1Challenge the future

Master-Thesis presentation by ir. R.M. Beentjes

Performance of rush-hour lanes and pluslanesA study to behavioral factors and design factors

2Challenge the future

About me...

• Graduated november 1st 2012

• Master Transport & Planning

• ITS Edulab

• Cooperation between Rijkswaterstaat and TU Delft

• Nice combination between company and university

• Supervision from both parties

• Currently working for Witteveen+Bos as project-engineer

3Challenge the future

Contents

• Introduction• Definitions• Background• Performance-indicators

• Ex-post evaluation• Experimental setup• Results

• Driving simulator study• Experimental setup• Results

• Conclusions and recommendations

• Future research

4Challenge the future

Introduction

5Challenge the future

Definition - rush-hour lane

A hard shoulder on the right side of a road section that

can be opened for traffic when intensities are high.

6Challenge the future

Definition - pluslane

A lane on the left side of a road section that can be

opened for traffic when intensities are high. The hard

shoulder can be retained, as all other lanes will become

narrower.

7Challenge the future

• First rush-hour lane in 1996

• First pluslane in 1999

• Extra capacity without addition of an extra lane

• ± 174 km rush-hour lanes (7%) in the Netherlands

• ± 116 km pluslanes (5%) in the Netherlands

• No research compares different designs of rush-hour lanes

and pluslanes

• No research focuses on influence of behavioral factors

Background

8Challenge the future

Performance-indicators

Lane-flow distribution – regular highway

9Challenge the future

Performance indicators

Lane-flow distribution – rush-hour lane

10Challenge the future

Performance-indicators

Intensity-speed relation

11Challenge the future

Ex-post evaluation

12Challenge the future

Experimental setup

• Preliminary research

• Inquiry of all existing rush-hour lanes and pluslanes in

the Netherlands

• Suitable sections for this research were filtered

• Data is collected and filtered using MATLAB

13Challenge the future

Experimental setup

• Preliminary research

• Chosen rush-hour lanes (5):

• Chosen pluslanes (5):

Location Lanes Lane width Speed limit (closed/open)

A1 – Hoevelaken - Barneveld 2+1 3,35|3,50|3,50 120 / 100

A2 – Kerensheide - Vonderen 2+1 3,25|3,40|3,28 120 / 100

A2 – Vonderen - Urmond 2+1 3,25|3,40|3,35 120 / 100

A13 – Berkel & Rodenrijs - Delft-

Zuid

3+1 3,25|3,40|3,40|

3,35

100 / 100

A50 – Ewijk - Valburg 2+1 3,50|3,50|3,50 120 / 120

Location Lanes Lane width Speed limit (closed/open)

A1 – Beekbergen – Deventer-Oost 2+1 3,10|3,50|3,45 120 / 100

A12 – Ede - Veenendaal 2+1 3,00|3,50|3,35 120 / 100

A12 – Woerden - Gouda 3+1 2,75|3,50|3,50|

3,50

120 / 100

A12 – Zoetermeer - Gouwe 2+1 2,75|3,50|3,25 100 / 100

A27 – Gorinchem -Noordeloos 2+1 2,70|3,00|3,25 100 / 80

14Challenge the future

Experimental setup

• Several comparisons

• Rush-hour lane vs. regular right lane

• Pluslane vs. regular left lane

• Different locations on rush-hour lanes and pluslanes

• Influence of design factors

15Challenge the future

Results

• Design factors

• Lane widths

• Speed limits

• Total number of lanes in section (3 or 4)

• 5 rush-hour lane sections and 5 pluslane sections

analyzed

• Pairwise comparison

• Influence on occupation and on free speeds driven

16Challenge the future

Results

• Rush-hour lanes - occupation

Influence of speed limit: 100 km/h – 120 km/h

17Challenge the future

Results

• Pluslanes - occupation

High speed limit + narrow lane

18Challenge the future

Driving simulator study

19Challenge the future

Experimental setup

• A50 between junction Ewijk and junction Valburg

• Wide rush-hour lane (3,50 m)

• Permanent 120 km/h speed limit

• 3 Lanes total (2+1)

• Designed and programmed into simulator

• Results in 2 parts:

• Car-following behavior

• Changes is the design

20Challenge the future

Results

• Part 1: Car-following behavior

• Followers and leaders

21Challenge the future

Results

± 95 km/h

Desired speed: ± 120 km/h

• Part 1: Car-following behavior

• Followers and leaders

22Challenge the future

Results

Lane change when there is enough space on the rush-hour lane

23Challenge the future

Results

Speed difference is equal, car-following distance decreases linearly

24Challenge the future

Results

Lane change when smallest desired car-following distance is reached

25Challenge the future

Results

• Part 2: Changes in the design

• Influence of signaling system (reduced signaling)

• Influence of broken markings (instead of continuous)

• Influence on occupation analyzed

26Challenge the future

Results

• Part 2: Changes in the design

• Determining the occupation per lane

Left lane

Middle lane

Rush-hour lane

27Challenge the future

Results

• No differences at given conditions

28Challenge the future

Conclusions and recommendations

29Challenge the future

• Rush-hour lanes:

• Lower speed limit than 120 km/h

• The incentive to change to the rush-hour lane at 120 km/h

is very low

• Changes in markings and signaling do not have an

influence on occupation at 120 km/h

• Pluslanes:

• Do not combine a high speed limit (100 km/h) with a

narrow pluslane (< 2,80 m)

Conclusions andrecommendations

30Challenge the future

Future research

• Extensive research to the influence of design factors

• Quantify influence per factor

• Possibly make an estimation of performance before the

construction of a new managed lane

• New driving simulator study

• Option 1: improve the current study

• Option 2: use another driving simulator with better

traffic models

• Test alternative designs with lower speeds

31Challenge the future

Questions / discussion