HOW MUCH TIME IS SPENT AT TRAFFIC SIGNALS

While working on another piece, I came upon the question of how much
time is spent at traffic lights, for which there is not a well-sourced
answer. I posted to Twitter and got some useful replies.

With that and some additional digging, I attempt to answer the question.

As the saying goes: Your Mileage May Vary. This depends on your origin
and destination and path and mode and time of day and local traffic
signal policies and street design. Tom VanVuren notes: “Much of the
impact is in slow moving queues, rather than waiting for the signal cycle
to complete. I expect you can make this number smaller than 10% (time
at the stop line) or larger than 50% (time affected by traffic lights).” For
simplicity, I am considering vehicles that would be stopped if they could
either move at the desired speed or must stop (i.e. they are subject to
“vertical” or “stacking” queues), but clearly measurement will depend on
assumption. Still, there must be a system average. I had heard the
number 20% bandied about, which feels right, but let’s first begin with
some thought experiment, then look for some empirical results. We take
different modes in turn.
Pedestrian Crossing at Broadway and City Road, Sydney. Pedestrians
crossing against the light.

MOTOR VEHICLES
THOUGHT EXPERIMENTS
THOUGHT EXPERIMENT 1 A
Imagine an urban grid.

 Assume 10 signalized intersections per km.

 Assume a travel speed of 60 km/h when in motion. (This is probably
too high with so many intersections and no platooning, but we are
imagining here that you would not be stopping.)
 Time to traverse 1 km=1 minute + signal delay. (Some of the distance

traversal time overlaps some of the signal delay time, but we will
imagine a stacking queue, rather than one that has physical distance
for simplicity, we can correct this later if it matters.)
 Assume each intersection has only 2 phases.

 Assume fixed time signals at each intersection evenly distributing

green time between N/S and E/W directions. So red time = 1/2 cycle
length.
 Assume 1 minute cycle length

 If a vehicle stops, it waits 1/2 red time.

 Vehicles obey traffic signals.

 Assume no platooning.

This means that the average vehicle will stop at 5 intersections for 15
seconds each = 75 seconds (or 1.25 minutes) (vs. 1 minute in motion time).
In this case, 1.25/2.25 minutes (55.5%) is spent waiting at signals.
THOUGHT EXPERIMENT 1 B
In contrast.

 Assume near perfect platooning.

In this case, the vehicle will stop at 1 intersection per km, for 15 seconds
= 15 seconds. In this case 0.25/1.25 = 20% of the time is spent waiting at
signals.

DISCUSSION
Now, not all travel takes place on an urban grid.

 Assume 25% of travel is on limited access roads (this is

approximately true in the US), 75% on non-limited access roads.
With perfect platooning on the grid, and 25% off-grid, then 15% of travel
time is intersection delay with near perfect platooning.

Clearly in practice platooning is far from perfect. My guess is the green

wave breaks down after one or two intersections during peak times, but
can survive well in the off-peak. As a rule of thumb, about ~10% of travel
is in the peak hour, ~30% peak period. ~60% AM + PM Peak.

DATA
GPS STUDIES

Eric Fischer of MapBox was kind enough to offer to run this question on
their open traffic data. The results are not yet in. I will update when they
are.

ARTERIAL TRAVEL TIME STUDIES

There are a variety of Arterial Travel Time studies for specific corridors,
but nothing that is universally generalizable. (And logically where
people do arterial travel time studies, there is a congestion problem,
otherwise why study it.)

I recall that in my childhood, I did a study in Montgomery County,

Maryland using such data (from 1987 traffic counts and a floating car
study published by Douglas and Douglas), I did not actually compute the
percentage, but fortunately I reported enough data that allows me to
compute the percentage now. (The sample is of course biased to what is
measured). For the average arterial link, the speed was
 Variable Inside the Beltway Outside the Beltway
Speed
(km/h) 34.88 41.60
Length (km) 0.46 0.72
n) 0.792 1.04
Downstream
Delay (min) 0.27 0.24
Percentage
of Signal
Delay 25% 18.75%
Which is consistent with expectations that signals are more significant in
more urbanized areas (inside the beltway is basically Bethesda and
Silver Spring, MD), and with our general estimates. Now of course the
speed here is impacted by downstream signals, and so is lower than the
speed limit and certainly lower than the free-flow speed sans-signals.
More details are in the paper.

 Levinson, David (1998) Speed and Delay on Signalized Arterials. ASCE

Journal of Transportation Engineering 124(3) 258-264. [doi]

ENGINE IDLING STUDIES

Moaz Ahmed pointed me to a Vehicle Idling Study by Natural Resources

Canada.
The percent of time of vehicle idling ranged from 20-25%. (Not all
vehicle idling is at signalized intersections).

(Engine idling of course burns fuel without doing work, so if the engine is
going to be idling for an extended period, it would save fuel (and reduce
air pollution) to turn it off. Turning the engine on and off also has costs,
so the estimate was if idling was going to be longer than 10 seconds, it
uses more fuel, but considering other wear and tear costs, the
recommended threshold is if idling is longer than 60 seconds, then turn
off the engine. But at a signalized intersection, how will vehicles know
how long they will wait? Smart traffic signals with connected vehicles
could provide this, but now they don’t. Eventually this will be moot with
a full electric vehicle fleet. Until that time, it matters. I suspect given the
longevity and sluggishness of the traffic control sector, smart signals
informing trucks will not be widely or systematically deployed before
trucks are electrified.)

PEDESTRIANS
Now as noted above, Your Mileage May Vary. If you are a pedestrian, you
are unlikely to hit a greenwave designed for cars, though of course your
travel speed is slower is well. So redoing the Thought Experiment

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT 2
Imagine an urban grid.

 Assume 10 signalized intersections per km.

 Assume a travel speed of 6 km/h when in motion. (this is a bit on the
high side, average pedestrian speed is closer to 5 km/h)
 Time to traverse 1 km=10 minutes + signal delay. (Some of the
distance traversal time overlaps some of the signal delay time, but we
will imagine a vertical stacking queue, rather than one that has
physical distance for simplicity, this is a much better assumption for
pedestrians than vehicles.)
 Assume each intersection has only 2 phases.
 Assume fixed time signals at each intersection evenly distributing
green time between N/S and E/W directions. So red time = 1/2 cycle
length.
 Assume 1 minute cycle length
 If a pedestrian stops, she waits 1/2 red time. (That is the “walk” phase
for pedestrians is as long as the green phase for cars. Strictly speaking
this is not true, it is more true in cities with narrow streets than it is
in suburban environments with wide streets, as narrow streets can be
crossed more quickly, so the amount of “walk” time allocated can be
most of the phase. This is certainly not true in Sydney, where the
“walk” phase is cut short so turning cars have fewer conflicts with late
pedestrians.)
 Pedestrians obey traffic lights. (This is not as good an assumption as

vehicles obey signals, pedestrian signal violation is probably higher.

This is not a moral judgment one way or the other, people tend to
obey authority, even when authority abuses power.)
 Assume no platooning. (This is probably too severe, a quick

pedestrian with some signal coordination can probably make a couple

of lights in a row).
Here the average pedestrian will stop at 5 intersections for 15 seconds
each = 2.5 minutes (vs. 10 minute in-motion time). In this case,
2.5/(2.5+10) minutes (or 20%) is spent waiting at signals. Now, this
number is probably true for more pedestrians than the vehicle delay
estimate is for vehicles, since pedestrians are more likely to be found on
an urban grid and less in a suburban or limited access environment.
(Self-selection at work).

BICYCLISTS
If you are a bicyclist, you are unlikely to hit a greenwave designed for
cars unless you travel at exactly an integer fraction (1/1, 1/2, 1/3) of the
green wave, as your travel speed is slower is well. So redoing the
Thought Experiment

THOUGHT EXPERIMENT 3
Imagine an urban grid.

 Assume 10 signalized intersections per km.

 Assume a travel speed of 20 km/h when in motion. (This is a typical

for experienced riders). Time to traverse 1 km=3 minutes + signal

delay. (Assume a stacking queue)
 Assume each intersection has only 2 phases.

 Assume fixed time signals at each intersection evenly distributing

green time between N/S and E/W directions. So red time = 1/2 cycle
length.
 Assume 1 minute cycle length

 If a bicyclist stops, she waits 1/2 red time. (That is the ‘bike’ phase for

bicyclists is as long as the green phase for cars.)

 Bicyclists obey traffic lights. (This is not as good an assumption as

‘motor vehicles obey signals’, bicyclists signal violation is probably

higher.)
 Assume no platooning. (This is probably too severe, a quick bicyclists

with some signal coordination can probably make a couple of lights in

a row).
In this case the average bicyclists will stop at 5 intersections for 15
seconds each = 2.5 minutes (vs. 3 minute in-motion time). In this case,
2.5/(3+2.5) minutes (or 45%) is spent waiting at signals in an urban
environment.