Advertisement

Comparative Evaluation of Density Estimation Methods on Different Uninterrupted Roadway Facilities: Few Case Studies in India

  • Nipjyoti Bharadwaj
  • Pallav Kumar
  • Ajinkya S. Mane
  • Shriniwas S. Arkatkar
  • Ashish Bhaskar
  • Gaurang J. Joshi
Original Article

Abstract

Traffic density is one of the fundamental macroscopic characteristics and it is of prime importance when assessment of a facility has to be done based on both users as well as planner’s perspective. According to the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), USA, for expressways and multilane roads, the Level-of-Service (LoS) has been defined taking density as the governing factor. Density is treated as the fundamental macroscopic spatial parameter of traffic flow, as it directly indicates the quality of traffic and ease with which one can drive. The present research study focuses on applicability of density estimation methods on multi-class, heterogeneous, non-lane based Indian traffic condition. In this research study, mid-block road sections namely, on Delhi-Gurgaon Expressway, Ahmedabad-Vadodara Expressway, National Highway (NH)-8 and urban arterial road in Chennai are considered. The expressways are the highest class of roads in Indian road network with different roadway, traffic conditions and with access control facilities. Delhi–Gurgoan Expressway is eight-lane divided facility and Ahemdabad –Vadodara Expressway is four-lane divided with 2.6 m paved shoulder. On the other hand, selected section on National Highway (NH8) is four-lane divided road. Real traffic data was collected through video-graphic survey on all these roads with different traffic conditions. HCVs (Heavy Commercial Vehicles) and MCVs (Multi-axle Commercial Vehicles) were the major traffic composition in congested regime. Thus, the present study focuses on the comparison of density estimation methods on different roadway and traffic conditions. The three methods to be employed for the purpose of estimating traffic density on the study section are: (1) using traffic flow fundamental equation relating speed, flow and density, HCM definition (2) using Cumulative input–output Plots (Input–Output method) (3) Eddie’s (x, t) method. This paper aims to empirically quantify the difference in the density estimation based on the aforementioned methods. Assuming input–output provides theoretical density, the errors in the estimation of density using fundamental equation under different traffic flow conditions are also quantified. In spite of growing body of literature disputing about the effectiveness and applicability of various density estimation methods, the key finding from this research indicates that all three abovementioned methods works very well under uncongested traffic flow condition. However, for oversaturated traffic conditions the density estimation using fundamental relationship has errors, primarily due to errors in estimation of the space mean speed since the vehicles which persisted within trap length for period longer than time-interval under consideration are not incorporated in the calculation, which is not the case for other two methods. Moreover, the research study concludes that smaller trap length (<100 m) can have errors in estimation of density values as compared to actual density values. The findings are useful for condition assessment of traffic flow for design and operation purposes.

Keywords

Density Expressways National highway Urban arterial road Uncongested regime Congested regime Fundamental relationship Cumulative plots Edie’s definition 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study is a part of “Development of Indo-HCM” project sponsored by planning commission of India. The Authors are very grateful to Central Road Research Institute CRRI-Delhi for the same. The authors acknowledge the opportunity to present the research work that forms the basis of this article at the 3rd Conference of the Transportation Research Group of India held at Kolkata (India) from 17 to 20 December, 2015.

References

  1. 1.
    Ameena P, Lelitha V, Subramanian SC, Manda H (2009) Prediction of traffic density for congestion analysis under Indian Traffic Conditions. Proceedings of the 12th International IEEE Conference on Intelligent Transportation Systems, St. Louis, MO, USA, October 3–7, 2009Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arasan VT, Koshy RZ (2005) Methodology for modelling highly heterogeneous traffic flow. J Transp Eng 131:544–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arasan VT, Dhivya G (2010) Simulation of Highly Heterogeneous Traffic Flow. Proceeding of 24th European Conference on Modelling and Simulation, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia during 1–4 June, 2010, pp 81–87Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asha R, Lelitha V, Subramanian C (2011) Traffic Density Estimation under Heterogeneous Traffic Condition using Data Fusion. IEEE Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV)Baden-Baden, Germany, June 5–9, 2011Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bham GH, Benekohal RF (2004) A high fidelity traffic simulation model based on celular autómata and car-following concepts. Transp Res Part C: Emerg Techol 12(1):1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bhaskar A, Chung E (2013) Fundamental understanding on the use of Bluetooth scanner as a complementary transport data. Transport Res C Emer Technol 37:42–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhaskar A, Chung E, Dumont AG (2010) Analysis for the Use of Cumulative Plots for Travel Time Estimation on Signalized Network. Int J Intell Transp Syst Res 8:151–163Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bhaskar A, Chung E, Dumont AG (2011) Fusing loop detector and probe vehicle data to estimate travel time statistics on signalized urban networks. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 26:433–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhaskar A, Tsubota T, Kieu LM, Chung E (2014) Urban traffic state estimation: fusing point and zone based data. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol 48:120–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cassidy M, Coifman B (2014) Relation among average speed, flow, and density and analogous relation between density and occupancy. Transportation Research Record No 1591Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chari SR, Badarinath KM (1983) Study of mixed traffic stream parameters through time lapse photography. Highway Research Bulletin (Indian Road Congress, Highway Research Board). 20:57–83Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Edie LC (1961) Car Following and Steady-State Theory for Non-Congested Traffic. Oper Res 9(1):66–76MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Edie LC (1965) Discussion of Traffic Stream Measurements and Definitions. Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on the Theory of Traffic Flow. Almond J (ed), Paris, OECD, pp 139–154Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gazis D, Liu C (2003) Kalman filtering estimation of traffic counts for two network links in tandem. Transp Res Part B 37:737–745CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ghosh D, Knapp CH (1978) Estimation of traffic variables using a linear model of traffic flow. Transp Res 12(6):395–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hall FL (1986) The relationship between occupancy and density. Transp Forum 3(3):46–52MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Haynes J (1965) Some considerations of vehicular density on urban freeways. Highway Research Board, Record 99, HRB, Washington D.C., 59–80Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    HCM (2000) Highway Capacity Manual 2000 (Transportation Research Board)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    HCM (2010) Highway Capacity Manual 2010 (Transportation Research Board)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Johnson AN (1928) Aerial Survey of Highway Traffic between Baltimore and Washington. Highway Research board. Proceedings, 1928, vol. 8, 106–115Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kanagaraj V, Asaithambi G, Toledo T, Lee TC (2015) Trajectory data and flow characteristics of mixed traffic. paper presented at the 94th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.CGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Khanna SK, Patel LM, Chari SR (1976) Study of traffic flow characteristics on Roorkee Hardwar road during kumbh-mela. Indian Highw 4(7):22–39Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kenneth DL, Ronald KK (1982) Advances in business and management forecasting. Emerald Books, BingleyGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kumar VM, Rao SK (1998) Headway and speed studies on two-lane highways. Indian highw 26(5):23–36Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lewis CD (1982) International and business forecasting methods. Butterworths, LondonGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Makigami Y, Newell G, Rothery R (1971) Three-dimensional representation of traffic flow. Transp Sci 5:302–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Mallikarjuna C, Rao KR (2006) Area Occupancy Characteristics of Heterogeneous Traffic. Transportmetrica 2(3):223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    May AD (1962) California Freeway Operations Study. Thompson Ramo Wooldridge, Chats-worth, 71–81 and 93–100Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    May AD (1990) Traffic flow fundamentals. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Muñoz L, Sun X, Horowitz R, Alvarez L (2003) Traffic density estimation with the cell transmission model. In Proceedings of American Control Conference 2003, IEEE, vol. 5, pp 3750–3755Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nazar PA (2001) Density of mixed traffic stream from the speeds of individual vehicles. Traffic Eng Control 42(9):308–310Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ni D, Leonard JD (2006) Direct Methods of Determining Traffic Stream Characteristics by Definition. TRB Annual Meeting CD-ROMGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Obrien E, Lipari A, Caprani C (2011) Estimation of density and gaps in congested traffic. Proceedings of the Irish Transportation Research Network 2011, ITRN2011, 31 Aug–1 Sept, CorkGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Qiu TJ, Lu XY, Andy HF, Shladover C, Steven E (2010) Estimation of Freeway Traffic Density with Loop Detector and Probe Vehicle Data. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2178, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Saberi M, Mahmassani H, Hou T, Zockaie A (2014) Estimating Network Fundamental Diagram using Three-Dimensional Vehicle Trajectories: Extending Edie’s Definitions of Traffic Flow Variables to Networks. Transport Res Rec 2422:12–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Sahoo PK, Rao SK, Kumar VM (1996) A study of traffic characteristics on two stretches of national highway no 5, Indian Highways. Indian Road Congr 24(4):11–17Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Singh B (1999) Simulation and Animation of heterogeneous traffic on urban roads. Ph. D. Thesis, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Singh K, Li B (2012) Estimation of Traffic Densities for Multilane Roadways Using a Markov Model Approach. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics. vol 59. NO. 11Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Sun X, Mufioz L, Horowitz R, Alvarez L (2001) Traffic Density Estimation with the Cell Transmission Mode. Proceedings of the American Control Conference Denver, ColoradoGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Sun X, Muñoz L, Horowitz R (2003) Highway traffic state estimation using improved mixture Kalman filters for effective ramp metering control. In 42nd IEEE Conference on Proceedings of Decision and Control, 2003, IEEE, vol 6, pp 6333–6338Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sun X, Muñoz L, Horowitz R (2003) Highway Traffic State Estimation Using Improved Mixture Kalman Filters for Effective Ramp Metering Control. Proceedings of the 42nd IEEE Conference on Deeidon and Control Maui, Hawaii USA, December 2003Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sun X, Muñoz, L, Horowitz R (2004) Mixture Kalman Filter Based Highway Congestion Mode and Vehicle Density Estimator and its application. Proceeding of the 2004 American Control Conference Boston, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Tsubota T, Bhaskar A, Nantes A, Chung E, Gayah VV (2015) Comparative analysis of traffic state estimation: cumulative counts-based and trajectory-based methods. Transp Res Rec J Transp Res Board 2491, pp 43–52Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Takahiro T, Ashish B, Alfredo N, Edward C, Vikash VG (2015) Comparative Analysis of Traffic State Estimation Cumulative Counts-based and Trajectory-based Methods. Transport Research RecordGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Tiwari G, Joseph P, Fazio E, Chatteerjee N (2008) Continuity equation validation for non-homogeneous traffic. J Transp Eng ASCE 134(3):118–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Traffic Data Extractor IIT Bombay (2013). http://www.civil.iitb.ac.in/tvm/tde2/. Accessed 10 Jan 2015

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nipjyoti Bharadwaj
    • 1
  • Pallav Kumar
    • 1
  • Ajinkya S. Mane
    • 1
  • Shriniwas S. Arkatkar
    • 1
  • Ashish Bhaskar
    • 2
  • Gaurang J. Joshi
    • 1
  1. 1.Civil Engineering DepartmentSardar Vallabhbhai National Institute of Technology (SVNIT)SuratIndia
  2. 2.Civil Engineering and the Built EnvironmentQUTBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations