Paper

MICROSIMULATION OF “TURBO”
ROUNDABOUTS
Budapest Conference and PTV Vision Workshops 2007

Goran Jovanović, B Sc CEng, APPIA d.o.o., Slovenia

David Lavrič, B Sc CEng, APPIA d.o.o., Slovenia

Budapest May 30 - June 1, 2007

 The history of roundabouts in Slovenia

1 The history of roundabouts in Slovenia

Roundabouts or in the past named ‘’traffic islands”, had been introduced in the early
history of Yugoslavia. They developed like in the rest of the world. Everything
started as a city square (Figure 1) with variety of activities around the square
(shops, promenade, crafts ..etc.) and of course with traffic circling around.

Figure 1: Main Square in Maribor, 1920

As traffic increased the needs of traffic regulations appeared. At the beginning they
had started with some new geometric elements (islands) and reducing the width of
the squares. The first reconstruction of the square into the central island is noticed
in Maribor in the year 1938. With this reconstruction the width of the square was
reduced and the new possibilities for public marketing with tower in the middle of
island was invented (Figure 2).

Figure 2: Main Square in Maribor, 1938

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 2/11

 Modern approach

In the early 50’s the first traffic rule, concerning the entry of the roundabouts (Figure
3) in Slovenia had been written.
Early circular intersection designs gave priority to entering vehicles facilitating high
speed entry, high crash experience and congestion.

Figure 3: Driving rules around “traffic islands”, Janko Struna, 1950

2 Modern approach
The modern roundabout was developed in the United Kingdom to rectify problems
associated with traffic circles. In 1966, the United Kingdom adopted mandatory
“give–way” rule at all circular intersections. The vehicles entering the roundabout
yield to the traffic in the roundabout. In addition, smaller circular intersections were
proposed that required adequate horizontal curvature of vehicle paths to achieve
slower entry and circulating speeds.

In the past four decades, modern roundabouts or circular intersections have been
used mostly in Europe and Commonwealth countries. Despite the tens of
thousands of modern roundabouts in operation around the world, roundabouts have
been slow to gain support in the Slovenia. When Slovenia became an independent
country, in the beginning of 90’s, the need for establishing new legislation for the
field of road construction and road traffic appeared. At the same time the modern
roundabout arrived in Slovenia. The lack of our own guidelines forced the designers
to choose among foreign guidelines. Thus, the choice of a certain guideline
depended on designer’s subjective estimation and on literature and articles, which
was attainable at that time. This caused a partial disunity at designing the first few
roundabouts in Slovenia.

The first huge roundabout (D=200 m) on freeway interchange (Figure 4), was built
in 1992 at the interchange in capital Ljubljana. Also we have “invented” the 3 lanes
roundabout with just one entry and one exit lane per leg (built in Ljubljana). Several
other roundabouts, from that time, were built in just about every municipality in the
new country; need to have at least one.

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 3/11

 Modern approach

We were aware at least the capacity problems just after the first applications of
modern roundabouts. Both Universities (University of Ljubljana and Maribor) had
started with practical education on SIDRA software. This early beginnings
influenced also on the fact that, Slovenia with 2 millions inhabitants, is on the 10th
place concerning the number of SIDRA licenses in the world.

At the beginning there was also a problem to take into the account the influence
between intersections.

Figure 4: Freeway interchange of main state road G1-8 and highway H3 in

Ljubljana

We have started to improvise with TSIS software (Figure 5) in the middle of 90’s.
The first micro simulations of roundabouts were made by combining the standard
give –way intersections.

Figure 5: Micro simulation of roundabout using TSIS software, 1997

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 4/11

 Capacity estimation problems of Roundabouts

3 Capacity estimation problems of Roundabouts

The gap acceptance method for calculating the capacity of roundabouts is mostly
used and also directed in our Regulation for roads design. SIDRA (Figure 5) uses
advanced gap acceptance techniques for roundabout capacity and performance
analysis; as such it differs from the empirical approach used in the U.K. and
elsewhere. SIDRA gap acceptance models are used not only for capacity
estimation, but also for the estimation of delay, queue length and other performance
measures. The HCM approach to capacity modelling for roundabouts is based on
gap-acceptance method consistent with the SIDRA method.

Gap acceptance parameters are related to roundabout geometry as well as

circulation and entry flows. In many cases our traffic engineers take advantage for
increasing the capacity of roundabout just with increasing the number of entry
lanes. This has huge influence on decreasing the follow-up headway and critical
gap is proportional to the follow-up headway. The ratio of the critical gap to the
follow-up headway is in the range 1.1 to 2.1, and decreases with increasing number
of circulating lanes, and average entry lane width. Thus, driver behavior changes
with roundabout geometry as well as increased circulation flows (more vehicles can
depart through an acceptable gap, and shorter critical gaps are accepted).

We have built plenty of two lanes roundabouts with two entry (in some cases also
with two exit) lanes. From the practice we can consider, that in many cases (no
matter the size and structure of entry flow) the dominant and mostly used lane is
outside entry and circulating lane. The main reason for thus driver behavior is the
size of outside roundabout diameter. If we transfer the diameter into the time that
one driver needs to change the lane into the circulation area, we can conclude, that
our two lane roundabouts are too small. This affects also some accident situation
appearing just in the area of entering/exiting the roundabout from inner circulation
lane. We have established that in some cases, it would be better, if we close that
extra lane, or if we can find some alternative solution. Alternative solution has to be
oriented in the way of reducing conflict points in two lane roundabouts. The
alternative solution can be so called Turbo Roundabout.

At the moment the group of experts is preparing the update of our existing
Roundabouts Technical Specifications. The proposal is, that outside diameter for
two lanes roundabouts should not be smaller than 70 m. This means, that in urban
area, where we have the problem with space limitation, we can not implement the
two lanes roundabouts.

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 5/11

 New era of roundabouts

Figure 5: SIDRA capacity estimation of two lane roundabout, 1997

4 New era of roundabouts

Following the Slovenian statistics there is 22% more accidents in two lane
roundabouts. The goal of research work concerning the new types of roundabouts
was possibilities for improving the capacity, circulation and safety of two lane
roundabouts. First pilot projects and implementations realized that it is possible to
achieve those goals with an innovative system of lanes and markings. We have
found the solution in so called TURBO roundabouts. The main characteristic of a
turbo roundabout is separated traffic lanes in circulatory carriageways streams.
Traffic streams already separate before the approach to the roundabout are
separated on the roundabout and also separately lead away from the roundabout
(Figure 6). Separation is achieved with de-leveled traffic islands, delineators,
lowered edging stones or other similar manners, and it is only interrupted at the
foreseen approaches (inner circular driveway) to the roundabout.

Figure 6: Separate traffic streams in a turbo-roundabout; Heerlen, the Netherlands

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 6/11

 Capacity estimation of turbo roundabouts

Figure 7: Basic design of turbo-roundabout

Group of experts, leads by Ph.D. Tomaž Tollazzi, D.Sc. (University of Maribor), is

completing research of traffic-technical, design and traffic-safety characteristics of
turbo-roundabouts before first implementation in Slovenian. We have realized that
some characteristics can be determined with a theoretical approach, others using
simulations, however, determining some characteristic will require an
implementation of a pilot project with direct field application and monitoring the
"reactions" and behavior of drivers and the "before-after" situation analysis.

5 Capacity estimation of turbo roundabouts

At the moment there is no method for calculating the capacity of turbo roundabouts.
We can calculation capacity of a planned turbo roundabout according to existing
methods:

• modified Bovy method,

• HBS method and

• Akcelik method (SIDRA).

In this article we will concentrate only in possibilities for capacity estimation using
micro simulation. After a quick look on the driveway details of turbo roundabout, we
conclude, that the only software that could simulate this complex design is PTV
VISSIM.

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 7/11

 Capacity estimation of turbo roundabouts

5.1 Capacity estimation of turbo roundabouts using

micro simulation

The subject of theoretical research was an existing, isolated, "normal" two-lane,

three-armed roundabout intersection on West Maribor bypass. It is foreseen, that
another arm is added to the existing roundabout intersection and that it is going to
have two lanes in the circular driveway, two approaching and two exit lanes in the
north-south direction, and one approaching and one exit lane in the east-west
direction.

The capacity verification of a normal two-lane and a turbo-roundabout intersection

is carried out using the PTV VISSIM 4.10 program tool. In the first stage, with a
number of links and connections, mathematical models of a normal and a turbo-
roundabout were produced, basing on the digital Arial-Photo snap-shot and the
segment from the general design project of reconstruction. At the analysis, delays
and queue lengths for four different load examples have been evaluated, and
according to these results the comparison of capacity parameters had been carried
out. Load examples presents fictive traffic load of 750, 1000, 1250 and 1500
vehicles per peak hour, on main road (N-S). The load on the minor approaches (the
E-W) is 75, 100, 125 and 150 vehicles per peak hour. In the analysis fictive traffic
load had been used, because the implementation of the fourth arm of the
roundabout and the nearby construction will cause the re-distribution and increase
of traffic load, which will be treated in detail in the following phases of the project
(pilot project).

Figure 8: Modeled turbo-roundabout with PTV VISSIM

5.2 Calibration

In order to achieve as accurate results as possible, we carried out a calibration of

the microscopic model. The VISSIM program tool actually contains a number of

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 8/11

 Capacity estimation of turbo roundabouts

simulation parameters, that can affect the simulation results (network, vehicle,
driver characteristics), but for the calibration process we focused mainly on the
parameters, defined in VISSIM in the so-called Priority Rules. In the parameters
themselves the rules of driving, the minimum critical gap time (drivers' reaction
time) and the minimum headway are determined. VISSIM determines priority to a
certain participant according to the set Priority Rules. Depending on the situation at
the conflict area, an individual decides either to continue with their route or to wait
for more suitable traffic conditions. At the marked spot, they must always examine
both pre-determined conditions (minimum headway and the minimum gap time),
before continuing with their route. The fact, that the inner lane of the roundabout
becomes more attractive for the users, is also considered in the model.

Since we do not have experience with the behavior of drivers in turbo-roundabouts,

we used in the simulation model the same parameters as in the previously
conducted research (Tollazzi & all, 2005), which is considered a good basis for
comparison of results. Same construction elements, same vehicle types, same
drivers' behavior and same simulation parameters have also been used.

5.3 Results of micro-simulation capacity analysis

Traffic characteristics and the "real-time" microsimulation results have to be

assembled for the appropriate analysis and evaluation of the capacity parameters.
In accordance to the treated problem we decided to evaluate the efficiency of the
analyzed geometry according to the following criteria: average delays per vehicle [s]
(all vehicle types considered, Figure 9) an average queue length [m] (Figure 10).

Comparison of delay

80
Roundabout
70 Turbo-roundabout 69,3

60

50
Delay (s)

42,6
40

32,2
30

20
7,5
12,1
10 4

3,3 5,8
0
750 1000 1250 1500
Number of vehicles per hour

Figure 9: Delays in a normal and a turbo-roundabout depending on the load example

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 9/11

 Conclusion

Comparison of average queue

90
Roundabout 85,6
80 Turbo-roundabout

70

60

Average queue (m)

50 48,4

40

30 31

20

10
1,4 6,6
0 0,3 1,4
750 1000 1250 1500
Number of vehicles per hour

Figure 10: Average queue lengths in a normal and a turbo-roundabout

The results of traffic stream micro-simulation evidently show that in case of small
traffic load there is no significant difference between a normal and a turbo-
roundabout. Delays and queue lengths are comparable (load examples "750" and
"1000").

In case of larger traffic load (load examples "1250" and "1500"), a significant
difference in favor of the turbo-roundabout is evident.

Delays in the load example "1250" come to 32,2 seconds in the normal roundabout
intersection (LOS=C), and to 12,1 seconds in the turbo-roundabout (LOS=B).
Delays in the load example "1500" come to 69,3 seconds in the normal roundabout
intersection (LOS=E), and to 42,6 seconds in the turbo-roundabout (LOS=D).

The mentioned differences occur mostly due to insufficient usage of the inner
circular lane in a normal roundabout intersection, since in spite of two exit lanes, the
forward driving vehicles (direction N-S) start to change lanes just before the exit,
which causes time loss and delays. This problem does not occur in a turbo-
roundabout, this is why the inner circular lane works with full power.

6 Conclusion
Regarding the fact, that only few turbo-roundabouts have been implemented so far,
and even those only in the Netherlands, little research and experience exist in this
area, which causes a certain reserve to this novelty, since all their characteristics
are still unknown. Due to this, several approaches of establishing these
characteristics, among those the foreseen capacity of turbo-roundabouts are being
used.

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 10/11

 REFERENCES

The smallest difference in capacities had been detected between the modified Bovy
method and the Akcelik method, and it came up to 30 per cent in case of smaller
traffic load, and only up to 8 per cent in favor of the modified Bovy method in case
of larger traffic load.

The other concrete example was treated by a microscopic simulation model using
PTV VISSIM software. In the first stage, a mathematic model of a normal and a
turbo-roundabout has been designed, and in the second stage, the delays and
queue lengths for four different load examples have been evaluated, and basing on
them a comparison of capacity parameters has been carried out.

The results of the traffic stream micro-simulation evidently show that in case of
smaller traffic load there is no significant difference between a normal and a turbo-
roundabout. Significant difference occurs in case of larger traffic load; in this case
the delays are much shorter with turbo-roundabouts, thus achieving better service
levels.

The comparing analysis of calculations of capacities of turbo-roundabouts showed

a considerable dispersion of results depending on the method used, which had
been expected, since the mentioned methods are not intended for calculating
capacities of turbo-roundabouts, furthermore, at this point in time, there is no
method designed for calculating the capacity of a turbo-roundabout.

7 REFERENCES
T. Tollazzi: Roundabout (university book), second edition, Maribor, Technical
Faculties University of Maribior, Slovenia 2005

R. Akcelik: Capacity and Performance Analysis of Roundabout Metering Signals,

TRB National Roundabout Conference, Vail, Colorado, USA, 2005

R. Akcelik: aaSIDRA Traffic model reference guide, Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd,
Victoria, Australia, 2002

T. Tollazzi, B. Kralj, S. Destovnik: Pedestrians and roundabout capacity - a

simulation analysis. Suvremeni promet, 2005, vol 25, no. 6

© PTV AG 05/07 Page 11/11