22 AM 3W 9.13 11.8 X
33 8:23 AM LT 7.66 14.1 X
34 8:24 AM C 5.50 19.6
35 8:24 AM LT 7.98 13.5
36 8:25 AM MC 4.08 26.5
37 8:25 AM C 7.69 14.0
38 8:26 AM U 5.53 19.5
39 8:27 AM C 5.77 18.7
40 8:27 AM MC 6.04 17.9
41 8:28 AM U 5.19 20.8
42 8:29 AM LT 12.08 8.9 X
43 8:30 AM MC 4.90 22.0
44 8:30 AM 3W 7.71 14.0
45 8:31 AM C 7.05 15.3
46 8:32 AM MC 6.21 17.4
47 8:32 AM MC 5.35 20.2
105
(contd..)
Clock
Vehicle Time Speed
S.N Time Notes
(hh:mm)
48 8:33 AM C 5.77 18.7
49 8:33 AM MC 4.47 24.2
50 8:34 AM C 5.43 19.9
51 8:34 AM MC 6.61 16.3
52 8:35 AM MC 5.21 20.7
53 8:35 AM MC 3.89 27.8
54 8:36 AM MC 5.03 21.5
55 8:36 AM U 8.48 12.7
56 8:37 AM FW 4.87 22.2
57 8:38 AM MC 4.52 23.9
58 8:38 AM FW 6.02 17.9
59 8:38 AM MC 6.07 17.8 X
60 8:39 AM MC 5.77 18.7
61 8:40 AM C 5.45 19.8
62 8:41 AM MICRO 8.14 13.3 X
63 8:43 AM C 5.83 18.5
64 8:43 AM MC 3.73 29.0
65 8:44 AM MC 6.98 15.5 X
66 8:46 AM 3W 7.39 14.6
67 8:46 AM MICRO 5.12 21.1
68 8:47 AM U 6.48 16.7
69 8:47 AM MC 6.09 17.7
70 8:48 AM FW 8.96 12.1 X
71 8:48 AM MC 4.05 26.7
72 8:50 AM 3W 8.33 13.0
73 8:51 AM MC 8.93 12.1
74 8:51 AM MC 3.59 30.1
75 8:52 AM 3W 5.17 20.9
76 8:52 AM C 6.06 17.8
77 8:53 AM MC 5.15 21.0
78 8:54 AM MC 2.86 37.8
79 8:54 AM C 6.15 17.6
80 8:55 AM C 6.73 16.0
81 8:55 AM MC 3.76 28.7
82 8:56 AM LT 5.85 18.5
83 8:57 AM C 6.12 17.6
84 8:58 AM 3W 6.53 16.5
85 8:59 AM C 5.30 20.4
86 9:00 AM MC 4.19 25.8
87 9:01 AM C 5.50 19.6
88 9:02 AM MC 3.89 27.8
89 9:04 AM C 6.41 16.8
90 9:06 AM MC 6.10 17.7 X
91 9:06 AM C 5.64 19.1
92 9:07 AM MC 2.84 38.0
93 9:07 AM C 6.65 16.2
106
(contd..)
Clock
Vehicle Time Speed
S.N Time Notes
(hh:mm)
94 9:08 AM MC 7.34 14.7 X
95 9:08 AM SB 7.16 15.1
96 9:09 AM 3W 6.35 17.0
97 9:09 AM MC 5.19 20.8
98 9:10 AM C 5.92 18.2 X
99 9:10 AM MC 3.92 27.6
100 9:11 AM C 6.83 15.8 K
101 9:11 AM C 4.35 24.8
102 9:12 AM 3W 7.88 13.7
103 9:13 AM C 5.67 19.0
104 9:14 AM MICRO 6.68 16.2 P
105 9:14 AM 3W 9.99 10.8
106 9:15 AM MC 5.77 18.7
107 9:17 AM MC 4.65 23.2
108 9:18 AM MC 6.78 15.9
km/h ± 1 km/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean speed = 19.4
confidence
th
Vehicle Types
Micro: Microbus
J = Other Junction Floods - Weather extremes
K = Affected by Parking Roadworks - Diversion
107
Appendix-3.1:Field Measured Back of Queue in Sinamangal Approach (AM Peak Hour)
Intersection Name: Old Baneshwor Chowk

Arm Name: Sinamangal Approach (East)
Study Period: AM Peak Hour (10:00 AM- 11:00 AM) Weather: Clear
Cycle start Queue at start of RED Back of Queue Overflow Queue
time (veh) (veh) (veh)
Cycl (start red) Ni Nb No
e Total
no. MC
(with
H M S MC LV HV Total MC in LV HV MC LV HV Total
MC
PCU
in PCU)
veh PCU veh veh veh
Tuesday, May 8, 2018 (AM Peak Hour)
1 10 05 00 32 8 23 1 32 -
2 10 08 00 40 10 21 31 -
3 10 12 00 20 5 13 18 -
4 10 15 00 20 5 11 1 17 -
5 10 19 00 9 2 4 6 -
6 10 21 00 20 5 9 14 -
7 10 24 00 15 4 11 15 -
8 10 26 00 20 5 5 10 -
9 10 29 00 12 3 13 16 -
10 10 33 00 5 1 7 8 -
11 10 37 00 12 3 14 17 -
12 10 41 00 27 7 13 20 -
13 10 44 00 7 2 7 9 -
14 10 46 00 - 4 1 7 8 -
15 10 55 00 - 18 5 10 15 -
16 10 57 00 - 5 1 3 4 -
Wednesday, May 9, 2018 (AM Peak Hour)
17 10 00 00 28 7 8 0 15 -
18 10 06 00 38 10 19 0 29 -
19 101 14 00 50 13 11 0 24 -
20 10 21 00 21 5 10 0 15 -
21 10 23 00 35 9 16 1 26 -
22 10 29 00 10 3 7 0 10 -
23 10 36 00 12 3 9 0 12 -
24 10 42 00 7 2 3 0 5 -
25 10 45 00 2 1 3 0 4 -
26 10 47 00 25 6 10 0 16 -
27 10 50 00 39 10 16 0 26 -
28 10 54 00 8 2 4 0 6 -
29 10 57 00 7 2 1 0 3 -
30 10 59 00 6 2 6 0 8 -
95th percentile back of queue: 30
Sample Mean: 15
Standard Deviation: 8
Sample Size: 30
Standard Error of mean, SE: 1
2xSE: 2
Hence, the Mean Back of Queue: 15 ± 2 veh with 95 % confidence
108
Appendix-3.2:Field Measured Back of Queue in Gausala Approach (AM Peak Hour)
Arm Name: Gausala Approach (North)
Cycle Queue at start of RED Back of Queue Overflow Queue
start time
(veh) (veh) (veh)
(start
Ni Nb No
Cycle red)
no. Total
MC
(with
MC
PCU
in PCU)
veh PCU veh veh veh
1 10 02 00 - - - - 16 4 6 0 10 -
2 10 06 00 - - - - 41 10 31 2 43 -
3 10 10 00 - - - - 51 13 32 0 45 -
4 10 14 00 - - - - 67 17 20 0 37 -
5 10 17 00 - - - - 34 9 5 0 14 -
6 10 19 00 - - - - 32 8 20 1 29 -
7 10 22 00 - - - - 40 10 11 0 21 -
8 10 25 00 - - - - 17 4 17 0 21 2 2
9 10 28 00 - 2 - 2 16 4 5 0 9 -
10 10 31 00 - - - - 17 4 14 1 19 -
11 10 34 00 - - - - 18 5 2 0 7 -
12 10 36 00 - - - - 14 4 7 1 12 -
13 10 39 00 - - - - 31 8 24 0 32 -
14 10 42 00 - - - - 12 3 7 0 10 -
15 10 45 00 - - - - 18 5 1 0 6 -
16 10 47 00 - - - - 13 3 20 2 25 -
17 10 45 00 - - - - 3 1 3 0 4 -
18 10 52 00 - - - - 7 2 5 0 7 -
19 10 54 00 - - - - 8 2 13 0 15 -
20 10 56 00 - - - - 10 3 6 0 9 -
21 10 04 00 - - - - 17 4 11 0 15 -
22 10 05 00 - - - - 33 8 15 0 23 -
23 10 07 00 - - - - 32 8 28 1 37 -
24 10 17 00 - - - - 45 11 34 0 45 3 5 8
25 10 21 00 3 5 - 8 19 5 6 0 11 -
26 10 22 00 - - - - 64 16 22 1 39 -
27 10 25 00 - - - - 8 2 8 0 10 -
28 10 28 00 - - - - 27 7 6 0 13 -
29 10 30 00 - - - - 5 1 6 0 7 -
30 10 36 00 - - - - 10 3 4 0 7 -
31 10 46 00 - - - - 13 3 9 0 12 -
32 10 47 00 - - - - 15 4 15 0 19 -
33 10 49 00 - - - - 50 13 33 0 46 -
Sample Mean: 20
Sample Size: 33
2xSE: 4
109
Appendix-3.3:Field Measured Back of Queue in Maitidevi Approach (AM Peak Hour)
Arm Name: Maitidevi Approach (West)
Cycle Queue at start of RED Back of Queue Overflow Queue
start time
(veh) (veh) (veh)
(start
Cycle Ni Nb No
red)
no. MC Total
H M S MC LV HV Total MC in LV HV (with MC MC LV HV Total
PCU in PCU)
veh PCU veh veh veh
1 10 01 00 - - - - 8 2 1 0 3 -
2 10 04 00 - - - - 13 3 5 0 8 -
3 10 06 00 - - - - 17 4 14 0 18 2 4 6
4 10 09 00 2 4 - 6 18 5 8 0 13 -
5 10 11 00 - - - - 9 2 3 0 5 -
6 10 15 00 - - - - 17 4 16 0 20 -
7 10 18 00 - - - - 12 3 6 0 9 -
8 10 20 00 - - - - 25 6 12 0 18 -
9 10 23 00 - - - - 11 3 5 0 8 -
10 10 28 00 - - - - 16 4 7 0 11 -
11 10 30 00 - - - - 19 5 10 0 15 -
12 10 38 00 - - - - 5 1 3 0 4 -
13 10 40 00 - - - - 3 1 0 0 1 -
14 10 43 00 - - - - 2 1 2 0 3 -
15 10 46 00 - - - - 10 3 10 1 14 -
16 10 49 00 - - - - 13 3 11 0 14 -
17 10 52 00 - - - - 9 2 1 0 3 -
18 10 54 00 - - - - 11 3 2 0 5 -
19 10 57 00 - - - - 7 2 1 0 3 -
Sample Mean: 9
Sample Size: 19
2xSE: 2
110
Appendix-3.4:Field Measured Back of Queue in New Baneshwor Approach (AM Peak
Hour)

Arm Name: New Baneshwor Approach (South)
Cycle Queue at start of Back of Queue Overflow Queue
start time
(veh) (veh) (veh)
(start
Ni Nb No
Cycle red)
no. Total
MC
(with
MC
PCU
in PCU)
veh PCU veh veh veh
1 10 02 00 - - - - 3 1 3 1 5 -
2 10 04 00 - - - - 6 2 4 0 6 -
3 10 06 00 - - - - 4 1 1 0 2 2 4 6
4 10 07 00 2 4 - 6 7 2 8 0 10 -
5 10 11 00 - - - - 5 1 3 0 4 -
6 10 12 00 - - - - 4 1 2 0 3 -
7 10 15 00 - - - - 7 2 1 0 3 -
8 10 17 00 - - - - 21 5 19 1 25 -
9 10 19 00 - - - - 4 1 1 0 2 -
10 10 20 00 - - - - 12 3 7 0 10 -
11 10 23 00 - - - - 4 1 6 0 7 -
12 10 35 00 - - - - 2 1 3 0 4 -
13 10 44 00 - - - - 3 1 2 0 3 -
14 10 48 00 - - - - 8 2 5 0 7 -
Sample Mean: 7
Sample Size: 14
2xSE: 4
111
Appendix-4.1: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in New Baneshwor approach
Prevailing Field Saturation Flow Rate Study
Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection Arm Name: New Baneshwor Leg (South) Lane No: 2 (TH+RT) Lane width: 3m
Area Type: CBD Date surveyed: Wednesday, May 8, 2018 Study Time Period: 17:01 to 18:13 PM Weather: clear
No. of Vehicles Passing
Saturat‐ Satura‐
Heavy Truck
Total
Light Truck
Micro Bus
Wheeler
Mini Bus
ed tion
Vechicle
Four
Utility
Std Bus
Three
Tractor
Motor‐ LV & HV Notes & delays
Vehicle Types => Car wheel Time Flow
Cycle (with MC
Drive (s) (s')
in PCU)
PCU factors => 0.25 1 1 1 1 1.25 2.5 3 1.5 2.5 1.5 veh veh/h
Clock
Cycle
Start Time
No.
hh:mm:ss
1 17:01:20 20 3 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 12 3,000 ‐
2 17:02:43 19 5 1 4 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 17 63 957 ‐
3 17:05:25 17 6 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13 38 1,255 ‐
4 17:08:16 33 7 2 ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 19 59 1,175 ‐
5 17:12:12 23 2 1 ‐ 1 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 52 744 ‐
6 17:13:34 15 4 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 22 1,595 ‐
7 17:14:10 11 ‐ ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 5 21 814 ‐
Polic intervention for 12 sec.
8 17:16:30 61 13 6 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 36 123 1,061
& affected by pedestrians
9 17:20:51 26 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 32 1,181 ‐
10 17:24:48 12 3 2 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9 24 1,350 ‐
Polic intervention for 14 sec.
11 17:28:03 47 11 3 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 29 108 958
& affected by pedestrians
Polic intervention for 10 sec &
12 17:31:52 39 7 1 1 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 21 60 1,245
affected by pedestrians
13 17:33:25 20 4 2 2 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 16 48 1,200
14 17:37:09 44 17 4 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 34 65 1,883 Affected by pedestrian
15 17:40:52 47 13 4 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 32 82 1,394
16 17:45:49 26 3 2 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 14 36 1,350
17 17:55:33 15 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 22 1,268 ‐
18 17:56:16 12 3 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 25 1,152 ‐
19 17:57:08 11 2 1 1 ‐ ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9 27 1,167 ‐
20 18:00:29 26 5 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 29 1,676 ‐
21 18:03:55 29 5 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13 34 1,403 ‐
22 18:04:45 12 4 ‐ ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9 33 982 ‐
23 18:06:27 15 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 29 962 ‐
24 18:11:08 13 4 1 ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 27 1,367 ‐
25 18:13:57 19 2 2 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 22 1,595 ‐
Sample Statistics
Minimum Saturation Flow = 744
Maximum Saturation Flow = 3,000
Number of Samples, N = 25
Sample Mean Saturation Flow, x m = 1,309
Standard deviation of sample values, σ = 443
Standard Error of the mean, SEm = 89
Value of two standard errors (2xSEm) = 178
± 178 veh/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean Saturation Flow (veh/h)= 1,309
confidence
Median Saturation Flow = 1,245
th
95 percentile Saturation Flow = 1,842
th
112
Appendix-4.2: Saturation Flow Study of left turn lane in Gausala approach
Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection Arm Name: Gausala Leg (North) Lane No: 1 (LT) Lane width: 2.5m

Saturat‐ Satura‐
Heavy Truck
Total
Light Truck
Micro Bus
Wheeler
Mini Bus
ed tion
Vechicle
Four
Utility
Std Bus
Motor‐
Tractor
Three
Cycle
LV & HV Notes & delays
Vehicle Types => Car wheel Time Flow
(with MC
Drive (s) (s')
in PCU)
Clock
Cycle
Start Time
No.
hh:mm:ss
1 9:03:31 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 Discarded
2 9:04:38 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 14 707 queued disharge
3 9:09:01 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 1,350 queued disharge
4 9:09:45 7 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 28 Discarded
5 9:13:01 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 1,500 queued disharge
6 9:16:34 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 18 Discarded
7 9:18:43 4 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 1,440 queued disharge
8 9:19:02 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 900 queued disharge
9 9:19:32 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 11 818 fairly queued disharge
10 9:21:19 4 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 1,080 fairly queued disharge
Sample Statistics
Sample Mean Saturation Flow, xm = 1,114
Hence, Mean Saturation Flow (veh/h)= 1,114 ± 242 veh/h with 95 %
th
th
113
Appendix-4.3: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in Gausala approach
Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection Arm Name: Gausala Leg (North) Lane No: 2 (TR) Lane width: 3.75m

Saturat‐
Heavy Truck
Total Satura‐
Light Truck
Micro Bus
Wheeler
Mini Bus
ed
Vechicle
Four
Utility
Std Bus
Motor‐
Three
Tractor
Cycle
LV & HV tion Notes & delays
Vehicle Types => Car wheel Time
(with MC Flow
Drive (s)
in PCU)
Clock
Cycle
Start Time
No.
hh:mm:ss
1 9:18:40 22 5 1 ‐ 3 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 17 57 1,042 ‐
2 9:20:54 5 4 3 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 10 24 1,538 ‐
3 9:30:33 14 5 4 1 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15 30 1,740 ‐
4 9:32:56 18 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 13 2,077 Taxi blocked for 15 s
5 8:45:33 8 4 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 15 1,920 ‐
6 8:46:52 12 8 5 1 1 2 ‐ ‐ 2 1 ‐ 23 53 1,562 ‐
7 8:50:10 23 4 3 ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15 28 1,896 ‐
8 8:55:00 42 4 4 ‐ 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 22 53 1,460 ‐
9 8:57:20 10 5 1 ‐ 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 13 35 1,286 ‐
10 9:03:30 13 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4 21 729 ‐
11 9:05:50 8 4 3 1 ‐ 3 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 14 65 775 P, K
12 9:08:55 25 4 3 2 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 18 39 1,685 P, K
13 9:11:00 16 3 3 3 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 16 31 1,858 P, congestion
14 9:13:00 19 3 3 ‐ 1 2 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 18 58 1,102 P, B
15 9:16:20 14 5 6 1 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 17 56 1,061 P
16 9:34:38 24 8 3 2 2 2 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 24 62 1,394 P
17 9:40:11 88 18 11 2 2 3 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 59 197 1,078 P
18 9:46:07 63 10 10 2 1 5 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 44 151 1,043 P
19 9:50:55 32 9 7 1 2 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 28 92 1,096 P
20 9:54:15 52 14 7 3 ‐ 6 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 43 111 1,395 P
21 10:00:00 91 17 9 5 2 3 ‐ 1 2 ‐ ‐ 62 200 1,112 P
22 10:05:43 40 6 3 ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 21 49 1,543 P, congestion
23 10:09:02 56 16 7 1 2 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ 42 128 1,181 ‐
24 10:13:15 63 9 11 2 2 7 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 47 107 1,573 P
25 10:16:35 50 6 6 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 27 55 1,735 ‐
Sample Statistics
Sample Mean Saturation Flow, xm = 1,395
± 146 veh/h with 95 %
confidence
th
th
114
Appendix-4.4: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (LTR) in Sinamangal approach
Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection Arm Name: Sinamangal Arm (East) Lane No: 1 (LTR) Lane width: 4.5m

Area Type: CBD Date surveyed: Wednesday, May 8, 2018 Study Time Period: 9:21 to 10:49 AM Weather: clear
Saturat‐
Heavy Truck
Total Satura‐
Light Truck
Micro Bus
Wheeler
Mini Bus
ed
Vechicle
Four
Utility
Std Bus
Motor‐
Three
Tractor
Cycle
(with MC Flow
Drive (s)
in PCU)
Clock
Cycle
Start Time
No.
hh:mm:ss
1 9:21:40 19 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 9 17 1,853 ‐
2 9:24:34 15 4 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 20 1,755 ‐
3 9:29:40 25 10 2 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 20 46 1,585 ‐
Motorcycles from cross
4 9:31:22 13 5 1 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 23 1,761 roads & parking at d/s exit
lane
Parking at d/s exit lane &
5 9:33:36 11 3 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7 17 1,429
Pedestrians
motorcycles from cross
6 9:37:47 70 8 ‐ 3 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 32 55 2,062 roads & parking at d/s exit
lane
Affected by parking at d/s
7 9:43:55 93 25 3 5 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 57 126 1,636
exit lane
Slightly affected by
8 9:48:56 82 15 3 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 43 90 1,700
pedestrians
9 9:52:40 48 16 3 2 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 34 84 1,457
exit lane
10 9:56:14 37 5 1 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
17 ‐ ‐ 33 1,882 ‐
11 9:59:10 21 15 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
20 ‐ ‐ 40 1,823 ‐
12 10:03:36 37 10 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
21 ‐ ‐ 42 1,821 ‐
13 10:07:28 40 6 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
17 ‐ ‐ 35 1,749 ‐
14 10:11:34 40 14 1 1 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
29 ‐ ‐ 64 1,631 ‐
15 10:15:15 40 16 2 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐
30 ‐ ‐ 68 1,588 Affected by pedestrians
16 ‐ Sample Discarded
17 10:20:50 15 2 2 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 21 1,671 ‐
18 10:23:37 24 7 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 16 31 1,858
exit lane & pedestrians
19 10:25:57 32 11 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 23 56 1,479 ‐
20 10:28:54 18 5 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 18 2,100
exit lane
23 10:40:45 14 4 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 24 1,575 ‐
25 10:48:31 26 4 ‐ ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 13 28 1,607 ‐
Sample Statistics
Minimum Saturation Flow = 1,429
± 78 veh/h with 95 %
confidence
th
th
115
Appendix-4.5: Saturation Flow Study of shared lane (TR) in Maitidevi approach
Site Name: Old Baneshwor Intersection Arm Name: Maitidevi Leg Lane No: 2 (TR) Lane width: 3m
Area Type: CBD Date surveyed: Wednesday, May 8, 2018 Study Time Period: 8:43 to 10:46 AM & 17:03 to Weather: clear
Saturat‐
Heavy Truck
Total Satura‐
Light Truck
Micro Bus
Wheeler
Mini Bus
ed
Vechicle
Four
Utility
Std Bus
Motor‐
Three
Tractor
Cycle
(with MC Flow
Drive (s)
in PCU)
Clock
Cycle
Start Time
No.
hh:mm:ss
1 8:43:15 6 2 1 ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7 19 1,232 ‐
2 8:48:26 16 4 2 3 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 75 Discarded
3 8:53:18 8 5 1 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 11 71 Discarded
4 8:56:33 10 4 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 30 Discarded
5 9:07:27 13 4 1 ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 10 20 Discarded
6 9:10:25 2 4 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 23 1,174 ‐
7 9:15:12 7 4 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 7 21 1,157 P
8 9:37:35 17 8 6 2 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 22 55 1,456 B
9 9:44:03 34 4 3 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 18 48 1,313 Pol. Intervention for 20 s
10 9:56:25 25 2 3 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 12 39 1,131 ‐
11 9:59:05 4 1 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 4 11 1,309 ‐
12 10:18:23 18 8 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15 45 1,160 ‐
13 10:20:54 16 9 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15 43 1,256 ‐
14 10:32:15 28 8 1 ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 18 44 1,473 Pol. Intervention for 18 s
15 10:35:16 9 4 ‐ ‐ ‐ 1 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 25 1,188 ‐
16 10:40:31 14 5 2 1 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 43 1,130 ‐
17 10:43:58 17 8 ‐ 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 42 1,221 ‐
18 10:46:18 13 2 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 27 1,100 ‐
19 17:03:55 27 5 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 37 1,338 Pol. Intervention for 10 s
20 17:06:38 50 7 3 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 24 57 1,484 ‐
21 17:11:07 19 9 2 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 16 41 1,383 ‐
22 17:14:38 25 7 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 33 1,555 Pol. Intervention for 26 s
23 17:19:13 25 5 1 ‐ 3 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 15 43 1,277 ‐
24 17:22:46 27 5 1 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 14 39 1,269 ‐
25 17:26:40 14 1 2 ‐ 1 ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ 8 22 1,227 ‐
Sample Statistics
Minimum Saturation Flow = 1,100
± 56 veh/h with 95 %
Hence, Mean Saturation Flow (veh/h)= 1,278.0
confidence
th
th
116
Appendix-5.1:Observation of Phase-A Timing of Traffic Police
Date: May 7, 2018 Observation Period: Peak Hour 10:00 AM - 11:00 pm
Phase Phase Phase Remarks

Cycle
Start End Duration
No.
Time Time (hh:mm:ss)
Date: May 7, 2018

RT from Gausala protected for a while by
1 10:07:23 10:10:18 0:02:55
stopping TH&RT from New Baneshwor
2 10:12:07 10:14:38 0:02:31
3 10:15:41 10:16:57 0:01:16
4 10:18:13 10:20:52 0:02:39
5 10:22:33 10:24:01 0:01:28
6 10:25:14 10:26:59 0:01:45
7 10:27:58 10:29:16 0:01:18
8 10:29:36 10:30:14 0:00:38
9 10:30:52 10:31:46 0:00:54
10 10:32:31 10:33:50 0:01:19
RT from Gausala protected for a while by
11 10:35:36 10:39:28 0:03:52
stopping TH&RT from New Baneshwor
12 10:41:18 10:42:55 0:01:37
13 10:44:13 10:47:03 0:02:50
14 10:48:50 10:50:00 0:01:10
15 10:51:46 10:54:22 0:02:36
16 10:56:02 10:57:22 0:01:20
17 10:58:21 10:59:47 0:01:26
Date: May 8, 2018
18 10:00:00 10:03:20 0:03:20
19 10:05:01 10:07:04 0:02:03
20 10:08:50 10:11:01 0:02:11
21 10:13:06 10:15:03 0:01:57
22 10:16:27 10:17:52 0:01:25
23 10:19:20 10:20:25 0:01:05
24 10:21:40 10:23:24 0:01:44
25 10:24:34 10:25:46 0:01:12
26 10:26:58 10:28:42 0:01:44
27 10:30:11 10:32:03 0:01:52
28 10:33:33 10:35:02 0:01:29
29 10:35:51 10:36:43 0:00:52
30 10:37:05 10:40:08 0:03:03
31 10:41:18 10:43:25 0:02:07
32 10:44:40 10:46:02 0:01:22
33 10:46:50 10:47:56 0:01:06
34 10:48:57 10:49:38 0:00:41
35 10:50:00 10:53:07 0:03:07
Date: May 9, 2018
36 10:08:59 10:10:40 0:01:41
37 10:20:14 10:22:44 0:02:30
38 10:23:46 10:26:17 0:02:31
39 10:27:31 10:28:22 0:00:51
Maximum Phase Time: 0:03:52
Minimum Phase Time: 0:00:38
Mean Phase Time: 0:01:50
No. of Samples: 39
Standard Deviation: 0:00:48
Standard Error of the mean: 0:00:08
Mean Phase Time: 0:01:50 ± 0:00:16 with 95 % confidence
117
Appendix-5.2:Observation of Phase-B Timing of Traffic Police
Date: May 7, 2018 to May 9, 2018
Phase Phase Phase Remarks
Cycle
Start End Duration
No.
Time Time (hh:mm:ss)
Date: May 7, 2018
1 10:00:09 10:00:28 0:00:19
2 10:06:50 10:07:23 0:00:33
TH vehicles from Maitidevi
3 10:10:36 10:12:06 0:01:30 stopped to pass RT vehicles from
Sinamangal
4 10:14:38 10:15:44 0:01:06
5 10:16:54 10:18:11 0:01:17
6 10:21:02 10:22:28 0:01:26
7 10:24:00 10:25:09 0:01:09
8 10:27:00 10:28:03 0:01:03
9 10:29:06 10:29:37 0:00:31
10 10:30:10 10:31:00 0:00:50
11 10:31:43 10:32:32 0:00:49
12 10:33:35 10:35:35 0:02:00
13 10:39:30 10:41:14 0:01:44
14 10:43:01 10:44:10 0:01:09
15 10:47:27 10:48:44 0:01:17
16 10:50:02 10:51:44 0:01:42
17 10:54:28 10:56:02 0:01:34
18 10:57:25 10:58:20 0:00:55
Date: May 8, 2018
19 10:03:27 10:05:17 0:01:50
20 10:07:07 10:08:48 0:01:41
TH vehicles from Maitidevi
21 10:11:11 10:13:03 0:01:52 stopped to pass RT vehicles from
Sinamangal
22 10:15:08 10:16:25 0:01:17
23 10:18:14 10:19:16 0:01:02
24 10:20:33 10:21:36 0:01:03
25 10:23:32 10:24:37 0:01:05
26 10:25:53 10:26:56 0:01:03
27 10:28:44 10:30:11 0:01:27
28 10:32:07 10:33:30 0:01:23
29 10:35:00 10:35:51 0:00:51
30 10:36:46 10:37:05 0:00:19
31 10:40:09 10:41:12 0:01:03
32 10:43:26 10:44:39 0:01:13
33 10:46:04 10:46:45 0:00:41
Date: May 9, 2018
34 10:07:45 10:09:00 0:01:15
35 10:26:17 10:27:27 0:01:10
36 10:28:41 10:29:12 0:00:31
Maximum Phase Time: 0:02:00

Minimum Phase Time: 0:00:19
Mean Phase Time: 0:01:09
No. of Samples: 36
Standard Deviation: 0:00:26
Standard Error of the mean: 0:00:04
Mean Phase Time: 0:01:09 ± 0:00:09 with 95 % confidence
118
Appendix-6.0: Photographs
Typical View of Gausala Approach Typical View of Sinamangal Approach

(AM Peak hour) (AM Peak hour)
Typical View of New Baneshwor Approach Typical View of Maitidevi Approach

(AM Peak hour) (AM Peak hour)
119
Appendix-6.0: Photographs (contd…)
Conducting Speed survey in New Conducting Speed survey in Gausala

Baneshwor Approach Approach
Traffic counting by observing in recorded CC camera set up at a vantage point at the

video footage in AVIYAAN Consultancy P intersection to record turning movements
Ltd at the intersection
CC camera set up at a vantage point CC camera set up at a vantage point

upstream of queues in the Gausala approach upstream of queues in the Maitidevi
for recording vehicle arrival rate approach for recording vehicle arrival rate
120
Appendix-6.0: Photographs (contd…)
CC camera set up at a vantage point

Setting up the CC camera and digital video
upstream of queues in the New Baneshwor
recorder
approach for recording vehicle arrival rate
A typical view of vehicular traffic at the Conducting back of queue (queue length)
intersection during peak hours survey
121
122

MSC Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MSC Thesis PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Master’s Thesis

Analysis of Operational Performance of

Gopi Chandra Shrestha

Nepal Engineering College

Gopi Chandra Shrestha

Nepal Engineering College

The main objective of this research is to investigate operational performance of the

It is recommended to improve the intersection with rearrangement of lane

I hereby declare that this study entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of

This is to certify that this thesis entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of

This thesis entitled Analysis of Operational Performance of Old Baneshwor

Prof. Dr. Padma Bahadur Shahi ………………. …………….

Er. Subash Dhungel ………………. …………….

Prof. Dr. Khem Raj Sharma ………………. …………….

Gopi Chandra Shrestha

ADB Asian Development Bank

As a result of this strong impact on corridor function, intersection improvements can be a

TRB describes in Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2010) that an intersection’s

1.2 Problem Statement

1.3 Research Questions

1.4 Research Objectives

1.5 Significance of the Study

1.6 Scope and Limitation of the Study

1.6.1 Scope of the Study

Various operational performance measures of Old Baneshworintersection for the vehicular

1.6.2 Limitation of the Study

2.1 Performance Measures

The US Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) describes that an intersection’s performance is

2.2 Road Capacity

2.3 Signalized Intersection Capacity

2.4 Level of Service (LOS)

Automobile LOS for an intersection is a qualitative measure developed by the

Level of Service for v/c

• Demand‐to‐capacity ratios describe the extent to which capacity is exceeded during

2.6 Signalized Intersection Flow Characteristics

2.7 Demand Flow Rate

2.8 Saturation Flow Rate at Signalized Intersection

Default Basic Saturation flow,

Various Studies on Saturation flow at signalized intersections in mixed traffic

2.9 Traffic Signal Controller Characteristics

• Pre-timed, in which a sequence of phases is displayed in repetitive order. Each phase

• Fully actuated, in which the timing on all of the approaches to an intersection is

• Semi-actuated, in which some approaches (typically on the minor street) have

2.10 Concepts of Delay at Signalized Intersection

(Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, 2012 p. 4-34)

Stop-line delay (dSL): This is calculated by projecting the time-distance trajectory of a

2.10 Peak hour factor (PHF)

If 15-min periods are used, the PHF may be computed by

2.11 SIDRA intersection Software

SIDRA intersection Software is an advanced micro-analytical traffic evaluation tool that

• Analyse different types of signalized controllers (fixed-time / pre-timed and actuated),

2.12 Model Calibration in SIDRA intersection

Important model parameters need to be identified for calibrating SIDRA intersection to

i. saturation flow rate for signalised intersections, and

• the sensitivity analysis facility for all intersection (Site) types,

2.13.1 Comparison of Intersection Capacity with Traffic flow in Kabul Metropolitan

Quadratullah & Maruyama (2015) conducted a study of a congested intersection located in

2.13.3 Kathmandu Sustainable Urban Transport Project (KSUTP)

Stage 1: Issue Identification;

2.13.4 Development of Traffic diversion algorithm for the possible reduction of

Acharya (2015) conducted a case study of Thapathali intersection in Kathmandu in as her

2.13.5 Comparison of Probable Congestion Reduction Approaches at New

3.1 Research Design