Evaluation of performance measures for rural two-lane roads in Egypt

Traffic Operations on Rural Two-Lane Highways: A Review on Performance Measures and Indicators

“…Using ATS as a percentage of freeflow speed was viewed as a good indicator of the amount of speed reduction due to traffic and the amount of vehicular interaction in the traffic stream. However, evaluations using field data in the US, Egypt and Spain (6,8,9) showed that the speed measures did not exhibit good correlations with platooning variables compared to other performance measures investigated in these studies. Further, Luttinen (5) reported on an older study by Kiljunen & Summala in 1996 which proposed the use of ATS/FFS as a performance measure on Finnish two-lane highways.…”

“…Table 1 shows the LOS criteria for two-lane highways in the 2016 HCM (1). Several studies reported limitations in the current performance measures used by the HCM (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14). The main performance measure PTSF is limited in that it is difficult to measure in the field, is not compatible with the service measures of other facilities, does not describe the extent of congestion, and is not very useful in other analyses (e.g.…”

Improved Analysis of Two-Lane Highway Capacity and Operational Performance

“…This measure was originally proposed by Al-Kaisy and Freedman (2011) and was later investigated by Hashim and Abdel-Wahed (2011), Ghosh et al (2013), andMoreno et al (2014). PI is defined as the product of PF and the probability of desired speeds being greater than the average speed of platoon leaders.…”

“…The merit of using compound measures is the fact that those measures usually combine the advantages of more than one indicator of traffic performance on two-lane highways (e.g., amount of platooning and traffic level). One important combination measure is follower density, which was originally adopted by the South African National Roads Agency about ten years ago (Van As, 2003;Van As and Niekerk, 2004) and was later investigated in other studies (Catbagan and Nakamura, 2006;Al-Kaisy and Karjala, 2008;Hashim and Abdel-Wahed, 2011;Moreno et al, 2014). Follower density is defined as the product of PF and traffic density; therefore, this measure is derived using two important flow characteristics: traffic flow and density.…”

“…It is defined as the percentage of vehicles in the traffic stream with headways of less than three seconds (TRB, 2000(TRB, , 2010. A few recent studies have examined PF along with other proposed performance measures to evaluate their suitability for use on two-lane highways (Al-Kaisy and Karjala, 2008;Catbagan and Nakamura, 2006;Hashim and Abdel-Wahed, 2011;Van As, 2003;ODOT, 2014).…”