Use of Micro Simulation for Optimisation of Road Alignment ...urbanmobilityindia.in/Upload/Conference/77460b9a-6... · Dwarka Zone (K-II Zone) of Delhi Master Plan Project Road •

PTV Innovation Day and User Group Meeting India 2015

Use of Micro Simulation for Optimisation of RoadAlignment and Junction Control

Delhi Integrated Multi Modal Transit System (DIMTS) Limited

25th November 2015

Presentation ByAbhishek Patil

Arun SaviSairam Dasari

Presentation StructureProject Background

Traffic and Travel Characteristics

Challenges/ Issues Faced

Alternative options for Road Alignment

Evaluation of Alternative alignment Options

Alternative options of Junction control

Evaluation of Alternative junction control

Conclusion and Recommendations

Project Background

Location of Project Road

• Project Road Falls inDwarka Zone (K-IIZone) of DelhiMaster Plan

Project Road

• 3 Urban Extension Roads(UER) have beenproposed in Delhi byDDA.

• In combination withNPR, ConnectsDwarka withGurgaon andNational HighwayNo. 8

• ROW = 80m• Total Length = 3.3km

• Starts at junction ofUER-II & ends atDelhi-HaryanaBorder

Project Road and its Connectivity

End ofProject Road

Start ofProject Road

Indira GandhiInternational Airport

Connects to Dwarka Sector20 in the north

Connects to NorthernPeripheral Road in thesouth and further to NH-8

Provides Parallelconnectivity to NH-8between Delhi and Gurgaon

Proposed Land-Use and Developments

Challenges Faced

Mis-Matchof END and

STARTPoints

Mis-Matchof END and

STARTPoints

At-GradeSignalised

Junctions inDwarka

At-GradeSignalised

Junctions inDwarka

Fully GradeSeparated

atJunctions

Fully GradeSeparated

atJunctions

1

2

2

Alternative options for connectivity between NPR &UER

Option 1: Connecting with “L” curve

Option I• Creating an L-Shaped

Road• Includes 2 Junctions with

90º TurnsUER-I

Pros and Cons• Traffic from both the sides

will come to standstill atjunctions (-)

• Can result in high accidentrates (-)

• 30% less high value LA (+)• 11% less demolition of

structures (+)• Highest overall LA (-)• 19% less in total project

cost (+)

Option 2: Connecting along bund

Option II

• Creating a road along theexisting Bund

UER-I • Involves 4 curves

Pros and Cons• Bottleneck at Curves (-)• Can result in high accident

rates (-)• 40% less high value LA (+)• 11% less demolition of

structures (+)• 3% less in overall LA (-)• 26% less in total project

cost (+)

Option 3: Direct link connections

Option III

• Creating a Direct Linkbetween UER I and NPR

UER-I • Involves 2 curves

Pros and Cons• Extends into Haryana (-)• Highest high value LA (-)• Highest demolition of

structures (-)• 17% less in overall LA (+)• Highest total project cost (-

)

Option 4: Connecting with “S” Curve

Option IV

• Connecting both the roadswith an S-Curve

• Involves 2 curvesUER-I

Pros and Cons• Reduction in speeds at

curves (-)• 60% less high value LA (+)• No demolition of

structures (+)• 10% less in overall LA (+)• 45% less in total project

cost (+)

Simulation Results for Road Algin. OptionsRoadAlign

Options

Volume(in

PCU/Lane)

QueeLengths(in Mts.)

Delays(in sec)

Reducespeed

(KMPH)

Option 1:Directlyconnectingwithout anycurves (“L”Shapes)

332 150 45 40

Option 2:Connectivityalong thebund

756 80 25 60

Option 3:Straight lineconnectivity

884 - - 80

Option 4:“S” curve

514 50 15 50S Curve screenshots (VISSIM)

Option - 4

Inference:• Option1 less feasible from the safety and traffic point of view as it is having negligible turning radius.• Option 4 is having more benefits from the traffic maneuver and safety point of view.

Evaluation of Road Algin. Options

Alignmentoptions Distance Design

SpeedAlign. Shift in

Haryana Curves Land acquisition Cost

Option 1 - - - - - -

Option 2 1014 50 15% 4 Medium Very high

Option 3 873 100 above 60% 2 High Medium

Option 4 941 50 0% 2 Low Low

• VISSIM is taken as a tool to evaluate the alternative options in the traffic

maneuver point.

• Evaluation of alternative options has been done by taking Traffic, Travel

Speed, Delay, Safety, Land Acquisition and Cost

• Option 1 is not considered for over all evaluation as it is provide less safety

and increasing the congestion levels.

Alternative options for Junction control on UER -1 & 2

Options 1: Signalized At-Grade JunctionsOption I

• Provision of signalizedjunctions

Pros and Cons• (+) Reduce in conflict

points• (+) increasing safety at

junction• (+) Pedestrian movement• (-) increase in travel time• (-) increase in delays

Options 2: Clover Leaf at JunctionsOption II

• Upgrading junction withinterchange

• Highly lucrative option

Pros and Cons• (+) Uninterrupted traffic

flow• (+) Negligible delay• (-) Increase in merging and

diverging points• (-) Increase in project cost• (-) High land acquisition is

required

Options 3: Grade Separation across Link RoadOption III

• Grade separation acrossproject road

• U-Turn Provision toRestrict Rt. TurningMovement

Pros and Cons• (+) Reduction in delay time

for the major traffic• (+) Reduction in signal

timings• (-) Engineering constraints

due presence of Nallhaalong UER II

• (-) Economically notfeasible

• (-) Increase in project cost

Options 4: Grade Separation along Link RoadOption III

• Grade separation acrossproject road

• U-Turn Provision toRestrict Rt. TurningMovement

Pros and Cons• (+) Negligible delay time

for the major traffic• (+) Reduction in signal

timings• (-) Construction cost is

relatively high• (-) Increase in project cost

JunctionControlOptions

CycleTimings(in Sec)

QueeLengths(in Mts.)

Delays (insec)

TravelTime (in

Mins)

Option 1:At Grade(Signalization)

180 150 120 8.0

Option 2:At Gradewith“cloverleaf”

- 40 10 5.5

Option 3:Gradeseparationacross thelink road

120 60 50 5.5

Option 4:Gradeseparationalong thelink road

90 25 30 4.3

Simulation Results for Jun. Control Options

Grade Separation at UER 1

Grade Separation at UER -2

Inference:• Grade separation along the project road is considered to

be the best junction control option in traffic point of view.

Evaluation of Junction control Options

• VISSIM is taken as a tool to evaluate the alternative junction control options in

the traffic maneuver point.

• Evaluation of alternative options has been done by taking Traffic (Delay,

Queue Lengths, Travel Time), Engg. Feasibility, Environment, Social and Cost.

Design Concepts

Evaluation Criteria

Total ScoreTrafficCirculation

EngineeringFeasibility

Social/Environment Cost

Weighting (%) 50 10 10 30 100

1. Project road with all accessesare at grade Low High Medium Low High

2. Flyover with Cloverleaf atUER's Medium Medium Medium High Medium

3. Flyover at UER's with elevatedU-turn Medium Medium Medium High Medium

4. Flyover at project road High High Medium High Very High

Conclusion & Recommendation• There shall be coordination approach between different agencies of

both the states during policy and planning stage of urban transport

projects to avoid such issues.

• Evaluation of geometric design in terms of safety can be done using

micro simulation and may be made a part of the safety audit studies.

• Micro simulation VISSIM can be used for development of decision

matrix in finalizing junction type.

• Safety of road users to be given higher priority while planning of links

and use of micro simulation to be added in the policy and guidelines.

THANK YOU