Advertisement

Analysis of Two-Lane, Two-Way Highways

  • Roger P. RoessEmail author
  • Elena S. Prassas
Chapter
  • 1.7k Downloads
Part of the Springer Tracts on Transportation and Traffic book series (STTT, volume 5)

Abstract

The 1950 HCM [1] recognized the critical interaction between directional flows on a two-lane, two-way rural highway. Because of this, in 1950 and 1965, the models for two-lane highways dealt with both directions simultaneously.

In 1950, it was argued that to keep a single lane in one direction fully utilized, that passing opportunities had to be unrestricted by alignment, sight distance, or the existence of flow in the opposite direction. Since the basic capacity of a lane on a multilane facility had been established as 2,000 pc/h/ln, it was argued that this could be achieved on a two-lane highway only when there was no opposing flow to inhibit passing.

Keywords

Transportation Research Adjustment Factor Heavy Vehicle Service Volume Service Flow 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Highway Capacity Manual, Bureau of Public Roads, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC (1950)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 87, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (1965)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (1985)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Messer, C.J.: Two-Lane, Two-Way Rural highway Level of Service and Capacity Procedures. Project Report, NCHRP Project 2-38A, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX (February 1983)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Messer, C.J.: Two-Lane, Two-Way Rural Highway Capacity. Final Report, NCHRP Project 2-38A, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX (February 1983)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Harwood, D.W., May Jr., A.D., Anderson, B., Leeman, L., Archilla, A.R.: Capacity and Quality of Service of Two-Lane Highways. Final Report, NCHRP Project 3-55(3), Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roess, R.P., Prassas, E.S.: Traffic Engineering, 3rd edn. Pearson-Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harwood, D.W., Potts, L., Bauer, K., Bonneson, J., Elefteriadou, L.: Two-Lane Road Analysis Methodology in the Highway Capacity Manual. Final Report, NCHRP Project 20-7 (Task 160), Midwest Research Institute, Kansas City, Mo. (September 2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luttinen, R., Dixon, M., Washburn, S.: Two-Lane Highway Analysis in the HCM 2000. Draft White Paper (2005) (unpublished)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Roess, R.: Memorandum to the Uninterrupted Flow Group (August 2008) (unpublished)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roess, R.: Memorandum to the Uninterrupted Flow Group (December 2008) (unpublished)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Washburn, S., McLoed, D., Courage, K.: Adaptation of Highway Capacity Manual 2000 for Planning Level Analysis of Two-Lane and Multilane Highways in Florida. Transportation Research Record 1802. Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Highway Capacity Manual. Transportation Research Board, Washington DC (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EmeritusNYU Polytechnic School of EngineeringNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Transportation EngineeringNYU Polytechnic School of EngineeringNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations