AP-R609-19 Improving - The Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters To Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling PDF

Research Report
AP-R609-19
Improving the Reliability of Heavy Vehicle

Parameters to Support More Accurate Traffic
Modelling in Australia and New Zealand
Improving the Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters to Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling in
Australia & New Zealand
Prepared by Publisher
Dr Ian Espada, Dr Chenyang Li, Jason Petsos and Zarko Andjic Austroads Ltd.
Level 9, 287 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000 Australia
Project Manager Phone: +61 2 8265 3300
austroads@austroads.com.au
TK Kim
www.austroads.com.au
Abstract About Austroads

This report explores heavy vehicle parameters which can be used to Austroads is the peak organisation of Australasian road
improve the accuracy of traffic modelling in Australia and New transport and traffic agencies.
Zealand. The focus was on relevant parameters used in SIDRA,
LINSIG, AIMSUN and VISSIM to model heavy vehicle movements in Austroads’ purpose is to support our member organisations to
interrupted traffic flow conditions. Literature reviews and stakeholder deliver an improved Australasian road transport network. To
consultations were conducted. Field surveys were also conducted to succeed in this task, we undertake leading-edge road and
measure real-world heavy vehicle characteristics. The field survey transport research which underpins our input to policy
results were then utilised to develop a set of parameters. development and published guidance on the design,
construction and management of the road network and its
associated infrastructure.
Austroads provides a collective approach that delivers value
for money, encourages shared knowledge and drives
Keywords
consistency for road users.
Heavy vehicles, field survey, traffic modelling, parameter calibration,
SIDRA, LINSIG, AIMSUN and VISSIM Austroads is governed by a Board consisting of senior
executive representatives from each of its eleven member
organisations:
• Transport for NSW
• Department of Transport Victoria
ISBN 978-1-925854-56-5
• Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads
Austroads Project No. NEG6114 • Main Roads Western Australia
Austroads Publication No. AP-609-19 • Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure
South Australia
Publication date November 2019
• Department of State Growth Tasmania
Pages 91
• Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Logistics
Northern Territory
• Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate,
Australian Capital Territory
• The Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Cities and
© Austroads 2019 Regional Development
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the • Australian Local Government Association
Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process • New Zealand Transport Agency.
without the prior written permission of Austroads.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the inputs from the Austroads project reference group and the software developers, i.e. SIDRA, LINSIG,
AIMSUN and VISSIM.
This report has been prepared for Austroads as part of its work to promote improved Australian and New Zealand transport outcomes by
providing expert technical input on road and road transport issues.
Individual road agencies will determine their response to this report following consideration of their legislative or administrative
arrangements, available funding, as well as local circumstances and priorities.
Austroads believes this publication to be correct at the time of printing and does not accept responsibility for any consequences arising from
the use of information herein. Readers should rely on their own skill and judgement to apply information to particular issues.
Improving the Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters to Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling in Australia & New Zealand
Summary
Heavy vehicle traffic on the arterial road network is increasing and the length and low acceleration capability
of heavy vehicles impact the performance of intersections. The accurate modelling of heavy vehicles is
necessary so that traffic schemes being examined by the models are assessed properly. It is therefore
important to review the heavy vehicle parameters currently used in traffic modelling software. The aim of this
project was to identify the parameters that can be used in the SIDRA, LINSIG, VISSIM and AIMSUN models.
The project focused on Austroads vehicle classes from 3 to 12 and four movement types, namely through,
unopposed turn, restricted unopposed turn, and opposed turn. The vehicle classes were grouped into five
types as follows:
• rigid trucks (class 3 to 5)
• single articulated trucks (class 6 to 9)
• B-double trucks (class 10)
• double road trains (class 11) 1
• triple road trains (class 12).
A review of literature and consultation workshops on the software were conducted to identify key parameters
relevant to heavy vehicle movement modelling. Field surveys were conducted to collect the data needed to
estimate the heavy vehicle characteristics required to develop the model parameters. The field surveys
involved video data collection which was undertaken at locations in Perth and Melbourne, including four
signalised intersections and one unsignalised intersection. The surveyed attributes included vehicle length,
clearance space, acceleration, start-up and saturation headways, through and turning speeds, critical gap
and follow-up headway. Powertrain analysis using the DriveSIM software was also conducted to assess
heavy vehicle acceleration under different loads and grades as supplemental information. The results of the
survey and powertrain analysis served as the basis for parameter development, as follows:
• Key parameters relevant to traffic movements in SIDRA were prepared, including vehicle length, queue
space, passenger car equivalent, turning vehicle factor, and gap acceptance factor.
• Passenger car unit factors for LINSIG were developed.
• AIMSUN parameters were examined in detail including maximum acceleration, reaction time and turn
speed.
• Parameters in VISSIM that were examined included the Wiedemann 74 parameters (i.e. additive and
multiplicative parts of safety distance), power distribution, weight distribution, maximum acceleration
function, and desired acceleration function.
The developed parameters were checked against field values and they were shown to be able to reasonably
accurately replicate field measured start-up and saturation headways.
This report has identified a set of heavy vehicle parameters that can be used as a guide by jurisdictions for
model development. The parameters provide particularly useful guidance when modelling conditions similar to
the calibration dataset, i.e. arterials that are relatively flat and in a 60 to 70 km/h speed limit zone. Application of
the parameters to dissimilar traffic and highway conditions should be reviewed using field observations.
It is recommended that further field research into the HV parameters be carried out: under more varied
conditions, in particular on a range of gradients; on link segments, away from intersection effects; and for
heavy vehicles at full legal mass/part-laden/unladen. Having regard to the variances noted between the
Perth and Melbourne HV survey sites, it is further recommended that research also be undertaken at more
sites across Australia.
1 An Austroads class 11 vehicle can be both a 30m PBS 2B heavy vehicle or a 36.5 Type 1 Road Train.
Austroads 2019 | page i

Contents
Summary ......................................................................................................................................................... i
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Key Issue .......................................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Purpose ............................................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Scope ............................................................................................................................................... 1
1.3.1 Vehicle Types ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.3.2 Parameters .......................................................................................................................... 1
1.3.3 Software .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Methodology ..................................................................................................................................... 2
1.5 Scope of the Report ......................................................................................................................... 2
2. Literature Review and Consultation Workshops ................................................................................ 3
2.1 Modelling Software ........................................................................................................................... 3
2.1.1 SIDRA .................................................................................................................................. 3
2.1.2 LINSIG ................................................................................................................................. 5
2.1.3 AIMSUN ............................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.4 VISSIM .............................................................................................................................. 10
2.2 Heavy Vehicle Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 12
2.2.1 Length and Width .............................................................................................................. 12
2.2.2 Clearance Space ............................................................................................................... 13
2.2.3 Acceleration and Deceleration .......................................................................................... 14
2.2.4 Power-to-Weight Ratio ...................................................................................................... 16
2.2.5 Mass .................................................................................................................................. 16
2.2.6 Turning Speed ................................................................................................................... 16
2.2.7 Passenger Car Unit ........................................................................................................... 18
2.2.8 Critical Gap ........................................................................................................................ 20
2.2.9 Reaction Time ................................................................................................................... 21
2.2.10 Lane Changing .................................................................................................................. 21
2.2.11 Overtaking ......................................................................................................................... 22
2.2.12 Turning Path and Queue Spillback.................................................................................... 22
2.2.13 Environmental Impacts ...................................................................................................... 22
2.3 Summary ........................................................................................................................................ 22
3. Heavy Vehicle Survey .......................................................................................................................... 24
3.1 Video Survey .................................................................................................................................. 24
3.2 Heavy Vehicle Length .................................................................................................................... 25
3.3 Clearance Space ............................................................................................................................ 25
3.4 Acceleration .................................................................................................................................... 26
3.5 Start-up Headway ........................................................................................................................... 27
3.6 Saturation Headway ....................................................................................................................... 29
3.7 Turning Speed ................................................................................................................................ 30
3.8 Through Speed ............................................................................................................................... 31
3.9 Critical Gap and Follow-up Headway ............................................................................................. 32
3.9.1 Critical Gap ........................................................................................................................ 32
3.9.2 Follow-up Headway ........................................................................................................... 33
Austroads 2019 | page ii

3.10 Passenger Car Unit ........................................................................................................................ 33

3.11 Powertrain Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 34
4. Parameter Development ...................................................................................................................... 37
4.1 SIDRA............................................................................................................................................. 37
4.1.1 Vehicle Length ................................................................................................................... 37
4.1.2 Queue Space..................................................................................................................... 38
4.1.3 Passenger Car Equivalent ................................................................................................. 38
4.1.4 Turning Vehicle Factor ...................................................................................................... 38
4.1.5 Gap Acceptance Factor ..................................................................................................... 39
4.2 LINSIG ............................................................................................................................................ 39
4.3 AIMSUN.......................................................................................................................................... 40
4.3.1 Calibration Methodology .................................................................................................... 40
4.3.2 Road Network Used in Calibration .................................................................................... 41
4.3.3 Calibration Results – Rigid Truck ...................................................................................... 42
4.3.4 Calibration Results – Single Articulated ............................................................................ 45
4.3.5 Calibration Results – B-double .......................................................................................... 47
4.3.6 Calibration Results – Double Road Train .......................................................................... 49
4.3.7 Recommended Ranges of Parameter Values for AIMSUN .............................................. 51
4.3.8 Calibration Check under Mixed Traffic Conditions ............................................................ 51
4.4 VISSIM ........................................................................................................................................... 54
4.4.1 Road Network Development ............................................................................................. 54
4.4.2 Vehicle Inputs .................................................................................................................... 56
4.4.3 Desired Speeds and Reduced Speed Areas .................................................................... 56
4.4.4 Signal Heads and Data Collection Points ......................................................................... 56
4.4.5 Gradients ........................................................................................................................... 57
4.4.6 Vehicle Types .................................................................................................................... 58
4.4.7 Driving Behaviours ............................................................................................................ 59
4.4.8 Methodology of Calibration and Mixed Traffic Checking ................................................... 60
4.4.9 Calibration Results – Rigid Truck ...................................................................................... 61
4.4.10 Calibration Results – Single Articulated ............................................................................ 61
4.4.11 Calibration Results – B-double .......................................................................................... 62
4.4.12 Calibration Results – Double Road Train .......................................................................... 63
4.4.13 Calibration Check under Mixed Traffic Conditions ............................................................ 64
4.4.14 Summary and Discussion .................................................................................................. 67
5. Conclusions.......................................................................................................................................... 69
5.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 69
5.2 Workshops ..................................................................................................................................... 70
5.3 Heavy Vehicle Surveys .................................................................................................................. 71
5.4 Parameter Development ................................................................................................................ 72
5.5 Suggestions for Future Study ......................................................................................................... 73
References ................................................................................................................................................... 74
Appendix A LINSIG Sensitivity Test ................................................................................................... 76
Appendix B VISSIM Calibration Issue of Double Road Trains ......................................................... 79
Appendix C VISSIM Mixed Traffic Checking Issue of Double Road Trains .................................... 83
Appendix D Acceleration Functions for VISSIM Calibration ............................................................ 85
Austroads 2019 | page iii

Tables
Table 2.1: SIDRA default parameters for length, queue space and PCU ....................................................... 3
Table 2.2: MRWA suggested PCU factors for SIDRA .................................................................................... 4
Table 2.3: TCE factors in SIDRA .................................................................................................................... 4
Table 2.4: Default critical gap and follow-up headway in SIDRA .................................................................... 4
Table 2.5: Gap acceptance and opposing vehicle factor in SIDRA ................................................................ 5
Table 2.6: MRWA suggested PCU factors for LINSIG .................................................................................... 5
Table 2.7: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model – typical parameters ................................ 6
Table 2.8: AIMSUN parameters prepared by DPTI of South Australia ........................................................... 7
Table 2.9: AIMSUN parameters prepared by TMR of Queensland ................................................................ 7
Table 2.10: Suggested reaction times for AIMSUN from MRWA and TMR ...................................................... 9
Table 2.11: Safety margin and time factor default parameters in AIMSUN ...................................................... 9
Table 2.12: Give-way time parameters suggested by DPTI and TMR ...........................................................10
Table 2.13: Turn type and desired speed ....................................................................................................... 11
Table 2.14: Vehicle length ............................................................................................................................... 13
Table 2.15: Clearance space .......................................................................................................................... 13
Table 2.16: Truck acceleration rates on an entry ramp – rigid and single articulated trucks ..........................14
Table 2.17: B-double acceleration and deceleration estimates ...................................................................... 14
Table 2.18: Double road train (30m PBS 2B heavy vehicle) acceleration characteristic estimates ...............15
Table 2.19: Deceleration characteristics of B-doubles and double road trains ...............................................15
Table 2.20: Acceleration and deceleration characteristics of car, rigid truck and single-articulated trucks ....15
Table 2.21: Power-to-weight ratio ................................................................................................................... 16
Table 2.22: Gross vehicle mass ...................................................................................................................... 16
Table 2.23: Turning speed .............................................................................................................................. 17
Table 2.24: Right-turning speed ...................................................................................................................... 17
Table 2.25: Queued vehicle right-turning speed ............................................................................................. 17
Table 2.26: PCU factors calculated for 14% heavy vehicles on rural roads ...................................................18
Table 2.27: PCU factors calculated for 5% heavy vehicles on an urban 3-lane road, for 70 km/h
unimpeded car speed, various grades and grade length ............................................................. 20
Table 2.28: PCU factors calculated for 5% heavy vehicles on an urban 3-lane road, for 80 km/h
unimpeded car speed, various grades and grade length ............................................................. 20
Table 2.29: Critical gap and follow-up headway – heavy vehicles ................................................................. 20
Table 2.30: Reaction time under various stimuli ............................................................................................. 21
Table 2.31: Reaction time to avoid an intersection collision ........................................................................... 21
Table 2.32: Heavy vehicle attributes relevant to movement through an arterial based on the
literature review ............................................................................................................................ 23
Table 3.1: Video survey location sites ........................................................................................................... 24
Table 3.2: Surveyed heavy vehicle length – applicable to the survey sites only ..........................................25
Table 3.3: Surveyed clearance space ........................................................................................................... 25
Table 3.4: Surveyed acceleration of the first vehicle (through movement) ...................................................26
Table 3.5: Surveyed starting acceleration of the first vehicle (through movement) ......................................26
Table 3.6: Surveyed start-up headway – through movement ....................................................................... 27
Table 3.7: Surveyed start-up headway – unrestricted turn movement .........................................................28
Table 3.8: Surveyed start-up headway – restricted turn movement ............................................................. 28
Table 3.9: Surveyed saturation headway – through movement ................................................................... 29
Table 3.10: Surveyed saturation headway – unrestricted turn movement ......................................................29
Table 3.11: Surveyed saturation headway – restricted turn movement ..........................................................29
Table 3.12: Surveyed speed along the vehicle trajectory – unrestricted turn movement ...............................30
Table 3.13: Surveyed speed along the vehicle trajectory – restricted turn movement ...................................31
Table 3.14: Surveyed through vehicle speed .................................................................................................. 32
Table 3.15: Surveyed critical gap .................................................................................................................... 32
Table 3.16: Surveyed critical gap factors ........................................................................................................ 33
Table 3.17: Surveyed follow-up headway ....................................................................................................... 33
Table 3.18: Surveyed TCE factors – based on saturation headways ............................................................. 33
Table 3.19: Surveyed TCE factors – based on start-up headways ................................................................ 34
Table 3.20: Simulated acceleration under various gradient and loading conditions .......................................35
Austroads 2019 | page iv

Table 4.1: Vehicle length parameters for SIDRA .......................................................................................... 37

Table 4.2: Queue space parameters for SIDRA ........................................................................................... 38
Table 4.3: PCE conversion factors for SIDRA (passenger vehicle = 1.0).....................................................38
Table 4.4: Summary of turning vehicle factors for SIDRA ............................................................................ 38
Table 4.5: Gap acceptance factors (passenger vehicle = 1.0) ..................................................................... 39
Table 4.6: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameters for through movement using the Victorian
datasets ........................................................................................................................................ 43
Table 4.7: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameters for through movement using the Western
Australian datasets ....................................................................................................................... 44
Table 4.8: Calibration results of rigid truck parameters for AIMSUN ............................................................ 44
Table 4.9: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameters for through movement using the Victorian
datasets ........................................................................................................................................ 45
Table 4.10: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameters for through movement in Western Australia .....46
Table 4.11: Calibration results of single articulated parameters for AIMSUN.................................................46
Table 4.12: Sensitivity test of B-double parameters for through movement using the Victorian datasets .....47
Table 4.13: Sensitivity test of B-doubles for through movement in Western Australia ...................................48
Table 4.14: Calibration results of B-double parameters for AIMSUN ............................................................. 48
Table 4.15: Sensitivity test of double road train parameters for through movement using
Victorian datasets ......................................................................................................................... 49
Table 4.16: Sensitivity test of double road train parameters for through movement in Western Australia .....50
Table 4.17: Calibration results of double road trains ...................................................................................... 50
Table 4.18: Recommended ranges of heavy vehicle parameters................................................................... 51
Table 4.19: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Victorian datasets ....................................52
Table 4.20: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Victorian datasets ........................................52
Table 4.21: Mixed traffic results for restricted turn based on Victorian datasets ............................................52
Table 4.22: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Western Australian datasets ....................53
Table 4.23: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Western Australian datasets ........................53
Table 4.24: Average rigid truck vehicle composition ....................................................................................... 58
Table 4.25: Average single articulated truck vehicle composition .................................................................. 58
Table 4.26: Calibration results of rigid truck for through movement ............................................................... 61
Table 4.27: Calibrated results of rigid truck for unrestricted turn .................................................................... 61
Table 4.28: Calibrated results of rigid truck for restricted turn ........................................................................ 61
Table 4.29: Calibration results of single articulated for through movement ....................................................62
Table 4.30: Calibration results of single articulated for unrestricted turn ........................................................62
Table 4.31: Calibration results of single articulated for restricted turn ............................................................ 62
Table 4.32: Calibration results of B-double for through movement ................................................................ 63
Table 4.33: Calibration results of B-double for unrestricted turn..................................................................... 63
Table 4.34: Calibration results of B-double for restricted turn......................................................................... 63
Table 4.35: Calibration results of double road train for through movement ....................................................64
Table 4.36: Calibration results of double road train for unrestricted turn ........................................................64
Table 4.37: Calibration results of double road train for restricted turn ............................................................ 64
Table 4.38: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Victorian datasets ....................................65
Table 4.39: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Victorian datasets ........................................65
Table 4.40: Mixed traffic results for restricted turn based on Victorian datasets ............................................65
Table 4.41: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Western Australian datasets ....................66
Table 4.42: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Western Australian datasets ........................66
Table 4.43: Recommended ranges of heavy vehicle parameters in VISSIM .................................................68
Table A 1: Base trip matrices, in passenger vehicles .................................................................................... 77
Table A 2: Total trip matrix volume (PCU) for sensitivity testing of PCU factors...........................................77
Table A 3: Average delay outputs of LINSIG under different PCU factor assumptions ................................78
Table D 1: Maximum acceleration values for 2-axle truck ............................................................................. 85
Table D 2: Maximum acceleration values for 3-axle articulated .................................................................... 86
Table D 3: Maximum acceleration values for 4-axle articulated .................................................................... 87
Table D 4: Maximum acceleration values for B-double ................................................................................. 88
Table D 5: Maximum acceleration values for double road train .................................................................... 89
Table D 6: Desired acceleration values for 2-axle truck ................................................................................ 90
Table D 7: Desired acceleration values for 3-axle truck ................................................................................ 91
Austroads 2019 | page v

Figures
Figure 2.1: Turning movements defined in SIDRA for TCE determination ...................................................... 4
Figure 2.2: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model .................................................................. 6
Figure 2.3: AIMSUN acceleration model .......................................................................................................... 8
Figure 2.4: AIMSUN critical gap model at priority-controlled intersections ...................................................... 9
Figure 2.5: Acceleration as a function of speed in VISSIM ............................................................................ 11
Figure 3.1: Composition of rigid trucks for start-up period of through movement ..........................................28
Figure 3.2: Composition of vehicles following rigid trucks during start-up period of through movement .......28
Figure 3.3: Change in acceleration due to load condition by vehicle type and gradient ................................35
Figure 3.4: Change in acceleration due to gradient by vehicle and load type ...............................................36
Figure 4.1: Gap acceptance factor estimation................................................................................................ 39
Figure 4.2: Modelled site for through movement analysis .............................................................................. 42
Figure 4.3: Modelled site for unrestricted turn analysis .................................................................................. 42
Figure 4.4: Modelled site for unrestricted turn analysis .................................................................................. 42
Figure 4.5: Modelled site for restricted turn analysis ...................................................................................... 42
Figure 4.6: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for unrestricted turn using the Victorian datasets ..........43
Figure 4.7: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for restricted turn using the Victorian datasets ..............43
Figure 4.8: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for unrestricted turn using the Western
Australian datasets ....................................................................................................................... 44
Figure 4.9: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for unrestricted turn using the Victorian
datasets ........................................................................................................................................ 45
Figure 4.10: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for restricted turn using the Victorian datasets ...45
Figure 4.11: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for unrestricted turn in Western Australia ...........46
Figure 4.12: Sensitivity test of B-double parameter for unrestricted turn using Victorian datasets .................47
Figure 4.13: Sensitivity test of B-double parameter for restricted turn using Victorian datasets .....................47
Figure 4.14: Sensitivity test of B-doubles for unrestricted turn in Western Australia .......................................48
Figure 4.15: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for unrestricted turn using Victorian datasets .....49
Figure 4.16: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for restricted turn using Victorian datasets .........49
Figure 4.17: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for unrestricted turn in Western Australia ...........50
Figure 4.18: Comparison of headway estimates using the calibrated and MRWA parameters based
on the Victorian datasets .............................................................................................................. 53
Figure 4.19: Comparison of headway estimates using calibrated and MRWA parameters based
on the Western Australian datasets ............................................................................................. 54
Figure 4.20: Ballarat Rd/Moore St intersection coded in VISSIM .................................................................... 55
Figure 4.21: Francis St/Hyde St intersection coded in VISSIM ........................................................................ 55
Figure 4.22: Feeding vehicles into correct lanes with lane-change bans ........................................................56
Figure 4.23: Coding of reduced speed areas and data collection points .........................................................57
Figure 4.24: Gradients coded for WA unrestricted turn movement .................................................................. 58
Figure 4.25: Rigid truck standstill distance combinations ................................................................................ 59
Figure 4.26: Single articulated truck standstill distance combinations ............................................................. 59
Figure 4.27: Assignment of driving behaviours to a link behaviour type ..........................................................59
Figure 4.28: Comparison of headway estimates using calibrated and MRWA parameters based on
Victorian datasets .......................................................................................................................... 66
Figure 4.29: Comparison of headway results using calibrated and MRWA parameters based on
Western Australian datasets ........................................................................................................ 67
Figure C 1: Double road train stuck on link with gradient of 7% ..................................................................... 83
Austroads 2019 | page vi

1. Introduction
1.1 Key Issue

Traffic models appear to be misestimating the capacity of arterial roads when there is a significant proportion
of heavy vehicles, particularly large heavy vehicles such as B-double trucks and larger trucks. Misestimation
of models results in inaccurate scenario testing and policy analysis. It is therefore important to review the
heavy vehicle parameters used in these models.
1.2 Purpose
This project aimed to identify heavy vehicle parameters which can be used in traffic models to improve the
accuracy of inputs in the models.
1.3 Scope
1.3.1 Vehicle Types
The main focus of the study was on heavy vehicles, grouped into five types as follows:
• rigid trucks(Austroads class 3 to 5)
• single articulated trucks(Austroads class 6 to 9)
• B-double trucks(Austroads class 10)
• double road trains(Austroads class 11) 2
• triple road trains(Austroads class 12).
Passenger vehicles (Austroads class 1 and 2) were also included in the analysis, where relevant. Note that
passenger vehicles in the report include cars and car-towing, and small commercial vehicles. However, the
focus is on heavy vehicles. Information on passenger vehicles examined in the project served only as a
comparison to the heavy vehicle analysis. Hence, the passenger vehicle analysis results should be treated
as supplemental information only. Moreover, it is acknowledged that there are various sub-types within each
of the five vehicle types. It is a limitation of the project that the level of disaggregation of vehicle classes is
only for the above five types.
1.3.2 Parameters
The analysis focussed on the arterial intersection traffic environment; hence, the following four movement
types were assessed:
• through movement
• unopposed turn (i.e. protected turn)
• restricted unopposed turn, i.e. turn radius is less than 15 m
• opposed turn.
2 An Austroads class 11 vehicle can be both a 30m PBS 2B heavy vehicle or a 36.5 Type 1 Road Train
Austroads 2019 | page 1

The parameters relevant to these movements are as follows:

• length
• clearance space (i.e. distance between vehicle at queues and also referred to as clearance distance or
jam space)
• acceleration and deceleration
• turning speed
• passenger car equivalent (PCE) or passenger car unit (PCU) factor (note: PCU and PCE are used
interchangeably in this report as certain models use one or the other term)
• gap acceptance.
1.3.3 Software
This project focussed on the parameters of commonly used traffic modelling software in Australia and New
Zealand, namely SIDRA, LINSIG, AIMSUN and VISSIM. The software can be categorised as follows:
• SIDRA and LINSIG are analytical models. Analytical models are closed-form models that use traffic flow
theory concepts such as saturation flow rates and platoon dispersion to model traffic behaviour.
• AIMSUN and VISSIM are microsimulation models, and they use car-following, gap acceptance and lane-
change modules to simulate vehicular movements in traffic.
The project aimed to develop suitable software-specific parameters for modelling heavy vehicle traffic
streams on an arterial road. The scope of the project did not include a comparison of software.
1.4 Methodology
The following steps were undertaken as part of the development of model parameters:
• A review of relevant literature was conducted to identify existing guidelines on heavy vehicle modelling.
• Four consultation workshops with software companies were conducted to better understand the relevant
model parameters needed for heavy vehicle modelling.
• Data from video surveys were collected for parameter calibration.
• Powertrain analysis was conducted to examine the sensitivity of heavy vehicle performance under various
gradient and loading conditions.
• Working group workshops were conducted to review and set the calibration datasets and methodology.
• SIDRA, LINSIG, AIMSUN and VISSIM model parameters were prepared based on the calibration datasets.
1.5 Scope of the Report

The report covers the following topics:
• literature review
• consultation workshops on key parameters for consideration
• video survey analysis
• powertrain analysis
• calibration methodology developed at the working group workshops
• calibrated model parameters.

2. Literature Review and Consultation

Workshops
The literature review and consultation workshops covered the following topics:
• parameters relevant to heavy vehicle movement modelling (Section 2.1)
• characteristics of heavy vehicles relevant to intersection capacity (Section 2.2).
2.1 Modelling Software

The modelling software reviewed in this section is as follows:
• SIDRA (SIDRA INTERSECTION 8.0, Section 2.1.1)
• LINSIG (LINSIG 3.2, Section 2.1.2)
• AIMSUN (AIMSUN Next 8.3, Section 2.1.3)
• VISSIM (VISSIM 11.0, Section 2.1.4).
2.1.1 SIDRA
SIDRA INTERSECTION (Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd 2018) is an analytical model which applies the
following parameters in the modelling of heavy vehicle movement:
• vehicle length
• queue space
• passenger car equivalent (PCE) or passenger car unit (PCU) factors
• turning vehicle factor
• gap acceptance parameters.
The default parameters in SIDRA for these parameters are shown in Table 2.1. Main Roads Western
Australia (2018) has developed PCU factors for SIDRA and they are shown in Table 2.2.
Table 2.1: SIDRA default parameters for length, queue space and PCU
Distance between
PCU
Vehicle type SIDRA description Length Queue space vehicles when
factor
queued
Passenger Light vehicles 4.5 m 7m 2.5 m 1.0
Rigid truck Heavy vehicles 10 m 13 m 3m 1.65
Large trucks
Trucks larger
(weighted average of trucks 22 m 25 m 3m 2.5
than rigid trucks
larger than rigid trucks)
Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Table 2.2: MRWA suggested PCU factors for SIDRA
Vehicle type PCU factor

Passenger (car and car-towing) 1
Rigid truck 2
Single articulated truck 3
B-double 4
Double road train 4
Triple road train 5
Source: MRWA (2018).
The effect of slow heavy vehicle turn capability is considered in SIDRA through adjusting the turning volumes
using the through car equivalent (TCE) factor. TCE is used instead of PCU factors to model turning
movements. The TCE factors are dependent on the turning angle as shown in Figure 2.1. The TCE values
are shown in Table 2.3.
Figure 2.1: Turning movements defined in SIDRA for TCE determination
Table 2.3: TCE factors in SIDRA
TCE factors by movement type

Vehicle type SIDRA description
T1 L1 & R1 L2 & R2 L3 & R3 U
Passenger Light vehicles 1 1.02 1.05 1.2 1.4
Rigid truck Heavy vehicle 1.65 1.73 1.80 1.98 2.31
SIDRA models priority-controlled intersections using a gap-acceptance-based model, which requires the
parameters of critical gap and follow-up headway. The default parameters are shown in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4: Default critical gap and follow-up headway in SIDRA
Vehicle type Movement type Critical gap Follow-up headway

Passenger vehicle Left turn 4s 2.4 s
Right turn 4.5 s 2.6 s
Slip lane 4s 2.4 s

Two parameters are used to incorporate the effect of heavy vehicles in the SIDRA gap acceptance model,
i.e. gap acceptance factor and the opposing vehicle factor. The gap acceptance factor is used to adjust the
critical gap and follow-up headway. The opposing vehicle factor is a PCU factor that is used to adjust the
opposing stream to account for the length of heavy vehicles. The default values are provided in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5: Gap acceptance and opposing vehicle factor in SIDRA
Vehicle type SIDRA description Gap acceptance factor Opposing vehicle factor
Passenger car Light vehicles 1 1
Rigid truck Heavy vehicle 1.5 1.5
Trucks larger than rigid trucks Large trucks 2.5 2.5
A SIDRA consultation workshop was conducted to identify additional items for consideration to improve the
modelling of heavy vehicles in SIDRA. The following issues and suggestions were identified:
• The PCU factors for heavy vehicles should consider gradients.
• The queue spacing on approaches with gradients may differ from approaches that are flat.
• The effect of heavy vehicles on start-up and lost time should be examined and adjusted, if needed.
• SIDRA’s vehicle emission and operating cost models account for the power-to-weight attribute of heavy
vehicles and should also be adjusted, if applied.
• The effect of heavy vehicles on lane utilisation is not well understood, wherein the presence of heavy
vehicles causes unequal lane use.
2.1.2 LINSIG
LINSIG (JCT Consultancy 2014) is an analytical model. LINSIG’s primary parameter for reflecting heavy
vehicles in an arterial intersection model is through the conversion of vehicles into PCU. The conversion is
done externally, i.e. traffic demand is input as PCU not in terms of vehicles. Hence, the software relies on the
user to input traffic flows in PCU. Main Roads Operational Modelling Guidelines (MRWA 2018) include PCU
conversion factors for heavy vehicles for LINSIG, shown in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6: MRWA suggested PCU factors for LINSIG
Vehicle type PCU factor

Passenger car 1
Passenger car (towing) 2
Rigid truck 2
Single articulated truck 3
B-double 4
Double road train 4
Triple road train 5
To model a priority-controlled intersection, LINSIG’s give-way model uses a linear step function as shown in
Figure 2.2. The typical values of the give-way model parameters are shown in Table 2.7.

Figure 2.2: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model
Source: JCT Consultancy (2014).
Table 2.7: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model – typical parameters
Parameter
Vehicle type Movement type
Intercept (F0) Slope (A1) Minimum (F1)
Applies to passenger car Give-way controlled left turn 715 0.22 0
equivalent (i.e. all types)
Right turn at signals 1439 1.09 0
Source: JCT Consultancy (2014).
A LINSIG consultation workshop was conducted to identify additional items for consideration to improve the
modelling of heavy vehicles in LINSIG. The following were suggested:
• The effect of heavy vehicles on start-up and lost time should be examined and adjusted, if needed.
• LINSIG applies platoon dispersion models. The effect of heavy vehicles on platoon dispersion is not well
understood. Platoon dispersion parameters may need to be reviewed where their effect on performance
is significant such as in modelling traffic progression.
2.1.3 AIMSUN
AIMSUN (TSS-Transport Simulation Systems 2014) is a microsimulation model. AIMSUN requires the
following key parameters for modelling heavy vehicle movement through an intersection:
• vehicle length
• clearance space (or minimum distance or clearance in AIMSUN)
• acceleration and deceleration
• reaction time
• turn speed
• weight, power-to-weight ratio and weight-to-frontal area ratio (which are used to adjust speed on slopes, if
activated)
• critical gap for give way model parameters.
The Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure of South Australia (DPTI 2013) provides a model
template for AIMSUN, which contains suggested values for most parameters related to heavy vehicle
modelling, presented in Table 2.8. Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (2002) also
provides a set of suggested parameters for AIMSUN, shown in Table 2.9.

In AIMSUN, the maximum acceleration and braking capability of a vehicle is adjusted based on gradient.
Maximum acceleration is reduced by 0.0981 m/s2 for every 1% of gradient, up to a minimum value of 10% of
the maximum acceleration.
Table 2.8: AIMSUN parameters prepared by DPTI of South Australia
Minimum Maximum Deceleration

Vehicle type Statistic Length Width
distance acceleration
Normal Maximum
Passenger car Mean 4.6 m 1.75 m 1.85 m 2.7 m/s2 3.5 m/s2 6 m/s2
Deviation 0.45 m 0m 0.8 m 0.2 m/s2 0.2 m/s2 0.5 m/s2
Minimum 3.35 m 1.75 m 0.5 m 2.2 m/s2 3.0 m/s2 5 m/s2
Maximum 5.35 m 1.75 m 3.2 m 3.5 m/s2 4.0 m/s2 7 m/s2
Rigid truck Mean 8.65 m 2.4 m 2m 1.6 m/s2 3.0 m/s2 5 m/s2
Minimum 5.6 m 2.4 m 0.5 m 0.8 m/s2 2.0 m/s2 4 m/s2
Single articulated Mean 17 m 2.4 m 2m 1.0 m/s2 3.0 m/s2 5 m/s2
truck
Deviation 2m 0m 1.3 m 0.5 m/s2 0.3 m/s2 0.5 m/s2
Minimum 12 m 2.4 m 0.5 m 0.5 m/s2 2.0 m/s2 4 m/s2
B-double Mean 25.5 m 2.4 m 2m 0.8 m/s2 3.0 m/s2 4.5 m/s2
Minimum 25.5 m 2.4 m 0.5 m 0.3 m/s2 2.0 m/s2 3.5 m/s2
Maximum 25.5 m 2.4 m 3.8 m 1.3 m/s2 3.5 m/s2 5.5 m/s2
Double road train Not available
Triple road train Not available
Source: DPTI (2013).
Table 2.9: AIMSUN parameters prepared by TMR of Queensland
Maximum Deceleration
Vehicle type Statistic Length Width Clearance
acceleration Normal Maximum
Passenger car Mean 4m 2m 3m 2.8 m/s2 4 m/s2 6.5 m/s2
Minimum 3m 2m 2.5 m 1.68 m/s2 3.2 m/s2 5.2 m/s2
Maximum 5m 2m 3.5 m 3.92 m/s2 4.8 m/s2 7.8 m/s2
Rigid truck (small) Mean 7m 2m 3m 2.5 m/s2 3.5 m/s2 5 m/s2
Minimum 5m 2m 2.7 m 1.5 m/s2 2.8 m/s2 4 m/s2
Maximum 9m 2m 3.3 m 3.5 m/s2 4.2 m/s2 6 m/s2
Rigid truck (large) Mean 12 m 2.5 m 3m 1.5 m/s2 2.2 m/s2 3 m/s2
Minimum 10 m 2.5 m 2.7 m 1.2 m/s2 1.76 m/s2 2.88 m/s2
Maximum 14 m 2.5 m 3.3 m 1.8 m/s2 2.64 m/s2 3.12 m/s2

Maximum Deceleration
Vehicle type Statistic Length Width Clearance
acceleration
Normal Maximum
Single articulated Mean 19 m 2.5 m 4m 1 m/s2 2 m/s2 2.9 m/s2
truck
Minimum 19 m 2.5 m 3m 0.9 m/s2 1.6 m/s2 2.73 m/s2
Maximum 19 m 2.5 m 5m 1.1 m/s2 2.4 m/s2 3.07 m/s2
B-double Mean 25 m 2.5 m 4m 0.8 m/s2 2 m/s2 2.75 m/s2
Minimum 25 m 2.5 m 3.6 m 0.72 m/s2 1.6 m/s2 2.59 m/s2
Maximum 25 m 2.5 m 4.4 m 0.88 m/s2 2.4 m/s2 2.92 m/s2
Double road train Not available
Triple road train Not available
Source: TMR (2002).
AIMSUN sets the speed of the vehicle based on two conditions. The first condition is when the vehicle is
accelerating to achieve its desired speed and it is not constrained by a leading vehicle. In this case, the
maximum acceleration parameter applies. A vehicle accelerating to its desired speed will accelerate based
on the equation graphically illustrated in Figure 2.3. Maximum acceleration defines the highest acceleration
possible during a simulation time step, and it is achieved shortly after starting from a stopped position. The
second condition is when the vehicle is constrained by the speed of a leading vehicle, with the speed of the
vehicle set to allow for a safe stop when the leading vehicle comes to a halt. In this case the normal
deceleration parameter applies. The speed of the following vehicle is dependent on the distance from the
leading vehicle, speed of the leading vehicle and deceleration capability of both the following and leading
vehicle. For turning manoeuvres, AIMSUN can employ a turning-speed parameter which constrains the
speed of a vehicle. This parameter can be set automatically by AIMSUN or user specified.
Figure 2.3: AIMSUN acceleration model
Source: Based on TSS (2014).
There are three types of reaction times in AIMSUN as follows:

• Reaction time: this is the time it takes a driver to react to speed changes in the preceding vehicle.
• Reaction time at stop: this is the time it takes for a stopped vehicle to react to the acceleration of the
vehicle in front.
• Reaction time at traffic light: this is the time it takes for the first vehicle stopped at a traffic light to react to
the traffic light changing to green.

The speed of a following vehicle is constrained such that it is able to comfortably stop when the leading
vehicle slows down or stops which is influenced by the reaction time. The suggested reaction times for
AIMSUN by MRWA and TMR are shown in Table 2.10.
Table 2.10: Suggested reaction times for AIMSUN from MRWA and TMR
MRWA (2018) TMR (2002)

Reaction time Car: 0.9 s 0.75 s
Truck and bus: 1.35 s
Reaction time at traffic light Car: 1.35 s 1.35 s
Truck and bus: 1.7 s
Reaction time at stop Not specified 1.35 s
AIMSUN models the decision of a vehicle to enter a priority-controlled intersection using a gap acceptance
model. The model specifies an initial maximum critical gap value (i.e. initial safety margin) that decreases to
a minimum critical gap value (i.e. final safety margin) with respect to the time the entering vehicle spends
waiting to enter, as shown in Figure 2.4. The critical gap values are specified as a property of a link, including
the initial and give-way time factors. The default parameters in AIMSUN are shown in Table 2.11.
Figure 2.4: AIMSUN critical gap model at priority-controlled intersections
Source: Based on TSS (2014).
Table 2.11: Safety margin and time factor default parameters in AIMSUN
Vehicle type Parameter Value

Applies to all types Initial safety margin 3s
Initial give-way time factor 1
Final safety margin 1s
Final give-way time factor 2
Source: TSS (2014).
Vehicle types are differentiated by the rate of decrease of the critical gap (i.e. give-way time). The give-way
time parameters suggested by DPTI and TMR are shown in Table 2.12.

Table 2.12: Give-way time parameters suggested by DPTI and TMR
Give-way time, by source
Vehicle type DPTI (2013) TMR (2002)
Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum

Passenger car 15 s 5s 5s 30 s 30 s 3s 24 s 36 s
Rigid truck (small) 15 s 5s 5s 30 s 30 s 3s 24 s 36 s
Rigid truck (large) 30 s 3s 24 s 36 s
Single articulated 15 s 5s 5s 30 s 30 s 3s 24 s 36 s
truck
B-double 15 s 5s 5s 30 s 60 s 6s 48 s 72 s
Double road train Not available Not available
Triple road train Not available Not available
A consultation workshop was conducted to identify further items for consideration to improve the modelling of
heavy vehicles in AIMSUN. The following were suggested:
• The modification to reaction time should be treated carefully and revised as a last resort.
• When long vehicles turn, the through movement of adjacent lanes may be blocked due to the swept path
of the vehicle, causing turn blocking. Turn blocking could be modelled in AIMSUN by encoding suitable
traffic management rules, such as conditional lane or turn closure.
2.1.4 VISSIM
VISSIM (PTV Group 2018) is a microsimulation model. VISSIM applies the following parameters when
modelling the movement of heavy vehicles on an arterial intersection:
• vehicle length
• clearance space (or standstill distance)
• reduced speed areas
• acceleration and deceleration (maximum and desired)
• power-to-weight ratio
• gap time.
Vehicle length is used to represent the road space occupied by the vehicle. Vehicle lengths for all vehicle
types are specified by vehicle 2D/3D models. The average standstill distance is the clearance space. Driving
behaviours are created to enable coding of standstill distances (clearances) between different types of
vehicles. Standstill distances are added using VISSIM Vehicle Class following behaviours through the
W74ax parameter.
Movement of heavy vehicles through a signalised intersection is modelled by reduced speed areas and
acceleration settings. Reduced speed areas are small areas set along the turning path of vehicles that
determine the desired speed of the vehicle when it performs a turn. The settings of the reduced area are
specified by the VISSIM vehicle class. The reduced speed area determines the ability of vehicles to execute
a turn movement and is an effective parameter to calibrate the capacity of a right-turn lane. MRWA (2018)
has prepared reduced speed area values for turn movements as shown in Table 2.13.

Table 2.13: Turn type and desired speed
Vehicle type Turn type Radius Example Desired speed

Applies to all Very tight turn 12.5 m Turn entering/leaving car parks, driveways 5 km/h
types or narrow roads/lanes (4 to 6 km/h)
Tight turn 15 m Most left-turns and small single-lane 12 km/h
roundabouts (12 to 15 km/h)
Moderate turn 20 m Most right-turns and medium-sized 15 km/h
roundabouts (15 to 20 km/h)
Gentle turn 30 m Large multi-lane intersections and large 25 km/h
(multi-lane) roundabouts (25 to 30 km/h)
VISSIM uses two modes of acceleration and deceleration of a vehicle (i.e. maximum and desired), and they
are described as follows:
• Desired acceleration and desired deceleration are used in normal operational scenarios. The desired
acceleration and desired deceleration parameters set the speed that vehicles require to reach their
desired speed.
• Maximum acceleration is the technically feasible acceleration of a vehicle. It is used to keep a certain
speed on slopes, i.e. when stronger acceleration is required. The maximum acceleration is automatically
adjusted for up and down gradients of links i.e. – 0.1 m/s² per percent for positive gradients (uphill) and
+ 0.1 m/s² per percent for negative gradients (downhill).
• Maximum deceleration is the technically feasible deceleration and it is used for emergency stopping
scenarios. At gradients there is an automatic compensation of + 0.1 m/s² per percent for positive
gradients (uphill) and – 0.1 m/s² per percent for negative gradients (downhill).
Acceleration and deceleration parameters are specified by vehicle type and can be set as a function of
speed, as shown in Figure 2.5. For example, higher acceleration values can be set when speed is low, and
lower acceleration values can be set when the speed is high. Acceleration and deceleration values are
assigned as a distribution defined by a minimum, maximum and median value.
Figure 2.5: Acceleration as a function of speed in VISSIM
Source: Based on PTV Group (2018).

VISSIM also adjusts the acceleration and deceleration behaviour of vehicles that are identified as heavy
goods vehicles (HGV) on links with gradients, based on power-to-weight ratio. Weight and power of vehicles
are entered as distributions bounded by a lower and upper bound. VISSIM then randomly selects from these
two distributions to assign a power-to-weight ratio to the vehicles. Minimum and maximum constraints are set
to 7 kW/t and 30 kW/t to avoid unrealistic power-to-weight ratio values being assigned. The acceleration of
HGV is defined as follows:
• If the power-to-weight ratio is 7 kW/t or less, then the minimum acceleration function is used (refer to
Figure 2.5).
• If the power-to-weight ratio is 30 kW/t or more, then the maximum acceleration function is used.
• If the power-to-weight ratio is 18.5 kW/t, then the median acceleration function is used.
• For all other power-to-weight ratios, linear interpolation is applied.
At priority-controlled intersections, VISSIM employs a critical-gap-based model to determine whether an

entering vehicle will proceed or not. The critical gap (or minimum gap time in VISSIM) is assigned by vehicle
type.
A consultation workshop was conducted to identify further items for consideration to improve the modelling of
heavy vehicles in VISSIM. It was suggested that acceleration and turn speed be calibrated accurately, as
intersection capacity is very sensitive to these parameters.
2.2 Heavy Vehicle Characteristics

This section reviews relevant heavy vehicle characteristics identified from the literature. The focus of the
review was on work that was based on field data. The review included the following:
• length and width (Section 2.2.1)
• clearance space (Section 2.2.2)
• acceleration and deceleration (Section 2.2.3)
• power-to-weight ratio (Section 2.2.4)
• mass (Section 2.2.5)
• turning speed (Section 2.2.6)
• passenger car unit (Section 2.2.7)
• critical gap (Section 2.2.8)
• reaction time (Section 2.2.9)
• lane changing (Section 2.2.10)
• overtaking (Section 2.2.11)
• turning path and queue spillback (Section 2.2.12)
• environmental impacts (Section 2.2.13).
2.2.1 Length and Width
The Austroads vehicle classification system defines vehicle classification by length as described in
Table 2.14. Austroads (2006) reported the width of all heavy vehicles to be 2.5 m, with the exception of prime
movers and long semi-trailers which have a width of 3.0 m. Standards Australia (2018) also indicated the
width of heavy vehicles to be 2.5 m, with the exception of small rigid trucks which have a width of 2.3 m.

Table 2.14: Vehicle length
Length
Vehicle Austroads Austroads National Heavy Standards

Example (indicative) Vehicle Australia
type class
(Austroads Regulator (limit) (Standards
2006) (NHVR 2016) Australia 2018)
Passenger 1 Sedan Up to 5.5 m
car
2 Caravan 5.5 m to 14.5 m
Rigid truck 3 Two axle truck, small rigid 5.5 m to 14.5 m 12.5 m 6.4 m
4 Three axle truck, medium 8.8 m
rigid
5 Four axle truck, heavy rigid 12.5 m
Single 6 Three axle articulated 11.5 m to 19 m 19 m 20 m
articulated
7 Four axle articulated
truck
8 Five axle articulated
9 Six axle articulated
B-double 10 B-double 17.5 m to 36.5 19 m (7 axle) 26 m
m
25 m (9 axle)(1)
Double road 11 Double road train 17.5 m to 36.5 36.5 m 36.5 m
train m
30 m for PBS
2B (Austroads
2018)
Triple road 12 Triple road train Up to 53.5 m 53.5 m 53.5 m
train
1 26 m length is possible for eligible vehicles.
Source: Austroads (2006), NHVR (2016) and Standards Australia (2018).
2.2.2 Clearance Space
Clearance space is the distance between vehicles in a queue. Clearance space plus the vehicle length is the
queue space. Clearance space of heavy vehicles as determined by Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018) and
Haldane and Bunker (2002) is shown in Table 2.15.
Table 2.15: Clearance space
Clearance space
Vehicle type
Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018) Haldane and Bunker (2002)
Rigid truck 2.7 m (through lane)
2.2 m (right-turn lane)
Single articulated truck 4.3 m
B-double 4.1 m
Double road train 4m
Triple road train 4m
Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018) and Haldane and Bunker (2002).

2.2.3 Acceleration and Deceleration
A study in the USA (Yang et al. 2016) collected data on trucks accelerating at an entry ramp of a motorway
from the ramp signal stop line. The data included samples from rigid trucks and single articulated trucks, and
this is shown in Table 2.16. Austroads (2018) provided the acceleration characteristics of B-doubles and double
road trains, as shown in Table 2.17 and Table 2.18 respectively. Deceleration characteristics of B-doubles and
double road trains are shown in Table 2.19. Austroads (2018) also provided acceleration and deceleration
characteristic estimates for cars, rigid trucks and single articulated trucks as shown in Table 2.20.
Table 2.16: Truck acceleration rates on an entry ramp – rigid and single articulated trucks
Acceleration by segment (distance from start), m/s2
0 to 150 m
Vehicle type 15 to 30 30 to 60 60 to 90 90 to 120
0 to 6 m 6 to15 m Standard
m m m m Mean
deviation
Rigid truck (small) 1.46 1.23 1.09 0.93 0.79 0.79 0.89 0.26
Rigid truck (large) 1.15 1.01 0.97 0.81 0.66 0.66 0.77 0.21
Single articulated 0.65 0.60 0.62 0.58 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.13
truck
Source: Yang et al. (2016).
Table 2.17: B-double acceleration and deceleration estimates
Driving Speed range,

Load Grade Average acceleration, m/s2
mode km/h
Unladen Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.38
(24.2 tonnes
0–80 km/h 0.35
per vehicle)
Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.64
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.60
Upgrade Normal Not applicable Not applicable, at upgrade aggressive driving applies
(+5%)
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h May only reach a top speed of 74 km/h
Typical Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.34
weight (tare
0–80 km/h 0.17
+ 75%
payload) Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.59
(57.4 tonnes (aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.31
per vehicle)
(+5%)
(aggressive)
At capacity Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.32
(high mass
0–80 km/h 0.13
load, HML)
(68.5 tonnes Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.57
per vehicle) (aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.25
(+5%)
(aggressive)
Source: Austroads (2018).

Table 2.18: Double road train (30m PBS 2B heavy vehicle) acceleration characteristic estimates
Driving Speed range,

Load Grade Average acceleration, m/s2
mode km/h
Unladen Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.38 (0.33 to 0.45)

(20 to
0–80 km/h 0.39 (0.31 to 0.46)
27 tonnes
per vehicle) Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.63 (0.55 to 0.71)
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.64 (0.52 to 0.73)
(+5%)
Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.35 (0.16 to 0.22)
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.22 (0.16 to 0.33) may only reach a top speed of 70 to
75 km/h
Typical Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.33 (0.28 to 0.4)
weight (tare
0–80 km/h 0.16 (0.12 to 0.2)
+75%
payload) Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.58 (0.49 to 0.67)
(56 to (aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.28 (0.23 to 0.35)
70 tonnes
per vehicle)
(+5%)
Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.27 (0.19 to 0.41)
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h May only reach a top speed of 30 to 40 km/h
At capacity Flat (0%) Normal 0–20 0.31 (0.26 to 0.38)
(high mass
0–80 km/h 0.12 (0.08 to 0.16)
load, HML)
(68 to Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.55 (0.46 to 0.63)
85 tonnes (aggressive)
0–80 km/h 0.22 (0.18 to 0.28)
per vehicle)
(+5%)
Maximum 0–20 km/h 0.22 (0.13 to 0.34)
(aggressive)
0–80 km/h May only reach a top speed of 25 to 35 km/h
Table 2.19: Deceleration characteristics of B-doubles and double road trains
Deceleration (m/s2)
Vehicle class
Normal Max.
B-double 2.2 3
Double road train 2 to 2.2 2.75 to 2.85
Table 2.20: Acceleration and deceleration characteristics of car, rigid truck and single-articulated trucks
Acceleration Deceleration (m/s2)

Vehicle class
(m/s2) Normal Max.
Car 2.4 4 6
Bus 1.18 2.5 5
Rigid truck 1.18 2.5 5
Single articulated truck 0.86 2.2 3

2.2.4 Power-to-Weight Ratio
The power-to-weight ratios of heavy vehicles suggested by Austroads (2018) are shown in Table 2.21.
Table 2.21: Power-to-weight ratio
Vehicle class Unladen, kW/t Typical laden weight, kW/t Laden at capacity, kW/t
Car 33.5
Bus 11.6
Rigid truck 9.7 to 11.6
Single articulated truck 7.7 to 9.4
B-double 13.9 to 18.5 5.8 to 7.8 4.9 to 6.5
PBS 2B (low-end engine) 13.7 to 16.7 5.3 to 6.1 4.4 to 5.1
PBS 2B (typical engine) 15.1 to 19.0 5.8 to 7.0 4.8 to 5.8
PBS 2B (high-end engine) 19.2 to 23.4 7.2 to 8.1 5.9 to 6.7
2.2.5 Mass
The NHVR (2016) defined the values of gross vehicle mass under three types of mass limits, i.e. general,
concessional and high, as shown in Table 2.22.
Table 2.22: Gross vehicle mass
Type of mass limit

Vehicle type Example General Mass Concessional Higher Mass Limit
Limit (GML) Mass Limit (CML) (HML)
Rigid truck Two axle truck 15 t
Three axle truck 22.5 t 23 t 23 t
Four axle twin steer truck 26.5 to 27.5 t 27 to 28 t 27 to 28 t
Single articulated Three axle articulated 24 t
truck
Five axle articulated 39 t 40 t 40 t
Six axle articulated 42.5 t 43.5 t 45.6 t
B-double Seven axle 50 to 55 t 57 t 57 t
Nine axle 62.5 t 64.5 t 68 t
Double road train Road train (type 1) 79 t 81 t 85 t
Triple road train B triple road train 82.5 t 84.5 t 90.5 t
AB triple road train 99 t 101 t 107.5 t
Source: NHVR (2016).
2.2.6 Turning Speed
The turning speed of heavy vehicles impacts their ability to manoeuvre in a turn at an intersection. The
turning speeds of heavy vehicles for different turning radii were determined in Austroads (1991) as shown in
Table 2.23.

Table 2.23: Turning speed
Vehicle type Movement type Turning radius Turning speed

Passenger car
Rigid truck Intersection left turn 4.6 m 9.6 km/h
Intersection right turn 8.4 m 13.9 km/h
17.1 m 18.1 km/h
Single articulated truck Intersection left turn 4.6 m 8.9 km/h
Intersection right turn 8.4 m 9.7 km/h
17.1 m 20.7 km/h
B-double Roundabout right turn 10.9 m 20.3 km/h
Double road train
Triple road train Intersection right turn 13.4 m 12.3 km/h
Intersection left turn 18.9 m 19 km/h
Kutadinata et al. (2018) investigated the free flow and queued speeds for right-turning vehicles at three
intersections, of which the majority of vehicles assessed were passenger vehicles. The average turning
speeds for these sites are shown in Table 2.24 and Table 2.25.
Table 2.24: Right-turning speed
Intersection 1 Intersection 2 Intersection 3

Average volume of right turn, veh/h 139.7 306.2 178.2
% free-flow right turns 12.5% 5.8% 2.3%
% free-flow during protected right turns 0.2% 5.4% 0.1%
% free-flow during filter right turns 12.3% 0.4% 2.2%
Free-flow speed at Mean, km/h 53.5 44.2 61.9
63 m from stop line
85th percentile, km/h 65.5 55.9 61.9
Free-flow speed at Mean, km/h 30.6 39.6 36.1
stop line
85th percentile, km/h 37.8 46.3 42.7
Free-flow average Mean, km/h 29.0 N/A 31.2
turning speed
15th percentile, km/h 23.8 N/A 26.7
15th percentile, km/h 34.5 N/A 36.3
Source: Kutadinata et al. (2018).
Table 2.25: Queued vehicle right-turning speed
Intersection 1 Intersection 2 Intersection 3 Combined

Average Mean, km/h 29.31 N/A 30.32 29.82
turning
15th percentile, km/h 25.80 N/A 26.24 26.05
speed
Median, km/h 30.11 N/A 31.44 30.11
85th percentile, km/h 33.12 N/A 33.38 33.12
Speed at Mean, km/h 24.41 25.23 24.92 24.85
stop line
15th percentile, km/h 20.11 20.36 22.82 21.03
Median, km/h 23.40 25.13 25.34 24.52
85th percentile, km/h 29.65 30.24 27.65 28.48

Intersection 1 Intersection 2 Intersection 3 Combined

Speed at Mean, km/h N/A 20.19 22.84 21.49
5 m from
15th percentile, km/h N/A 14.78 18.83 16.06
stop line
Median, km/h N/A 20.52 24.08 22.28
Speed at Mean, km/h N/A 16.73 19.78 18.36
10 m from
stop line
Median, km/h N/A 17.01 20.48 18.94
Source: Kutadinata et al. (2018).
2.2.7 Passenger Car Unit
Blanksby et al. (2007) reviewed PCU factors for heavy vehicles, and they found that the PCU factors change
for various situations. These include whether the road is urban or rural, the power-to-weight ratio, whether
the road is congested or free-flow and the length of the grade. The results from TRARR (an abbreviation of
TRAffic on Rural Roads, a traffic simulation model for two-lane, two-way rural roads) assessment for the
rural environment are shown in Table 2.26.
Table 2.26: PCU factors calculated for 14% heavy vehicles on rural roads
PCU factors
Average speed, 88 km/h Average speed, 70 km/h

Number Total
Number Grade Grade
of heavy traffic
of cars
vehicles volume 0% 4% 8% 0% 4% 8%
per h
per h per h
Grade length Grade length
– 1 km 5 km 1 km 5 km – 1 km 5 km 1 km 5 km
Semi-trailer
50 9 59 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 4.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 7.9
100 17 117 1.0 1.0 7.4 2.1 12.7 1.0 1.0 1.9 1.0 15.5
150 25 175 1.0 1.0 7.5 3.6 14.4 1.3 1.3 5.2 2.5 14.5
200 33 233 1.6 1.8 7.3 3.8 13.5 1.9 1.9 5.1 2.7 14.0
250 41 291 1.4 2.2 6.9 3.4 12.6 1.7 1.8 5.2 2.3 13.0
300 49 349 1.4 2.2 6.9 3.2 12.1 1.8 1.8 5.0 2.4 13.2
350 57 407 1.6 2.1 6.3 3.1 11.3 1.8 1.9 4.9 2.3 12.5
400 66 466 1.3 1.8 6.0 2.6 10.5 1.5 1.6 4.7 2.1 11.7
450 74 524 1.1 1.5 5.6 2.4 10.0 1.2 1.3 4.4 1.7 10.9

PCU factors
Average speed, 88 km/h Average speed, 70 km/h

Number Total
Number Grade Grade
of heavy traffic
of cars
vehicles volume 0% 4% 8% 0% 4% 8%
per h
per h per h
Grade length Grade length
– 1 km 5 km 1 km 5 km – 1 km 5 km 1 km 5 km
B-double
50 9 59 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 4.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 7.9
100 17 117 1.0 1.0 7.7 2.5 15.4 1.0 1.0 6.1 1.7 17.7
150 25 175 1.1 1.0 9.5 4.5 16.8 1.6 2.0 8.0 3.3 16.4
200 33 233 1.6 1.5 9.0 4.6 15.9 2.1 2.3 7.5 3.4 15.7
250 41 291 1.7 2.8 8.4 4.1 14.4 1.9 2.1 7.3 3.1 15.6
300 49 349 1.6 2.6 8.2 3.7 13.3 2.0 2.1 7.1 3.0 15.3
350 57 407 1.6 2.4 7.7 3.6 12.9 1.9 2.1 7.0 3.0 14.5
400 66 466 1.5 2.1 7.2 3.2 11.9 1.7 1.8 6.5 2.6 13.6
450 74 524 1.1 1.8 6.8 2.9 11.3 1.4 1.5 6.0 2.3 12.5
Rigid
50 9 59 1.0 1.0 1.4 1.0 2.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
100 17 117 1.0 1.0 4.3 1.1 8.1 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.2
150 25 175 1.0 1.4 3.9 2.2 8.7 1.3 1.1 1.6 1.0 7.6
200 33 233 1.6 2.1 4.4 2.6 8.6 1.6 1.7 2.1 1.6 7.7
250 41 291 1.4 1.7 1.4 1.5 1.9 1.4 7.9
300 49 349 1.4 1.7 4.0 2.2 7.9 1.6 1.6 2.0 1.6 7.5
350 57 407 1.6 1.8 3.7 2.2 7.7 1.7 1.7 2.1 1.6 7.3
400 66 466 1.4 1.6 3.3 1.9 7.0 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.4 6.9
450 74 524 1.2 1.3 3.0 1.7 6.7 1.2 1.2 1.5 1.2 6.6
B-triple
50 9 59 3.6 2.6 3.2 5.6 33.9 1.0 1.0 4.3 1.0 24.0
100 17 117 8.4 10.3 18.1 12.9 42.2 8.8 9.3 17.5 11.9 42.9
150 25 175 5.3 6.6 13.2 8.8 28.2 5.4 5.9 13.2 8.5 30.1
200 33 233 4.9 6.2 12.1 8.1 24.1 4.8 5.4 11.6 7.5 26.0
250 41 291 4.1 5.6 11.6 7.6 23.1 4.2 5.1 12.2 7.4 25.7
300 49 349 3.6 5.1 11.2 7.1 21.2 3.8 4.6 11.7 7.0 23.5
350 57 407 3.0 4.3 10.0 6.0 18.2 3.1 3.8 10.5 6.0 20.6
400 66 466 2.9 4.1 10.1 6.1 17.9 2.9 3.8 10.6 6.0 19.4
450 74 524 2.5 3.7 9.5 5.6 16.5 2.5 3.5 10.0 5.5 17.8
Source: Blanksby et al. (2007).
The PCU factors based on a VISSIM analysis (Blanksby et al. 2007) for urban environments of 70 km/h and
80 km/h are shown in Table 2.27 and Table 2.28, respectively.

Table 2.27: PCU factors calculated for 5% heavy vehicles on an urban 3-lane road, for 70 km/h unimpeded car
speed, various grades and grade length
Unimpeded speed 70 km/h
Grade, % 0 4 8
Distance to
commencement of
N/A 0 200 1000 0 200 1000
grade from nearest
intersection, m
Length of grade, m N/A 200 200 1000 200 1000 200 200 1000 200 1000
Semi-trailer – 1.6 – 8.7 – – 7.7 4.4 6.5 – –
B-double – 3.7 – 8.8 – 2.0 8.0 9.2 22.3 – –
B-triple – 5.7 2.1 9.7 – 6.1 9.6 9.4 24.0 – 2.8
Rigid truck – – – – – – 3.0 – 4.9 – –
Table 2.28: PCU factors calculated for 5% heavy vehicles on an urban 3-lane road, for 80 km/h unimpeded car
speed, various grades and grade length
Unimpeded speed 80 km/h
Grade (%) 0 4 8
Commencement (m) N/A 0 200 1000 0 200 1000
Length (m) N/A 200 200 1000 200 1000 200 200 1000 200 1000
Semi-trailer 1.4 – – 9.0 – – 2.6 – 22.5 – 17.5
B-double 1.6 1.1 – 9.5 – 1.0 3.1 1.6 24.6 – 18.1
B-triple – 5.8 1.7 10.6 – 1.1 4.0 4.7 25.2 – 20.9
Rigid truck 2.0 – – – – 3.1 3.0 – 14.9 1.7 2.2
2.2.8 Critical Gap
Tian et al. (2000) investigated the critical gap and follow-up headway of heavy vehicles and the results are
summarised in Table 2.29.
Table 2.29: Critical gap and follow-up headway – heavy vehicles
Critical gap and follow-up headway by intersection type
Vehicle type Movement type Single lane intersection Multi-lane intersection

Critical gap Follow-up Critical gap Follow-up
headway headway
Passenger car Right turn 7.2–7.6 s 2.2–4.4 s 6–7.1 s 3.5–4 s
Through 6.3 s 4.7 s 6.4 s 4.1 s
Left turn 6–6.7 s 3.1–5.1 s 5.2–5.9 s 3.1–4 s
All types of trucks Right turn 9s 4–4.4 s 7.2–7.4 s 3.4–3.5 s
Through 9.5 s 4.7–4.8 s 7.6 s 3.7–4 s
Left turn 8.2–9.4 s 4.2–4.3 s 6.8–6.9 s 3.3–3.4 s
Source: Tian et al. (2000).

2.2.9 Reaction Time
An Australian study (Triggs and Harris 1982) recorded the reaction time of drivers, which was defined as the
difference between the time a stimulus becomes visible and the time that the brake lights come on, signifying
a driver response. The experiments were collected from the field and the results are shown in Table 2.30.
Table 2.30: Reaction time under various stimuli
Reaction time
Stimulus Response rate(1)
Mean 85th percentile
Roadworks ahead 6% 1.64 s 3.0 s
Tyre change at the side of road 44% 0.97 s 1.5 s
Vehicle under repair (night) 64% 1.02 s 1.5 s
Marked police vehicle on shoulder 22% 2.37 s 2.8 s
Amphometer laid on road (4 sites) ~24% 2.45 s ~3.28 s
Railway level crossing signal (night) 98% 1.16 s 1.5
Railway level crossing signal (day) 70% 1.77 s 2.53 s
Leading car brake light on for 1 s in a high-speed See note (2) 0.92 s 1.26 s
environment and headways < 2 s
1 Response rate is the percentage of vehicles that applied their brakes (some vehicles did not brake in response to the
stimuli).
2 When headways < 2 s, the response rate was nearly 100%; however, when headways ≥ 2 s the stimuli did not illicit a
braking response from any of following vehicles surveyed.
Source: Triggs and Harris (1982).
McGehee, Mazzae and Baldwin (2000) also recorded reaction times in response to scenarios that could
potentially lead to a collision at an intersection. The experiment was conducted using a driving simulator and
a test track. The recorded driver reaction times are shown in Table 2.31.
Table 2.31: Reaction time to avoid an intersection collision
Driver action Simulator results Test track results

Mean time to initial accelerator release 0.96 s 1.28 s
Total brake reaction time (accelerator release to maximum brake 2.2 s 2.3 s
application)
Time to initial steering manoeuvre to avoid crash 1.64 s 1.67 s
Source: McGehee, Mazzae and Baldwin (2000).
2.2.10 Lane Changing
Lane changing is one of the basic driving interactions in microscopic traffic simulation. Lane changing
manoeuvres have a significant impact on microscopic traffic flow and a consequent impact on macroscopic
traffic flow due to the interference effect they have on surrounding traffic. The simulation of lane changing
phenomena is a critical issue that would affect the accuracy of model outputs (Austroads 2017).
Moridpour and Rose (2010) proposed a heavy vehicle drivers’ lane-changing model that consists of a fuzzy
logic heavy vehicle lane changing decision model and a constant speed lane changing execution model. The
performance of the model was then examined using VISSIM. Cao, Kim and Young (2018) also introduced a
lane-changing execution model for evaluating the lane-changing duration and lane-changing trajectory of
heavy vehicles, which was implemented in VISSIM and AIMSUN.

2.2.11 Overtaking
For traffic travelling in one direction on a two-lane, two-way road, when a faster vehicle catches up with a
slower one in front, the vehicle must either reduce speed or overtake. The overtaking manoeuvre can be
considered as a gap acceptance model. McLean (1989) suggested that overtaking drivers judge the size of
available gaps by length when deciding to overtake.
Troutbeck (1979) used a method by Ashworth (1968) for calculating overtaking critical gaps. The study found
that the 85th percentile critical gap increased by 4 s for each 10 km/h increase in speed. Troutbeck
developed a series of equations that relate the mean and variance of overtaking performance parameters
(e.g. overtaking time and overtaking distance) to the length and speed of the overtaken vehicles. The
analysis included the impacts of the overtaken vehicle type.
TRARR is a traffic simulation model for two-lane, two-way rural roads. TRARR simulates overtaking
decisions of vehicles based on a combination of factors that include vehicle and driver characteristics, road
geometry, sight distance, speed limit and the proximity of other vehicles. Austroads (2019) reviewed the
TRARR model and re-calibrated its parameters to match current vehicle fleet and recent field data.
2.2.12 Turning Path and Queue Spillback
Heavy vehicles are long and can easily spill back when downstream queues almost fill the road segment and
block upstream intersections. In real-world operation, truck drivers can judge the available space so that the
rear of the vehicle does not obstruct the intersection. To replicate this in a microsimulation model, the model
should be set up appropriately, otherwise the heavy vehicles would unrealistically obstruct the intersection.
The ‘yellow box’ feature in a microsimulation model is an effective method to deal with this problem.
Another heavy-vehicle-related issue in microsimulation models is that heavy vehicles can obstruct adjacent
vehicles when turning if the turning radius is too small so that the swept path encroaches on the adjacent
lane. Austroads (2013) prepared turning templates of heavy vehicles, considering operational heavy vehicle
speeds for different turning radii. These templates can be used to determine if a turning heavy vehicle would
obstruct adjacent lanes.
2.2.13 Environmental Impacts
The environmental impacts of trucks mainly involve noise, fuel consumption and environmental emissions.
These aspects are outside the scope of the study, however relevant references include the following:
• A six-category heavy vehicle noise emission model in free-flowing conditions was developed by Peng,
Parnell and Kessissoglou (2019).
• Fuel consumption and emissions resulting from fuel consumption models for various truck types are
available in the Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines (TIC 2016).
2.3 Summary
The key attributes of heavy vehicles that impact their movement through an arterial road based on the review
are summarised in Table 2.32. The key attributes are given in a range of values.

Table 2.32: Heavy vehicle attributes relevant to movement through an arterial based on the literature review
Single
Double road Triple road
Attribute Car Rigid truck articulated B-double
train train
truck
Length, m 5.5 5.5 to 14.5 11.5 to 20 17.5 to 36.5 17.5 to 36.5 Up to 53.5
(up to 14.5)
Width, m – 2.3 2.5
Clearance, m – 2..2 to 2.7 4.3 4.1 4 4
Acceleration 2.4 1.15 to 1.46 0.65 0.34 0.28 to 0.4 –
(start-up), m/s2
Normal 4 2.5 2.2 2.2 2 to 2.2 –
deceleration, m/s2
Turning speed, 16.7 to 19.8 9.6 to 18.1 8.9 to 20.7 20.3 20.3 12.3 to 19
km/h
PCU, flat grade 1 1 to 1.7 1 to 1.9 1 to 2.1 – 1 to 8.8
and 70 km/h speed
zone
Critical gap, s 5.2 to 7.6 6.8 to 9
Reaction time, s 0.92 to 2.45

3. Heavy Vehicle Survey

Field data were collected to serve as a basis for parameter development. This section presents the results.
3.1 Video Survey

The field survey involved the collection of video footage from a high vantage point and from a number of
perspectives to get a full view of the approach, signal light, stop line, departure and opposing traffic. The
video was manually analysed to encode the required data. The video was collected from Perth and
Melbourne locations as shown in Table 3.1. The sites were selected due to their relatively high volumes of
heavy vehicles. The sites have speed limit of 60 km/h or 70 km/h.
Table 3.1: Video survey location sites
Speed Movement type

Location Site and movement Period
zone
Perth Leach Highway right turn to Stock Road 7 am – 7 pm, 1 day 70 km/h Unopposed turn
Stirling Highway through to Canning Highway 7 am – 7 pm, 1 day 60 km/h Through
Melbourne Princes Highway right turn to Moore Street 6 am – 6 pm, 3 days 60 km/h Unopposed turn
Moore Street left turn to Princes Highway 6 am – 6 pm, 5 days 60 km/h Unopposed
restricted turn
Francis Street through to Hyde Street 6 am – 6 pm, 3 days 60 km/h Through
Salmon Street right turn into Turner Street 6 am – 6 pm, 3 days 60 km/h Opposed turn
Turner Street left turn into Salmon Street 6 am – 6 pm, 3 days 60 km/h Opposed turn
The results of the video survey are presented in the following sections:
• heavy vehicle length (Section 3.2)
• clearance space (Section 3.3)
• acceleration (Section 3.4)
• start-up headway (Section 3.5)
• saturation headway (Section 3.6)
• turning speed (Section 3.7)
• through saturation speed (Section 3.8)
• critical gap and follow-up headway (Section 3.9)
• passenger car unit (Section 3.10).
A powertrain analysis was also conducted to supplement the heavy vehicle survey to get insight into the
impact of gradient and loading conditions on heavy vehicle movement (Section 3.11).

3.2 Heavy Vehicle Length

The length of heavy vehicles is defined by their classification, as discussed in Section 2.2.1. There is
however variation in the length in each heavy vehicle class, for example, rigid trucks can range from two-axle
(5.5 m) to four-axle (12.5 m). The most frequent heavy vehicle type for each class would determine the
representative length of each heavy vehicle class. The measurement of vehicle lengths was undertaken on
the aerial map provided by Nearmap. The survey sites were within Melbourne and Perth. The surveyed
heavy vehicle lengths are shown in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Surveyed heavy vehicle length – applicable to the survey sites only
Length, m
Vehicle type Samples
Mean Standard deviation 5th percentile 95th percentile
Rigid truck 9.5 2.0 6.3 12.3 26
Single articulated truck 17.1 1.2 15.6 19.4 30
B-double 24.6 1.6 20.9 26.0 19
Double road train(1) 28.9 2.9 26.5 35.1 13
Triple road train 51.6 1.1 50.4 53.3 5
1 The wide range of double road train length was due to the variety of vehicle categories under the double road train
type as defined in the Austroads classification system wherein vehicle length ranges from 17.5 m to 36.5 m.
3.3 Clearance Space

Clearance space was measured as the distance between vehicles when queued. It was examined according
to the type of the leading and following vehicle. The results are shown in Table 3.3. The mean clearance
space ranges from 2.3 m to 2.9 m. Passenger vehicles tend to allow for more clearance space when
following larger trucks, i.e. 2.3 m to 2.5 m clearance for smaller vehicle types, while clearance with larger
vehicles was 3.3 m. Rigid trucks keep a relatively consistent clearance of 2.4 m to 2.7 m. Larger trucks also
use a consistent clearance space of 2.7 m to 2.9 m.
Table 3.3: Surveyed clearance space
Clearance space, m
Vehicle type
Standard Percentile
Mean Samples
Following Leading deviation 5th 95th
Passenger vehicle Passenger vehicle 2.3 0.9 1.0 4.2 86
Rigid truck 2.5 0.7 1.5 3.7 22
B-double
Double road train
Triple road train
Rigid truck Passenger vehicle 2.4 0.7 1.4 3.6 41
Rigid truck 2.8 0.8 1.8 3.8 21
B-double
Double road train
Triple road train
Single articulated Passenger vehicle 2.9 1.0 1.6 4.6 37
truck
Rigid truck 2.9 1.0 1.5 4.2 22

Clearance space, m
Vehicle type
Standard Percentile
Mean Samples
Following Leading deviation 5th 95th
B-double Single articulated truck 2.7 0.7 1.4 3.9 40
Double road train B-double
Triple road train Double road train
Triple road train
3.4 Acceleration
Acceleration was measured only for the first vehicle in front of the queue (i.e. initial speed = 0 km/h). Points
along the trajectory of the vehicle were selected starting from the stop line to the farthest point visible from
the video. The time taken for a vehicle to cross each point was recorded. The time it took the vehicle to
traverse the distance was calculated as well as the average speed over the section between the two points.
The change in speed between two succeeding sections and the time it took to traverse the two sections were
used to calculate the average acceleration of the vehicle.
Acceleration focussed only on the through movement and the results are shown in Table 3.4. The analysis
involved a trajectory distance of 37 m from the stop line. If the mean of the acceleration values was negative
(i.e. deceleration), it was assumed that the vehicles have reached their desired speed at that point and
normal acceleration would fluctuate and eventually converge to zero. Acceleration was highest at the start,
as the vehicle accelerates to depart from the stop line, and the starting acceleration values are further
detailed in Table 3.5.
Table 3.4: Surveyed acceleration of the first vehicle (through movement)
Average acceleration on sections of distance from the stop line, m/s2

Vehicle type Samples
0 to 8.6 m 8.6 m to 21.7 m 21.7 m to 30.5 m 30.5 m to 37.3 m
Passenger vehicle 40 4.1 2.4 –(1) –
Rigid truck 48 2.9 1.3 0.4 0.7
Single articulated 46 1.7 1.0 0.1 –
B-double 54 1.6 0.9 – –
Double road train
1 No value is provided when the average acceleration values is negative, and it is assumed that normal acceleration
would decrease to zero until the desired speed is reached.
Table 3.5: Surveyed starting acceleration of the first vehicle (through movement)
Starting acceleration, m/s2
Vehicle type Samples Percentile

Standard
Mean
deviation 5th 25th 50th 75th 95th
Passenger vehicle 40 4.1 0.8 3.2 3.5 3.9 4.8 5.1
Rigid truck 48 2.9 0.9 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.6 4.2
Single articulated 46 1.7 0.4 1.2 1.5 1.8 2.0 2.2
B-double
54 1.6 0.6 1.1 1.3 1.5 1.8 2.5
Double road train

3.5 Start-up Headway

The start-up headway was defined as the average headway of the first four vehicles in the queue. Vehicles
were categorised by type and determined if they were one of the first four vehicles in the queue. If the vehicle
was first in the queue, the headway was the time between the start of the green phase and the arrival of the
second vehicle. If the vehicle was either second, third or fourth in the queue, the headways were measured
as the time between when the front of the vehicle crosses the stop line and the time the front of the next
vehicle crosses the stop line. Measurements were done for different movement types as follows:
• through movement (Table 3.6)
• unrestricted turn movement (Table 3.7)
• restricted turn movement (Table 3.8).
It was noted that the start-up headway of rigid trucks for through movement in Victoria (6.2 s) was quite
different from the one in Western Australia (3.8 s), as shown in Table 3.6. The difference may be due to the
different sub-types composing rigid trucks in the Victorian and Western Australian sites, as follows:
Rigid trucks include class 3, 4 and 5 vehicle classes.
Figure 3.1 shows that class 4 vehicles (i.e. three-axle trucks) were the predominant type of rigid truck in the
Victorian sites while class 3 (i.e. two-axle trucks) were the predominant type of rigid truck in the Western
Australian sites. It is possible that rigid trucks in the Victorian sites are carrying heavier loads than in the
Western Australian sites which resulted in slower acceleration and longer start-up headways.
• Figure 3.2 shows that class 9 vehicles (i.e. single articulated trucks) were the predominant type of vehicle
following rigid trucks during start-up in the Victorian sites, while class 1 vehicles (i.e. cars) were the
predominant type of vehicle following rigid trucks in the Western Australian sites. The longer start-up
headways observed in the Victorian sites may also be because the vehicles following rigid trucks were
larger and slower leading to longer start-up headways.
Table 3.6: Surveyed start-up headway – through movement
Start-up headway, s
Vehicle type Victoria Western Australia Combined
Mean SD n Mean SD n Mean SD n
Passenger vehicle 3.1 1.5 207 3.0 1.4 157 3.0 1.5 364
Rigid truck 6.2 2.9 22 3.8 1.6 29 4.8 2.5 51
Single articulated truck 6.9 2.8 122 6.6 2.8 35 6.8 2.8 157
B-double 8.2 2.4 27 7.5 5.0 2 8.1 2.7 29
Double road train 8.4 2.2 18 7.9 2.2 7 8.2 2.2 25

Table 3.7: Surveyed start-up headway – unrestricted turn movement
Start-up headway, s
Rigid truck 5.4 2.4 55 4.4 2.0 28 5.1 2.3 83
B-double 8.6 2.2 10 6.9 1.4 7 7.9 2.1 17
Double road train 9.7 1.2 3 8.2 2.5 32 8.3 2.5 35
Table 3.8: Surveyed start-up headway – restricted turn movement
Start-up headway, s
Vehicle type
Mean SD n
Passenger car 3.1 1.4 863

B-double 11.0 2.7 19
Double road train 12.0 1.4 2
Figure 3.1: Composition of rigid trucks for start-up period of through movement
Figure 3.2: Composition of vehicles following rigid trucks during start-up period of through movement

3.6 Saturation Headway

Saturation headway is the average headway of queued vehicles after the start of the green signal, excluding
the first four vehicles in the queue. Queued vehicles include those that either arrived during the red signal
phase or arrived at the back of the queue during the green phase. Vehicles arriving when there were no
more residual queues were excluded. The queue position, and if the vehicle arrived at the back of queue,
was established from the video. The headway was measured as the time between when the front of the
vehicle crosses the stop line to the time when the front of the succeeding vehicle crosses the stop line.
Measurements were done for different movement types as follows:
• unrestricted turn movement (Table 3.10)
• restricted turn movement (Table 3.11).
Table 3.9: Surveyed saturation headway – through movement
Saturation headway, s
Rigid truck 3.8 1.1 10 2.8 1.1 24 3.1 1.2 34
B-double 4.5 0.6 6 3.6 1.3 7 4.0 1.1 13
Double road train N/A N/A N/A 4.2 1.8 13 4.2 1.8 13
Table 3.10: Surveyed saturation headway – unrestricted turn movement
Saturation headway, s
Rigid truck 3.7 2.06 21 3.6 1.7 27 3.6 1.9 48
B-double 7.0 1 3 5.5 0.7 2 6.4 1.2 5
Double road train 9.0 N/A 1 7.4 2.3 25 7.4 2.3 26
Table 3.11: Surveyed saturation headway – restricted turn movement
Saturation headway, s (Victoria only)

Vehicle type
Mean SD n
Passenger vehicle 2.4 0.9 3269

B-double 8.1 1.5 16
Double road train 9.8 1.5 4

3.7 Turning Speed

The turning speed was measured at intervals over the trajectory of the turning path of vehicles for
unrestricted turn and restricted turn (radius < 15 m). Vehicle speed was measured at the start near the stop
line, middle and end of the turn trajectory. The turn trajectory was approximately 30 m and 20 m in length in
the unrestricted turn case and restricted turn case, respectively. The measured speeds are shown in
Table 3.12 and Table 3.13.
Table 3.12: Surveyed speed along the vehicle trajectory – unrestricted turn movement
Position along Speed

Queue
Vehicle type the turn Standard
position Mean, km/h Samples
trajectory deviation, km/h
Passenger vehicle 1 to 4 Start 24.6 5.0 84
Middle 26.5 4.6 84
End 39.5 6.3 84
5 onwards Start 24.6 4.4 8
Middle 26.0 4.2 8
End 36.2 4.9 8
Rigid truck 1 to 4 Start 20.5 3.5 83
Middle 21.9 4.3 83
End 33.3 6.8 83
Middle 25.5 4.3 45
End 34.5 4.5 45
Single articulated truck 1 to 4 Start 17.5 4.1 112
Middle 19.9 3.6 112
End 26.7 5.1 112
Middle 21.6 3.4 43
End 28.8 4.9 43
B-double 1 to 4 Start 16.9 4.6 90
Double road train Middle 18.8 3.7 90
End 25.3 6.7 90
Middle 21.7 3.6 32
End 28.4 6.0 32

Table 3.13: Surveyed speed along the vehicle trajectory – restricted turn movement
Position along Speed

Queue
Vehicle type the turn Standard
position
trajectory Mean, km/h Samples
deviation, km/h
Passenger vehicle 1 to 4 Start 22.2 4.0 61
Middle 26.8 8.3 36
End 24.0 7.8 33
Middle 29.9 4.8 7
End 21.6 6.2 7
Rigid truck 1 to 4 Start 17.8 3.7 71
Middle 16.5 7.6 54
End 20.4 8.2 38
Middle 17.8 6.4 44
End 22.4 10.7 31
Single articulated truck 1 to 4 Start 17.8 4.0 54
Middle 12.9 3.6 54
End 22.0 5.7 27
Middle 14.5 6.8 33
End 19.9 6.7 18
B-double 1 to 4 Start 15.3 3.8 76
Double road train Middle 11.6 3.3 76
End 15.6 4.6 38
Middle 11.4 2.9 44
End 16.5 6.0 22
3.8 Through Speed

The through speed was measured as the speed of the vehicle at the departure-side of the intersection.
Speeds were measured for vehicles that were the first four vehicles in the queue, and other vehicles in the
stream. The surveyed speeds are shown in Table 3.14.

Table 3.14: Surveyed through vehicle speed
Speed
Queue
Vehicle type
position Mean, km/h Standard deviation, km/h Samples
Passenger vehicle 1 to 4 36.1 4.7 108

5 onwards 48.8 6.8 58
Rigid truck 1 to 4 30.2 5.1 105
5 onwards 44.3 7.8 51
Single articulated truck 1 to 4 26.9 5.3 111
5 onwards 43.9 8.5 73
B-double 1 to 4 23.3 4.3 60
Double road train 5 onwards 40.5 9.4 32
3.9 Critical Gap and Follow-up Headway

Vehicle discharge properties at a priority-controlled intersection were measured and are presented in this
section as follows:
• critical gap (Section 3.9.1)
• follow-up headway (Section 3.9.2).
3.9.1 Critical Gap
A gap is the time between when the back of the leading vehicle crosses a point and when the front of the
following vehicle crosses the same point. Vehicles on the minor road would judge the available gap on the
major road to make a decision whether to enter or cross the main road. The decision to accept or reject the
gap is based on the judgement of the motorist on the ability to be able to enter or cross safely. The shorter
the gap, the higher the probability that the gap will be rejected. The critical gap is defined as the gap where
there is a 50% probability that the gap will be rejected. To measure the critical gap, the gap on the major
road was measured and the decision of a waiting motorist on the minor road to accept or reject the gap was
recorded. The surveyed critical gaps are shown in Table 3.15. Note that the major road on the survey site
has only one lane.
Table 3.15: Surveyed critical gap
Critical gap by turning type
Left turn (minor road to major road) Right turn (major road to minor road)
Vehicle type
Critical gap, s Samples Critical gap, s Samples
Range, s Number Range, s Number

Passenger car 4.8 1 to 10 103 5.0 1 to 12 106
Rigid truck 5.6 1 to 12 157 5.7 1 to 11 117
Single articulated 7.5 1 to 20 133 8.2 1 to 11 76
truck
B-double 8.0 1 to 14 42 9.0 1 to 11 15
The gap acceptance factor is the ratio of the critical gap of a vehicle type to the critical gap of a passenger
car. This notation is utilised in SIDRA, wherein the critical gap is assigned for passenger cars, and the critical
gaps of other vehicles are expressed in terms of the critical gap factor. The critical gap factors are shown in
Table 3.16.

Table 3.16: Surveyed critical gap factors
Left turn (minor road to major Right turn (major road to minor
Vehicle type
road) road)
Passenger car 1.0 1.0
Rigid truck 1.2 1.1
Single articulated truck 1.6 1.6
B-double 1.7 1.8
3.9.2 Follow-up Headway
The follow-up headway is the time between when the front of a vehicle crosses the stop line and when the
succeeding queued vehicle arrives at the stop line. The follow-up headway was measured only for vehicles
that queued or stopped prior to entering the major road (i.e. excluding free-flowing vehicles). The surveyed
follow-up headways are shown in Table 3.17. There was limited data on larger truck types.
Table 3.17: Surveyed follow-up headway
Follow-up headway by turning type, s
Left tun (minor road to major road) Right tun (major road to minor road)
Vehicle type
Mean Standard Samples Mean Standard Samples
deviation deviation
Passenger vehicle 3.3 0.9 146 3.0 1.3 321
Rigid truck 3.7 0.8 15 3.7 1.0 22
3.10 Passenger Car Unit

The passenger car unit (also referred to as the passenger car equivalent) was measured as the ratio of the
headway of heavy vehicles and the headway of passenger vehicles. An extension of the passenger car unit
is the through car equivalent or TCE, which is expressed as the ratio of the headway of the vehicle
movement and the through car headway. The TCE factor incorporates the effect of reduced speeds in
turning movements on capacity. The TCE factors are applied in the adjustment of saturation flows in
analytical models, including SIDRA and LINSIG.
The surveyed saturation headways are shown in Table 3.9 to Table 3.11. Based on the surveyed headways,
the TCE factors were calculated as shown in Table 3.18.
Table 3.18: Surveyed TCE factors – based on saturation headways
Through passenger car units

Vehicle type
Through Unrestricted turn Restricted turn
Passenger vehicle(1) 1.0 1.2 1.1

Rigid truck 1.5 1.7 1.8
Single articulated truck 1.6 2.6 2.7
B-double 1.9 3.1 3.9
Double road train 2.0 3.5 4.7
1 The difference between the unrestricted turn and restricted turn TCE factors for passenger vehicles was not
statistically significant.

The TCE factors were also calculated using start-up headways instead of saturation headways to check if
the impact of heavy vehicles is different during the start-up phase of the movement (i.e. first four vehicles).
The results are shown in Table 3.19. It appears that the TCE factors of heavy vehicles tend to be relatively
lower for turning movements than for through movements. Hence, heavy vehicle drivers appear to drive
more aggressively at the start-up phase when turning than going through. This was thought to be due to the
shorter green phase for the turning movement than for the through movement.
Table 3.19: Surveyed TCE factors – based on start-up headways
Through passenger car units

Vehicle type
Through Unrestricted turn Restricted turn
Passenger vehicle 1.0 1.1 1.0

Single articulated truck 2.3 2.2 2.6
B-double 2.7 2.6 3.7
Double road train 2.7 2.8 4.0
3.11 Powertrain Analysis

Powertrain analysis was conducted using a computer simulation of the truck powertrain under specified
driving mode, gradient and load condition. Powertrain analysis focusses only on vehicular capability and
does not incorporate a real-world driving mode (i.e. how aggressively the driver attempts to increase speed).
Powertrain analysis is useful to assess changes in vehicular capability assuming the driving mode remains
constant. Powertrain analysis results are useful to examine the sensitivity of acceleration capability
characteristics of vehicles under various gradient and loading conditions.
The powertrain analysis was conducted using an industry-calibrated software called DriveSim. The
simulation was conducted on a straight stretch of road with constant gradient. The vehicle was initiated at a
full stop and then allowed to accelerate under normal driving conditions over a distance of 500 m. The focus
of the analysis was acceleration on the first 30 m distance, which represents the trajectory across an
intersection. The simulation results are shown in Table 3.20.
Figure 3.3 illustrates the change in acceleration of trucks when loading conditions change from empty to fully
laden under different gradients. The figure shows that small rigid truck acceleration decreases by 0.1 to
0.2 m/s2 when fully laden depending on gradient. Other truck types are less sensitive with acceleration
decreasing by less than 0.1 m/s2.
Figure 3.4 illustrates the change in acceleration when the gradient changes from flat for different truck types
and loading conditions. The figure illustrates that trucks bigger than a small rigid truck decrease their
acceleration by around 0.2 m/s2 when the gradient is +5%, or approximately 0.04 m/s2 per 1% of gradient.
The small rigid truck is less sensitive to gradient.

Table 3.20: Simulated acceleration under various gradient and loading conditions
Simulated acceleration by gradient in the first 30 m from stop, m/s2

Vehicle type Load
–2.5% –1% 0% +1% +2.5% +5%
Rigid truck (small) Full 1.10 1.10 1.07 1.04 1.01 0.96
Empty 1.22 1.22 1.19 1.19 1.19 1.16
Rigid truck (big) Full 0.64 0.64 0.59 0.48 0.48 0.37
Empty 0.66 0.60 0.60 0.54 0.45 0.38
Single articulated Full 0.64 0.61 0.62 0.57 0.45 0.41
truck
Empty 0.66 0.69 0.62 0.61 0.50 0.48
B-double Full 0.64 0.57 0.55 0.45 0.42 0.34
Empty 0.64 0.60 0.59 0.48 0.48 0.38
Double road train Full 0.59 0.55 0.53 0.44 0.43 0.33
Empty 0.62 0.60 0.59 0.49 0.48 0.43
Triple road train Full 0.55 0.51 0.49 0.40 0.38 0.29
Empty 0.62 0.60 0.58 0.47 0.47 0.38
Figure 3.3: Change in acceleration due to load condition by vehicle type and gradient

Figure 3.4: Change in acceleration due to gradient by vehicle and load type

4. Parameter Development
This section discusses the development of guidance in parameter setting for heavy vehicles for the following
software:
• SIDRA (Section 4.1)
• LINSIG (Section 4.2)
• AIMSUN (Section 4.3)
• VISSIM (Section 4.4).
The main focus is on heavy vehicles. Passenger vehicles were included where relevant.
4.1 SIDRA
The SIDRA parameters relevant to the traffic movements that were assessed included:
• vehicle length
• queue space
• passenger car equivalents
• turning vehicle factor
• gap acceptance factor.
It is noted that the surveyed values of the SIDRA parameters listed below can only be used as a guidance for
heavy vehicle modelling. Application to any other traffic conditions should be reviewed using field
observation.
4.1.1 Vehicle Length
A summary of heavy vehicle length data is provided in Table 4.1. This includes SIDRA’s default values for
vehicle length, as well as the values adopted for use by MRWA for comparison.
Table 4.1: Vehicle length parameters for SIDRA
Vehicle length, m
Vehicle type
SIDRA default MRWA (maximum) Survey (average)
Rigid truck 10 12.5 9.5
Single articulated truck 10 19.0 17.1
B-double 22 27.5 24.6
Double road train (representative for all types) 36.5 28.9
Triple road train 53.5 51.6

4.1.2 Queue Space
A summary of vehicle queue space data is provided in Table 4.2. This includes SIDRA’s default values,
MRWA’s recommended values, and surveyed values. To calculate the values for queue space, MRWA
recommends adding 2.5 m to MRWA’s default vehicle length of each movement class.
Table 4.2: Queue space parameters for SIDRA
Queue space, m
Vehicle type
SIDRA default MRWA (maximum)(1) Survey (average)
Rigid truck 13 15.0 12.3
Single articulated truck 13 21.5 19.8
B-double 25 30.0 27.3
Double road train (representative for all types) 39.0 31.6
Triple road train 56.0 54.3
1 Calculated by adding 2.5 m to MRWA default vehicle length of each vehicle type.
4.1.3 Passenger Car Equivalent
A summary of PCE factor data is provided in the Table 4.3. This includes PCE values adopted for use by
MRWA for comparison.
Table 4.3: PCE conversion factors for SIDRA (passenger vehicle = 1.0)
MRWA Survey
Vehicle type
Through Through Restricted turn Unrestricted turn
Rigid truck 2.00 1.5 1.8 1.7
Single articulated 3.00 1.6 2.7 2.6
truck
B-double 4.00 1.9 3.9 3.1
Double road train 4.00 2.0 4.7 3.5
Triple road train 5.00 N/A N/A N/A
4.1.4 Turning Vehicle Factor
Table 4.4 summarises the turning vehicle factors calculated from the surveyed saturation headways.
Table 4.4: Summary of turning vehicle factors for SIDRA
Surveyed
Vehicle type
Left (restricted) Right (unrestricted)
Rigid truck 1.2 1.2
Single articulated truck 1.7 1.6
B-double 2.0 1.6
Double road train 2.3 1.8
Triple road train N/A N/A

4.1.5 Gap Acceptance Factor
Gap acceptance factors were developed based on the relative proportions of critical gaps between vehicle
classes from the surveyed data. SIDRA also offers a simple formula to estimate gap acceptance factors as a
function of queue space. The resulting gap acceptance factor based on the surveyed values of queue space
is also provided. The formula is: GA factor = 0.083x + 0.42, where x = queue space in metres. Figure 4.1
presents the formula in chart form. The gap acceptance factors for SIDRA are shown in Table 4.5.
Figure 4.1: Gap acceptance factor estimation
Table 4.5: Gap acceptance factors (passenger vehicle = 1.0)
Survey
Vehicle type SIDRA formula estimation Left turn (minor road to Right turn (major road to
major road) minor road)
Single articulated
2.1 1.6 1.6
truck
B-double 2.7 1.7 1.8
Double road train 3.0 N/A N/A
Triple road train 4.9 N/A N/A
An important assumption in SIDRA is the critical gap for passenger vehicles (i.e. class 1), from which the gap
acceptance factors are applied. SIDRA’s default values for a left turn and right turn at a signalised
intersection are 4.0 s and 4.5 s respectively. This compares with the surveyed values of 4.8 s and 5.0 s
respectively (shown in Table 3.15).
4.2 LINSIG
LINSIG’s primary parameter for reflecting heavy vehicles in an arterial intersection model is in the conversion
from vehicles to PCU. This conversion is not completed within the software itself, rather it relies on the user
to input traffic flows in PCU. The PCU factors in Section 3.10 would apply.

Sensitivity tests were conducted to determine the effect of the surveyed PCU factors on delay as calculated
in LINSIG relative to the application of MRWA PCU factors (Appendix A). The analysis demonstrated that the
MRWA PCU factors resulted in average delay figures that are significantly higher than using the surveyed
PCU factors.
It is noted that the surveyed PCU factors can only be used as a guidance for heavy vehicle modelling in
LINSIG. Application to any other traffic conditions should be reviewed using field observation.
4.3 AIMSUN
This section covers parameter development for AIMSUN, which includes recommended ranges for maximum
acceleration, turn speed limit and reaction time. It is noted that the recommended parameters can only be
used as a guidance for heavy vehicle modelling in AIMSUN. Application to any other traffic conditions should
be reviewed using field observation.
4.3.1 Calibration Methodology
Calibration was conducted individually for each of the heavy vehicle types to isolate the effects of parameters
on each of the heavy vehicle types. This was done by assuming a traffic demand consisting of the same
heavy vehicle type. Hence, calibration was conducted under each of the following demand scenarios:
• 100% rigid trucks
• 100% single articulated trucks
• 100% B-doubles
• 100% double road trains.
The through movement was calibrated first which involved adjusting the maximum acceleration and reaction
time parameters so that the modelled start-up and saturation headways match the field surveyed values
described in Section 3.5 and Section 3.6, respectively. The turning movement was then calibrated next by
adjusting the turn-speed parameter so that the start-up and saturation headways match the field surveyed
values. The detailed workflow for the calibration of the through movement is as follows:
• Encode maximum acceleration, clearance and length using values obtained from field survey.
• Encode other parameters (e.g. reaction time, normal deceleration, maximum deceleration and width)
using values recommended by MRWA (2018).
• Compare start-up and saturation headways simulated by AIMSUN with those obtained from field survey.
If they are the same then calibration is complete.
• Otherwise, conduct sensitivity tests on the maximum acceleration and reaction time parameters, and find
parameter values that yield the least mean percentage error (i.e. average of the absolute error for the
start-up headway and the absolute error for the saturation headway).
The detailed workflow of the calibration for unrestricted and restricted turns is as follows:
• Encode maximum acceleration and reaction time parameters obtained from the calibration of the through
movement.
• Encode clearance and length using values obtained from field survey.
• Encode other parameters (e.g. normal deceleration, maximum deceleration and width) using values
recommended by MRWA (2018).
• Encode turn speed using default values of AIMSUN.
• Compare start-up and saturation headways simulated by AIMSUN with those obtained from field survey.
If they are the same, then calibration is complete.
• Otherwise, conduct sensitivity tests on the turn-speed parameter and find the parameter value that yields
the least mean percentage error.

Two approaches were used for calculating the start-up headway and saturation headway to account for the
difference in how the field data was analysed and the calibration method which uses 100% of the same
vehicle type in the demand, as follows:
• The 4-vehicle rule refers to a definition of the start-up phase of the cycle wherein the start-up phase is
from the start of the green to the arrival of the 5th vehicle. Saturation headway was derived from the
5th vehicle up to the last queued vehicles. The 4-vehicle rule was utilised to define the start-up phase
headways from the field surveys which was under mixed vehicle type traffic conditions. This rule was also
used for the calibration of rigid truck parameters.
• The 3-vehicle rule refers to a definition of the start-up phase of the cycle wherein the start-up phase is
from the start of the green phase to up to arrival of the 4th vehicle. Saturation headway was then derived
from the 4th vehicle up to the last queued vehicle. This rule was used for the calibration of the parameters
for trucks larger than the rigid truck, i.e. single articulated trucks, B-doubles, and double road trains. This
rule was applied because the field survey start-up headways were collected using the 4-vehicle rule,
however the field survey was under mixed vehicle type traffic conditions. Meanwhile, the simulated
headways were based on a 100% large truck demand and because the assumed truck types are
relatively longer, the 4-vehicle rule under could not be suitably applied. To compensate, the 3-vehicle rule
was applied when the demand is 100% large truck. The time duration of the start-up phase under the 3-
vehicle rule with 100% large truck traffic and 4-vehicle rule under mixed traffic conditions is approximately
the same.
4.3.2 Road Network Used in Calibration
The road network geometry and attributes used to calibrate AIMSUN were based on the selected survey
sites in Victoria and Western Australia. The following AIMSUN networks were utilised:
• Through movement analysis was conducted using an intersection based on the Victorian survey sites and
the Western Australian study sites shown in Figure 4.2, which has a 60 km/h speed limit and a flat
gradient.
• The unrestricted turn analysis was conducted using the Victorian survey site as the basis, and it is shown
in Figure 4.3. The site has a 60 km/h speed limit and a flat gradient.
• The unrestricted turn analysis was conducted using the Western Australian survey site as the template
and is shown in Figure 4.4. The site has a 70 km/h speed limit and sloped entrance and exit roads but is
flat around the intersection area.
• The restricted turn of analysis was conducted using the Victorian survey site as the template, as shown in
Figure 4.5. The site has a 60 km/h speed limit, 15 m turning radius and a flat gradient.
The lanes highlighted in Figure 4.2 to Figure 4.5 are movements that are of specific interest for each
analysis.

Figure 4.2: Modelled site for through movement Figure 4.3: Modelled site for unrestricted turn analysis
analysis
Figure 4.4: Modelled site for unrestricted turn Figure 4.5: Modelled site for restricted turn analysis
analysis
4.3.3 Calibration Results – Rigid Truck
This section presents the AIMSUN calibration results for rigid trucks. The calibration was conducted
separately for Victorian and Western Australian survey data. The sensitivity test results based on the
Victorian survey data are shown in Table 4.6. The analysis showed that the optimum range of the reaction
time parameter is 1.80 s to 2.25 s, and the optimum range of the maximum acceleration parameter is
0.6 m/s2 to 1.0 m/s2. At these values, the modelled rigid trucks had similar start-up and saturation headways
to the values measured from the Victorian survey sites.
Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7 illustrate the sensitivity test results for the turning movements using the Victorian
survey site data, which included unrestricted and restricted turns. The analysis showed that the optimum
range for the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns and restricted turns is 30 km/h to 45 km/h.

Table 4.6: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameters for through movement using the Victorian datasets
Mean percentage error
Reaction time (s) Max. acceleration (m/s^2)
0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2

1.35 15% 10% 16% 20% 23%
1.80 15% 5% 5% 12% 15%
2.25 26% 11% 4% 6% 8%
Figure 4.6: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for unrestricted turn using the Victorian datasets
Figure 4.7: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for restricted turn using the Victorian datasets
The sensitivity test results for rigid trucks based on the Western Australian data are shown in Table 4.7. The
results showed that the optimum range for the reaction time parameter is 0.90 s to 1.8 s and the optimum
range of maximum acceleration parameter is 3 m/s2 to 4 m/s2. At around these parameter values, the
modelled rigid trucks had start-up and saturation headways similar to the headways measured from the field.
Figure 4.8 shows the sensitivity test for an unrestricted turn using the Western Australian datasets as a
reference point to examine the turn speed parameter. The optimum range of the turn speed parameter was
25 km/h to 32 km/h.

Table 4.7: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameters for through movement using the Western Australian
datasets
2.0 3.0 3.5 4.0 5.0

0.90 10% 7% 6% 6% 8%
1.35 8% 4% 3% 4% 6%
1.80 17% 11% 9% 8% 8%
Figure 4.8: Sensitivity test of rigid truck parameter for unrestricted turn using the Western Australian datasets
The calibration results for rigid trucks are summarised in Table 4.8. The results for Victoria were notably
different to the ones for Western Australia. The differences in the calibrated parameters were possibly due to
the different composition of rigid trucks and traffic streams in the Victorian and Western Australian sites, as
discussed in Section 3.5. The rigid trucks in the Victorian survey sites were potentially larger and heavier
than those in the Western Australian sites. Hence the rigid truck parameters calibrated using the Victorian
datasets may be more appropriate for larger rigid truck varieties operating on freight routes. On the other
hand, the rigid truck parameters calibrated using the Western Australian datasets may be more suitable for
smaller rigid trucks operating in urban traffic conditions. Due to limitations in the data, this qualification could
not be validated, and it is recommended that the rigid truck parameters be examined further by collecting
more data for calibration.
Table 4.8: Calibration results of rigid truck parameters for AIMSUN
Movement and dataset Max. acceleration, m/s2 Reaction Turn speed

source Mean SD Min Max. time, s limit, km/h
Through – VIC 0.60–1.00 0.19–0.32 0.41–0.68 0.86–1.44 1.80–2.25 N/A

Unrestricted turn – VIC 35–45
Restricted turn – VIC 35–40
Through – WA 3.00–4.00 0.97–1.30 2.04–2.72 4.31–5.75 0.90–1.80 N/A
Unrestricted turn – WA 25–32

4.3.4 Calibration Results – Single Articulated
This section presents the AIMSUN calibration of single articulated parameters based on the Victorian and
Western Australian datasets. The sensitivity test results for the through movement using the Victorian
datasets are shown in Table 4.9. The sensitivity tests identified that the optimum range of the reaction time
parameter was 1.35 s to 1.80 s and the optimum range of the maximum acceleration parameter was 0.9 m/s2
to 1.1 m/s2 so that the start-up and saturation headways are as close as possible to the values derived from
the Victorian survey sites.
Sensitivity tests on the turn speed parameter for the turning movements using the Victorian datasets are
shown in Figure 4.9 and Figure 4.10 for unrestricted and restricted turns, respectively. The optimum range of
the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns and restricted turns was 23 km/h to 30 km/h and 20 km/h to
28 km/h, respectively.
Table 4.9: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameters for through movement using the Victorian datasets
0.5 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.5

1.35 16% 7% 6% 8% 14%
1.80 24% 4% 3% 3% 7%
2.25 35% 16% 13% 11% 13%
Figure 4.9: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for unrestricted turn using the Victorian datasets
Figure 4.10: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for restricted turn using the Victorian datasets

The sensitivity test results for single articulated truck parameters using the Western Australian datasets are
shown in Table 4.10 for the through movement. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the
reaction time parameter was 0.90 s to 1.35 s and the optimum range of the maximum acceleration parameter
was 1.0 m/s2 to 1.2 m/s2.
Sensitivity test results on the turn speed parameter for articulated trucks doing an unrestricted turn are
shown in Figure 4.11. The test shows that the optimum range of the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns
was 21 km/h to 28 km/h.
Table 4.10: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameters for through movement in Western Australia
0.5 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.5

0.90 20% 3% 4% 5% 8%
1.35 24% 3% 2% 3% 5%
1.80 13% 14% 12% 10% 13%
Figure 4.11: Sensitivity test of single articulated parameter for unrestricted turn in Western Australia
The calibration results for single articulated parameters are summarised in Table 4.11. The calibration results
using the Victorian and Western Australian datasets are similar.
Table 4.11: Calibration results of single articulated parameters for AIMSUN
Movement and dataset Maximum acceleration, m/s2 Reaction Turn speed

source Mean Std. dev. Min. Max. time, s limit, km/h
Through – VIC 0.90–1.10 0.20–0.25 0.65–0.79 1.13–1.38 1.35–1.80 N/A

Through – WA 1.00–1.20 0.22–0.27 0.72–0.86 1.26–1.51 0.90–1.35 N/A
Unrestricted – WA 20–30

4.3.5 Calibration Results – B-double
This section presents the AIMSUN calibration results for B-double parameters using the Victorian and
Western Australian datasets. The sensitivity test results for the through movement using the Victorian
datasets are shown in Table 4.12. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the reaction time
to 1.0 m/s2.
The sensitivity test results for the turn speed parameter for B-doubles using the Victorian dataset is shown in
Figure 4.12 and Figure 4.13 for the unrestricted and restricted turns, respectively. The sensitivity test
identified that the optimum range of the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns and restricted turns was
20 km/h to 27 km/h and 15 km/h to 19 km/h, respectively.
Table 4.12: Sensitivity test of B-double parameters for through movement using the Victorian datasets
0.5 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.5

1.35 11% 7% 8% 12% 19%
1.80 18% 2% 2% 3% 11%
2.25 26% 11% 7% 7% 10%
Figure 4.12: Sensitivity test of B-double parameter for unrestricted turn using Victorian datasets
Figure 4.13: Sensitivity test of B-double parameter for restricted turn using Victorian datasets

The sensitivity test results for B-double parameters for the through movement using the Western Australian
datasets are shown in Table 4.13. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the reaction time
to 1.1 m/s2.
Sensitivity test results for the turn speed parameter for B-doubles doing an unrestricted turn are shown in
Figure 4.14. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns
is 27 km/h to 30 km/h.
Table 4.13: Sensitivity test of B-doubles for through movement in Western Australia
0.5 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.5

0.45 19% 2% 2% 5% 10%
0.90 20% 3% 1% 3% 9%
1.35 28% 7% 3% 5% 8%
Figure 4.14: Sensitivity test of B-doubles for unrestricted turn in Western Australia
The calibration results for B-doubles for Victoria and Western Australia are summarised in Table 4.14. The
calibration results using the Victorian and Western Australian datasets are similar.
Table 4.14: Calibration results of B-double parameters for AIMSUN
Movement and dataset Max. acceleration, m/s2 Reaction Turn speed

source Mean Std. dev. Min. Max. time, s limit, km/h
Through – VIC 0.80–1.00 0.30–0.37 0.52–0.65 1.22–1.53 1.35–2.25 N/A

Through – WA 0.90–1.10 0.33–0.41 0.59–0.72 1.37–1.68 0.45–1.35 N/A
Unrestricted turn – WA 27–30

4.3.6 Calibration Results – Double Road Train
This section presents the AIMSUN calibration results for double road train parameters using Victorian and
Western Australian datasets. The sensitivity test results for double road train through movement parameters
using the Victorian datasets are shown in Table 4.15. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of
the reaction time parameter was 1.35 s to 1.80 s and the optimum maximum acceleration parameter was
0.8 m/s2 to 1.0 m/s2.
Sensitivity test results for the double road train turn speed using the Victorian datasets are shown in
Figure 4.15 and Figure 4.16 for unrestricted and restricted turn movements respectively. The sensitivity test
identified that the optimum range of the turn speed limit for unrestricted turns and restricted turns was
18 km/h to 24 km/h and 15 km/h to 19 km/h, respectively.
Table 4.15: Sensitivity test of double road train parameters for through movement using Victorian datasets
0.5 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.5

0.90 14% 7% 7% 10% 18%
1.35 17% 4% 3% 6% 13%
1.80 25% 8% 5% 4% 9%
Figure 4.15: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for unrestricted turn using Victorian datasets
Figure 4.16: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for restricted turn using Victorian datasets

The sensitivity test results for double road train parameters for through movements using the Western
Australian datasets are shown in Table 4.16. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the
reaction time parameter was 0.90 s to 1.35 s and the optimum range of the maximum acceleration parameter
was 0.9 m/s2 to 1.2 m/s2.
Sensitivity test results for the turn speed parameters for unrestricted turn movements of a double road train
are shown in Figure 4.17. The sensitivity test identified that the optimum range of the turn speed limit for
unrestricted turns was 21 km/h to 29 km/h.
Table 4.16: Sensitivity test of double road train parameters for through movement in Western Australia
0.8 0.9 1.0 1.2 1.5

0.90 7% 5% 3% 7% 12%
1.35 7% 4% 1% 3% 7%
1.80 16% 13% 8% 7% 10%
Figure 4.17: Sensitivity test of double road train parameter for unrestricted turn in Western Australia
The calibration results of double road trains for Victoria and Western Australia are summarised in Table 4.17.
The calibration results using the Victorian and Western Australian datasets are similar.
Table 4.17: Calibration results of double road trains
Max. acceleration, m/s2 Reaction Turn speed

Movement
time, s limit, km/h
Mean Std. dev. Min. Max.
Through – VIC 0.80–1.00 0.30–0.37 0.52–0.65 1.22–1.53 1.35–1.80 N/A
Through – WA 0.90–1.20 0.33–0.44 0.59–0.79 1.37–1.83 0.90–1.35 N/A
Unrestricted – WA 20–30

4.3.7 Recommended Ranges of Parameter Values for AIMSUN
Table 4.18 is the harmonised set of parameters based on the calibration of individual truck types in the
previous sections. Parameters pertaining to vehicle length and clearance follow the survey results in
Table 3.2 and Table 3.3, respectively. Due to a significant difference in rigid truck composition at the survey
sites in Victoria and Western Australia, two subcategories under rigid truck are categorised as rigid truck
(small) based on Western Australian datasets and rigid truck (large) based on Victorian datasets. It is
recommended that the applicability of the rigid truck parameters should be validated based on field
observations on site.
Table 4.18: Recommended ranges of heavy vehicle parameters
Heavy vehicle Max. acceleration, m/s2 Turn speed limit, km/h Reaction
type Mean SD Min. Max. Unrestricted Restricted time, s
Rigid truck (small) 3.00–4.00 0.97–1.30 2.04–2.72 4.31–5.75 25–32 N/A 0.90–1.35
Rigid truck
1.00–1.10 0.32–0.36 0.68–0.75 1.44–1.58 25–30 20–30 1.35
(large)(1)
Single articulated 1.00–1.10 0.22–0.25 0.72–0.79 1.26–1.38 23–30 20–28 1.35
B-double 0.90–1.00 0.33–0.37 0.59–0.65 1.37–1.53 20–30 15–19 1.35
Double road train 0.90–1.00 0.33–0.37 0.59–0.65 1.37–1.53 20–24 15–19 1.35
1 Rigid truck parameters were adjusted based on the overall trend of parameters for all truck types. It is recommended
that the use of the rigid truck parameters is validated, if possible.
4.3.8 Calibration Check under Mixed Traffic Conditions
This section examines the recommended parameter set (i.e. Table 4.18) for AIMSUN by comparing model
outputs under mixed traffic conditions to field observations. The MRWA (2018) parameters were also
examined as a basis of comparison with the recommended parameters. The analysis was conducted by
comparing the start-up and saturation headways for through movement, unrestricted turn and restricted turn.
Data from Victorian and Western Australian datasets were used. The analysis was conducted under mixed
traffic conditions as measured from the field. Movements during traffic signal cycles were grouped into three
types, based on the proportion of large trucks, as follows:
• low proportion (less than 20%) of large trucks, which includes single articulated trucks, B-doubles and
double road trains)
• medium proportion (greater than 20% and less than 40%) of large trucks
• high proportion (greater than 40%) of large trucks.
The start-up and saturation headways under each demand scenario were calculated using field
measurements. AIMSUN models were then calibrated, one using the recommended set of parameters and
another using the MRWA parameters. The analysis was done separately for the Victorian datasets and the
Western Australian datasets. The results are shown in the following sections.
Calibration check under mixed traffic conditions – Victorian datasets
This section presents the results of mixed traffic checking using the Victorian datasets. The results are
provided for:
• unrestricted turn (Table 4.20)
• restricted turn (Table 4.21).

Table 4.19: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Victorian datasets
Proportion Start-up headway, s Saturation headway, s Mean percentage

of large Parameter set error
trucks Simulated Actual Simulated Actual
Low Calibrated 3.6 3.6 2.7 2.6 2%

MRWA default 3.5 2.0 13%
Medium Calibrated 4.3 4.5 3.0 2.5 13%
High Calibrated 6.1 7.3 3.8 3.7 10%
Table 4.20: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Victorian datasets

Low Calibrated 3.2 3.6 2.7 2.5 10%

Table 4.21: Mixed traffic results for restricted turn based on Victorian datasets

Low Calibrated 3.5 3.4 2.9 2.6 6%

Medium & Calibrated 4.6 5.4 3.6 3.9 11%
high
Figure 4.18 illustrates the results, showing the field measured values and AIMSUN model estimates using
the recommended parameters and the MRWA parameters. The linear trendline of the model outputs using
the calibrated parameters has a slope of 1.15 and R2 of 0.65. On the other hand, the linear trendline of the
model outputs with the MRWA parameters has a slope of 1.32 and R2 of 0.47. Ideally the slope should be
close to 1.0 and the R2 should also be close to 1.0. In this respect, the recommended parameters are an
improvement on the MRWA parameters.

Figure 4.18: Comparison of headway estimates using the calibrated and MRWA parameters based on the
Victorian datasets
Calibration check under mixed traffic conditions – Western Australian datasets
This section presents the results of mixed traffic checking based on Western Australian datasets. The results
are provided for:
• unrestricted turn (Table 4.23).
Table 4.22: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Western Australian datasets

Low Calibrated 3.2 3.3 2.1 2.1 2%

Medium & Calibrated 4.5 4.6 2.5 2.9 7%
high
Table 4.23: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Western Australian datasets

of large Parameter value error
Low Calibrated 3.6 3.3 2.6 2.5 6%


Figure 4.19 illustrates the results, showing the field measured values and AIMSUN model estimates using
the recommended parameters and the MRWA parameters. The linear trendline of the model outputs using
the calibrated parameters has a slope of 1.05 and R2 of 0.94. On the other hand, the linear trendline of the
improvement to the MRWA parameters.
Figure 4.19: Comparison of headway estimates using calibrated and MRWA parameters based on the
Western Australian datasets
4.4 VISSIM
This section presents the development of parameters for VISSIM. It is noted that the recommended
parameters can only be used as a guidance for heavy vehicle modelling in VISSIM. Application to any other
traffic conditions should be reviewed using field observation.
4.4.1 Road Network Development
VISSIM network was built using BING background map. The exact locations of the two surveyed
intersections in Melbourne, Victoria:
• Ballarat Rd/Moore St (for restricted and unrestricted turn movement calibration – Figure 4.20)
• Francis St/Hyde St (for the through movement calibration – Figure 4.21).
The two surveyed sites in Perth, Western Australia were:

• Stirling Highway/Canning Hwy intersection (for through movement calibration)
• Leach Highway/Stock Rd (for unrestricted turn movement calibration).
Surveyed data from the two Western Australian intersections were used for parameter calibration but the
actual intersections were not coded in VISSIM. Instead, the intersections coded for the two Victorian sites
were also used for the Western Australian sites. The fact that vehicle behaviour in VISSIM is not directly
affected by link and connector horizontal geometric characteristics (e.g. radii, curvature etc.) allowed the
same intersections from Victoria to be used for the Western Australian sites without any detrimental effects
on the calibration and validation process.

Figure 4.20: Ballarat Rd/Moore St intersection coded in VISSIM
Source: Bing Maps 2019, ‘Ballarat Rd/Moore St Intersection, Melbourne’, image, Microsoft, WA, USA, viewed on
13 June 2019, <https://www.bing.com/maps/aerial>.
Figure 4.21: Francis St/Hyde St intersection coded in VISSIM
Source: Bing Maps 2019, ‘Francis St/Hyde St Intersection, Melbourne’, image, Microsoft, WA, USA, viewed on
13 June 2019, <https://www.bing.com/maps/aerial>.

4.4.2 Vehicle Inputs
In order to exclude unnecessary lane changes which would affect the start-up and saturation headways, the
vehicle inputs were coded as single lanes which then connect to two lanes and feed into the appropriate
lane. This was done to prevent random loading of the VISSIM network in two lanes which would then force
vehicles to change lanes in congested conditions and interfere with vehicle headways. Once in the surveyed
lane, the vehicles were prohibited from changing lanes. Vehicles were also prohibited from changing lanes
on exit links. This was done for all three vehicle inputs (Figure 4.22).
Figure 4.22: Feeding vehicles into correct lanes with lane-change bans
Vehicle input for

unconstrained turn
Vehicle input for straight
through movement
Vehicle input for

constrained turn
Source:
1) Bing Maps 2019, ‘Ballarat Rd/Moore St Intersection, Melbourne’, image, Microsoft, WA, USA, viewed on 13 June
2019, <https://www.bing.com/maps/aerial>.
2) Bing Maps 2019, ‘Francis St, Melbourne’, image, Microsoft, WA, USA, viewed on 13 June 2019,
<https://www.bing.com/maps/aerial>.
4.4.3 Desired Speeds and Reduced Speed Areas
All approaches and exits at the four intersections were coded with 60 km/h speed limits. Reduced speed
areas were coded in the middle of the turning movement connectors with 3 m in length (Figure 4.23).
4.4.4 Signal Heads and Data Collection Points
Signal heads in relevant lanes were enabled for the discharge record collection (*.dis files). Data collection
points were set to collect the raw data (*.mer files) and were placed in the following three spots on all
approaches (Figure 4.23):
• the stop line (aligned with signal heads)
• the middle of the turning movement (middle of the reduced speed areas)
• the exit of the intersection.

Figure 4.23: Coding of reduced speed areas and data collection points
4.4.5 Gradients
As mentioned in Section 4.4.1, the calibration and validation of parameters were carried out separately for
both surveyed data in Victoria and Western Australia. One of the WA sites (Leach Hwy/Stock Rd
intersection) also had some slopes on the approach and exit legs and they needed to be coded for the
affected links. For the calibration and validation of WA sites, identical models were used as for the Victorian
sites except for the gradients at the above-mentioned site. The gradient data was sourced from Google Maps
and was coded as shown in Figure 4.24.

Figure 4.24: Gradients coded for WA unrestricted turn movement
4.4.6 Vehicle Types
Vehicle sizes for all vehicle types were taken as per the surveyed average values. Two additional vehicle
types with associated 2D/3D models were created:
• Rigid_T_Exact (rigid truck with a length of exactly 9.5 m)
• Single_AT_Exact (single articulated truck of exactly 17.1 m).
These two vehicle groups were calibrated using two methods: the newly created vehicle types with exact
lengths and the combinations of existing vehicle types from the Operational Modelling and Visualisation
(OMV) template (MRWA 2018). In the second method, corresponding vehicle types were combined in such a
way so that the average length equals 9.5 m for rigid trucks and 17.1 m for single articulated trucks. The
proportions of vehicle types in the second method are as shown in Table 4.24 and Table 4.25.
Table 4.24: Average rigid truck vehicle composition
Vehicle type Desired speed distribution Relative flow (%) Length (m)
1003: 2 axle truck 60: 60 km/h 60.0 9.895
1004: 3 axle truck 60: 60 km/h 19.0 8.803
1005: 4 axle truck 60: 60 km/h 21.0 9.000
Table 4.25: Average single articulated truck vehicle composition
Vehicle type Desired speed distribution Relative flow (%) Length (m)
1006: 3 axle articulated 60: 60 km/h 9.5 12.065

4.4.7 Driving Behaviours
Five special driving behaviours were created to enable coding of the surveyed average queue standstill
distances (clearances) between different types of vehicles (Figure 4.25 and Figure 4.26). Surveyed standstill
distances were added using Vehicle Class following behaviours through the W74ax parameter.
Five driving behaviours were then assigned to the Urban (motorised) link behaviour type to facilitate the use
of Wiedemann 74 parameters in all possible situations of the leading and following vehicles (Figure 4.27).
The modelling scenario is arterial intersection. Comparing to Wiedemann 99 model that is suitable for
motorway traffic with no merging areas, Wiedemann 74 model that is suitable for urban traffic was used.
Figure 4.25: Rigid truck standstill distance combinations
Figure 4.26: Single articulated truck standstill distance combinations
Figure 4.27: Assignment of driving behaviours to a link behaviour type

4.4.8 Methodology of Calibration and Mixed Traffic Checking
The overall methodology used for parameter calibration and mixed traffic checking had the following
workflow:
1. Carry out the calibration of the start-up headway and saturation headway for the through scenario for all
vehicle types/classes (one at a time with vehicle composition of 100%) by changing/adjusting one or more
of the following parameters:
– W74bxAdd (additive part of the safety distance in the Wiedemann 74 model)
– W74bxMult (multiplicative part of the safety distance in the Wiedemann 74 model)
– Power distribution
– Weight distribution
– Maximum acceleration function
– Desired acceleration function.
2. Once the through scenario was calibrated, apply the identical set of parameters to the unrestricted and
restricted turn scenarios.
3. Adjust the desired speed distribution for reduced speed areas to match the surveyed values in the
unrestricted and restricted turn scenarios.
4. Report differences between calibrated and surveyed values for start-up headways and saturation
headways.
5. Once all vehicle types/classes for all scenarios (through, unrestricted and restricted) are calibrated as
best as possible, set up high HV, medium HV and low HV scenarios with vehicle compositions as per the
surveyed data.
6. Run all scenarios and compare them with surveyed high HV, medium HV and low HV scenarios.
The VISSIM manual only explains how to change the saturation headway by changing the Wiedemann
parameters. This approach is relatively straightforward if the focus is to calibrate the saturation headway
only. However, start-up headway is not covered at all in the VISSIM documentation and the relationship
between the calibration parameters and the start-up headway is largely unknown. It is also important to
establish the combination of parameters that can cause the start-up headway and saturation headway to
change at different rates and perhaps in different directions (increasing the start-up headway and decreasing
the saturation headway).
In the absence of those relationships, the abbreviated approach was used to achieve the closest match
between observed and simulated values (i.e. using different combinations of OMV Acceleration curves
during the calibration process in addition to changing other parameters).
Two calculation rules were used for deriving the start-up headway and saturation headway (explained in
more detail in Section 4.3.1):
• 3-Vehicle Rule – start-up phase starts from green to arrival of the 4th vehicle. The saturation headway
was derived from the 4th vehicle to the last queued vehicle. This rule was used for single articulated
trucks, B-doubles, and double road trains.
• 4-Vehicle Rule – start-up starts from green to arrival of the 5th vehicle. The saturation headway was
derived from the 5th vehicle to the last queued vehicle. This rule was used for rigid trucks.
Mean percentage error refers to an average of the absolute percentage errors associated with actual start-up
and saturation headways. The actual start-up and saturation headways for each vehicle class were obtained
from the heavy vehicle surveys (Sections 3.5 and 3.6). The ideal calibrated values of the parameters would
produce the start-up and saturation headways that are the closest to the actual ones, i.e. the lowest mean
percentage error.

4.4.9 Calibration Results – Rigid Truck
The parameters calibrated for rigid truck include the additive part of safety distance, multiplicative part of
safety distance, maximum acceleration function, desired acceleration function, and desired speed distribution
for reduced speed areas (RSAs).
Rigid truck has two calibration scenarios - exact length and average length. Exact length refers to the
calibration based on the created vehicle type of rigid truck with the exact length to be 9.5 m. Average length
refers to the calibration based on the combination of existing vehicle types from the OMV template. In the
second method, the corresponding vehicle types were combined in such a way that the average length
equals 9.5 m for rigid truck.
Table 4.26 to Table 4.28 show the calibration results for rigid truck for through, unrestricted turn, and
restricted turn, respectively.
Table 4.26: Calibration results of rigid truck for through movement
Calibrated parameters Mean percentage error
Location Maximum Desired

Exact length Av. length 9.5
W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration
9.5 m m
function function
VIC 1.5 2.5 Double road 2 axle truck 7% 3%
train
WA 1.5 2.5 2 axle truck 2 axle truck 6% 6%
Table 4.27: Calibrated results of rigid truck for unrestricted turn
Desired speed Maximum Desired

Location
distribution for RSAs W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration Exact length Av. length
9.5 m 9.5 m
function function
Mean Min. Max.
VIC 24.2 24.1 24.3 1.5 2.5 Double road 2 axle truck 7% 9%
train
WA 16.0 15.9 16.1 1.5 2.5 2 axle truck 2 axle truck 4% 4%
Table 4.28: Calibrated results of rigid truck for restricted turn

Location
9.5 m 9.5 m
Mean Min. Max. function function
VIC 20.0 19.9 20.1 1.5 2.5 Double road 2 axle truck 7% 9%
train
4.4.10 Calibration Results – Single Articulated
The parameters calibrated for single articulated include the additive part of safety distance, multiplicative part
of safety distance, maximum acceleration function, desired acceleration function, and desired speed
distribution for reduced speed areas (RSAs).

Single articulated has two calibration scenarios – exact length and average length. Exact length refers to the
calibration based on the created vehicle type of single articulated with the exact length to be 17.1 m.
Average length refers to the calibration based on the combination of existing vehicle types from the OMV
template (MRWA 2018). In the second method, the corresponding vehicle types were combined in such a
way that the average length equals 17.1 m for single articulated.
Table 4.29 to Table 4.31 show the calibration results of single articulated for through, unrestricted turn, and
Table 4.29: Calibration results of single articulated for through movement
Location Maximum Desired Exact Av.

W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration length length
function function 17.1 m 17.1 m
VIC 1.5 2.5 3 axle articulated 3 axle truck 6% 7%
WA 1.5 2.5 4 axle articulated 2 axle truck 11% 12%
Table 4.30: Calibration results of single articulated for unrestricted turn

Location
17.1 m 17.1 m
VIC 16.5 16.4 16.6 1.5 2.5 3 axle 3 axle truck 6% 7%

articulated
WA 15.0 14.9 15.1 1.5 2.5 4 axle 2 axle truck 4% 4%
articulated
Table 4.31: Calibration results of single articulated for restricted turn

Location
17.1 m 17.1 m
VIC 14.4 14.3 14.5 1.5 2.5 3 axle 3 axle truck 3% 3%

articulated
4.4.11 Calibration Results – B-double
The parameters calibrated for B-double include the additive part of safety distance, multiplicative part of
safety distance, maximum acceleration function, desired acceleration function, power distribution, weight
distribution, and desired speed distribution for reduced speed areas (RSAs).
Table 4.32 to Table 4.34 show the calibration results for B-double for through, unrestricted turn, and

Table 4.32: Calibration results of B-double for through movement
Calibrated parameters
Mean
Maximum Desired Power Weight
Location percentage
W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration distribution distribution
error
function function Min. Max. Min. Max.
double road
VIC 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 280 320 16 000 17 000 6%
train
WA 0.1 1.1 B-double 2 axle truck 280 320 16 000 17 000 9%
Table 4.33: Calibration results of B-double for unrestricted turn
Desired speed Mean

distribution for percentage
RSAs W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration distribution distribution
error
function function
Mean Min Max Min Max Min Max
Victoria
14.0 13.9 14.1 0.1 1.1 Double road 2 axle truck 280 320 16 000 17 000 2%
train
Western Australia
20.0 19.9 20.1 0.1 1.1 B-double 2 axle truck 280 320 16 000 17 000 8%
Table 4.34: Calibration results of B-double for restricted turn
Desired speed Mean

distribution for percentage
W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration distribution distribution
RSAs error
function function
Mean Min Max Min Max Min Max
Victoria
10.5 10.4 10.6 0.1 1.1 Double road 2 axle truck 280 320 16 000 17 10%
train 000
4.4.12 Calibration Results – Double Road Train
The parameters calibrated for double road train include the additive part of safety distance, multiplicative part
of safety distance, maximum acceleration function, desired acceleration function, weight distribution, and
desired speed distribution for reduced speed areas (RSAs).
Table 4.35 to Table 4.37 show the calibration results of double road train for through, unrestricted turn, and

Table 4.35: Calibration results of double road train for through movement
Mean
Location Maximum Desired Weight distribution percentage
W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration error
function function Min Max
Double road
VIC 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 18 000 19 000 5%
train
Double road
WA 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 18 000 19 000 7%
train
Table 4.36: Calibration results of double road train for unrestricted turn
Desired speed Mean

Weight
Location distribution for Maximum Desired percentage
distribution
RSAs W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration error
function function
Mean Min Max Min Max
Double road
VIC 12.0 11.9 12.1 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 18 000 19 000 3%
train
Double road
WA 16.0 15.9 16.1 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 18 000 19 000 6%
train
Table 4.37: Calibration results of double road train for restricted turn
Desired speed Mean

Weight
Location distribution for Maximum Desired percentage
distribution
RSAs W74bxAdd W74bxMult acceleration acceleration error
function function
Mean Min Max Min Max
Double road
VIC 9.0 8.9 9.1 0.1 1.1 2 axle truck 18 000 19 000 6%
train
4.4.13 Calibration Check under Mixed Traffic Conditions
The developed parameters for VISSIM were checked under mixed traffic conditions as described in
Section 4.3.8. The results are discussed below.
Calibration check under mixed traffic conditions – Victorian datasets
Table 4.38 to Table 4.40 show the mixed traffic results for through, unrestricted turn, and restricted turn
based on the Victorian datasets, respectively.

Figure 4.28 illustrates the results, showing the field measured values and VISSIM model estimates using the
recommended parameters and the MRWA parameters. The linear trendline of the model outputs using the
calibrated parameters has a slope of 1.04 and R2 of 0.92. On the other hand, the linear trendline of the
improvement on the MRWA parameters (MRWA 2018).
Table 4.38: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Victorian datasets
Start-up headway, s Saturation headway, s

Proportion of Mean percentage
Parameter value
large trucks Simulated Actual Simulated Actual error
Low Calibrated 3.7 3.6 2.7 2.6 4%

Table 4.39: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Victorian datasets

Parameter value
Low Calibrated 3.4 3.6 2.6 2.5 4%

Table 4.40: Mixed traffic results for restricted turn based on Victorian datasets

Parameter value
Low Calibrated 3.3 3.4 2.6 2.6 3%

Medium & high Calibrated 5.2 5.4 3.9 3.9 3%

Figure 4.28: Comparison of headway estimates using calibrated and MRWA parameters based on Victorian datasets
Calibration check under mixed traffic conditions – Western Australian datasets
Table 4.41 and Table 4.42 show the mixed traffic results for through and unrestricted turn in Western
Australia.
Figure 4.29 illustrates the results, showing the field measured values and VISSIM model estimates using the
recommended parameters and the MRWA parameters. The linear trendline of the model outputs using the
calibrated parameters has a slope of 1.05 and R2 of 0.92. On the other hand, the linear trendline of the
improvement on the MRWA parameters.
Table 4.41: Mixed traffic results for through movement based on Western Australian datasets
Start-up headway, s Saturation headway, s Mean

Proportion of Parameter
percentage
large trucks value Simulated Actual Simulated Actual error
Low Calibrated 3.2 3.3 2.3 2.1 7%
Medium & high Calibrated 4.4 4.6 3.1 2.9 5%
combined
Table 4.42: Mixed traffic results for unrestricted turn based on Western Australian datasets
Proportion Start-up headway, s Saturation headway, s Mean

Parameter
of large percentage
value Simulated Actual Simulated Actual
trucks error
Low Calibrated 3.3 3.3 2.6 2.5 4%

Figure 4.29: Comparison of headway results using calibrated and MRWA parameters based on Western
Australian datasets
4.4.14 Summary and Discussion
Simultaneous calibration of both the start-up headway and saturation headway presented difficulties as they
depend on many parameters. Generally, a change in most parameters used for calibration caused the
start-up headway and saturation headway to move in the same direction but at different rates.
During calibration it was observed that one of the efficient ways to keep the start-up headway at a relatively
large value and achieve smaller saturation headway values was to combine the OMV maximum acceleration
curve from heavier vehicle types and the OMV desired acceleration curve from lighter vehicle types.
In addition to reducing the Wiedemann 74 parameters to the most extreme values, the above approach was
the only way to achieve values closer to observed values for the heaviest and longest vehicle types like
B-doubles and double road trains.
The VISSIM manual only explains how to change the saturation headway by changing the Wiedemann
74 parameters. This approach is relatively straightforward if the focus was on calibrating the saturation
headway only. However, the start-up headway was not covered in VISSIM documentation and the
relationship between the calibration parameters and start-up headway was largely unknown. It was also
important to establish the combination of parameters that can cause the start-up headway and saturation
headway to change at different rates and perhaps in different directions (increasing the start-up headway
and decreasing saturation headway).
Consultation with PTV Group on this issue confirmed that the maximum and desired acceleration curves are
critical for the calibration of the start-up headway and that they have more influence on the start-up headway
than the Wiedemann 74 parameters. This consultation also revealed another parameter not included as part
of the calibration set at the start of this project. This parameter is ‘reaction after end of red’ which is part of
driving behaviour signal control which is controlled in the form of time distribution. This parameter can affect
the start-up headway in isolation, i.e. without affecting the saturation headway.
Since changing and providing a new set of acceleration curves is a complex process well beyond the scope
of this project, the abbreviated approach was used during calibration to achieve the closest match between
observed and simulated values (i.e. using different combinations of the OMV acceleration curves during the
calibration process in addition to changing other parameters). Therefore, the calibrated values presented in
this section cannot be used to make recommended parameter ranges before an agreement is reached on
how the acceleration curves are to be adjusted to best meet all the criteria under different driving conditions
(and not just start-up and saturation headways). Nevertheless, the main benefit of this calibration process is
to confirm that this workflow can be used successfully provided the main issues are resolved first.

Power-to-weight ratio needs to have a range between 7 and 30 and this cannot be achieved if the
Austroads (2018) suggested values shown in Table 2.21 are used. It is therefore recommended that realistic
observed ranges are used for the HGV power and have a free range for the HGV weight in order to achieve
the full VISSIM range of random acceleration values (between minimum and maximum boundary curves).
The value of the highest gradient for the simulation needs to be specified for each jurisdiction (or across
Australia and New Zealand) to avoid cases of vehicles permanently getting stuck during simulation. Current
OMV default curves for the double road train vehicle class could not cope with gradients higher than 2%
(Appendix B and Appendix C). In the absence of power-to-weight data it might also be of benefit to reduce
the spread around medium acceleration curves which will reduce the effect of the power-to-weight ratio on
selected acceleration values.
It is also evident that much a higher sample of observed data for heavy vehicles is required to develop a
complete set of acceleration curves with some confidence. If calibration on both start-up and saturation
headways still proves to be too difficult, another option is to calibrate just on observed saturation headway
rather than on both headways (i.e. start-up and saturation).
Given the results of mixed traffic checking, the recommended ranges for heavy vehicle parameters are
presented in Table 4.43. Vehicle length and clearance are consistent with the survey results which can be
found in Table 3.2 and Table 3.3. The maximum and desired acceleration curves used during the calibration
and mixed traffic checking process are presented in Appendix D.
Table 4.43: Recommended ranges of heavy vehicle parameters in VISSIM
Heavy vehicle Wiedemann 74 parameters Turn speed limit, km/h

type
W74bxAdd W74bxMult Unrestricted Restricted
Rigid truck 1.5 2.5 20–28 16–24
Single articulated 1.5 2.5 14–20 13–16
B-double N/A N/A N/A N/A
Double road train N/A N/A N/A N/A
Note: No recommendations were made for the B-double and double road train due to small samples which caused
extreme parameter values to be used in order to get close to observed values. More data is needed for these vehicle
classes.

5. Conclusions
Model misestimation of arterial road capacity involving heavy vehicles has been noted by road agencies.
This issue results from the inaccuracy of heavy vehicle parameters used in traffic modelling. The current
parameters of commonly used traffic modelling software fall short of their adaptability by Australia and New
Zealand. It is therefore important to review heavy vehicle parameters in traffic modelling software and identify
those that help improve the accuracy of traffic modelling for Australia and New Zealand. This project
contributed to this purpose by a literature review and workshops, heavy vehicle surveys, and parameter
development in traffic modelling software.
5.1 Literature Review

The key attributes of heavy vehicles that impact movement through an arterial road were identified, including
length, width, clearance, start-up acceleration, normal deceleration, turning speed, PCU, critical gap, and
reaction time. The recommended ranges for these attributes based on the literature review were also
summarised.
SIDRA
The effect of slow heavy vehicle turn capability is considered in SIDRA through adjusting the turning volumes
using the TCE factor. TCE is used instead of PCU factors to model turning movements.
Two parameters are used to incorporate the effect of heavy vehicles in the SIDRA gap acceptance model,
i.e. the gap acceptance factor and the opposing vehicle factor. The gap acceptance factor is used to adjust
the critical gap and follow-up headway. The opposing vehicle factor is a PCU factor that is used to adjust the
opposing stream to account for heavy vehicles.
LINSIG
LINSIG’s primary parameter for reflecting heavy vehicles in an arterial intersection model is through the
conversion of vehicles into PCU. The conversion is done externally with traffic demand being input as PCU,
i.e. not in terms of vehicles in LINSIG. Hence, the software relies on the user to input traffic flows in PCU.
The Main Roads Operational Modelling Guidelines (MRWA 2018) include PCU conversion factors for heavy
vehicles for LINSIG. Another important parameter is the saturation flow rate. This project excluded the
impact of the saturation flow rate in LINSIG and used the LINSIG default values.
AIMSUN
AIMSUN sets the speed of heavy vehicles based on two conditions. The first condition is when the vehicle is
accelerating to achieve its desired speed and it is not constrained by a leading vehicle. In this case, the
maximum acceleration parameter applies. Maximum acceleration defines the highest acceleration possible
during a simulation time step, and it is achieved shortly after starting from a stopped position. The second
condition is when the vehicle is constrained by the speed of a leading vehicle, with the speed of the vehicle
set to allow for a safe stop when the leading vehicle comes to a halt. In this case the normal deceleration
parameter applies. The speed of the following vehicle is dependent on the distance from the leading vehicle,
speed of the leading vehicle and deceleration capability of both the following and leading vehicle. For turning
manoeuvres, AIMSUN can employ a turning speed parameter which constrains the speed of a vehicle. This
parameter can be set automatically by AIMSUN or specified.

AIMSUN also constrains the speed of a following vehicle such that it is able to comfortably stop when the
leading vehicle slows down or stops which is influenced by reaction time. Reaction time is the time it takes a
driver to react to speed changes in the preceding vehicle.
In AIMSUN, the maximum acceleration and braking capability of a heavy vehicle is adjusted based on
gradient. Maximum acceleration is reduced by 0.0981 m/s2 for every 1% of gradient, up to a minimum value
of 10% of the maximum acceleration.
AIMSUN models the decision of a heavy vehicle to enter a priority-controlled intersection using a gap
acceptance model. The model specifies an initial maximum critical gap value (i.e. initial safety margin) that
decreases to a minimum critical gap value (i.e. final safety margin) with respect to the time the entering
vehicle spends waiting to enter. The critical gap values are specified as a property of a link, including the
initial and give-way time factors. Vehicle types are differentiated by the rate of decrease of the critical gap
(i.e. give-way time).
VISSIM
In VISSIM, the movement of heavy vehicles through a signalised intersection is modelled by reduced speed
areas and acceleration settings. Reduced speed areas are small areas set along the turning path of vehicles
that determine the desired speed of the vehicle when it performs a turn. The settings of the reduced area are
specified by the VISSIM vehicle class. The reduced speed area determines the ability of vehicles to execute
a turn movement and is an effective parameter to calibrate the capacity of a right-turn lane.
VISSIM uses two modes of acceleration and deceleration of a vehicle, which are maximum and desired, as
follows:
• Desired acceleration and desired deceleration are used in normal operational scenarios.
• Maximum acceleration is the technically feasible acceleration of a vehicle.
• Maximum deceleration is the technically feasible deceleration and is used for emergency stopping
scenarios.
In VISSIM, acceleration and deceleration parameters are specified by vehicle type and can be set as a
function of speed. Acceleration and deceleration values are assigned as a distribution defined by a minimum,
maximum and median value. VISSIM adjusts the acceleration and deceleration behaviour of vehicles that
are identified as heavy goods vehicles on links with gradients, based on the power-to-weight ratio.
VISSIM specifies vehicle length by vehicle 2D/3D models. Driving behaviours are created to enable coding of
standstill distances (clearances) between different types of vehicles. Standstill distances are added using the
VISSIM vehicle class following behaviours through the W74ax parameter.
5.2 Workshops
SIDRA workshop
The following suggestions were made at the SIDRA workshop:

• The PCU factors for heavy vehicles should consider gradients.
• The queue spacing on approaches with gradients may differ from approaches that are flat.
• The effect of heavy vehicles on start-up and lost time should be examined and adjusted if needed.
• SIDRA’s vehicle emission and operating cost models account for the power-to-weight attribute of heavy
vehicles and should also be adjusted, if applied.
• The effect of heavy vehicles on lane utilisation is not well understood, wherein the presence of heavy
vehicles causes unequal lane use.

LINSIG workshop
The effect of heavy vehicles on start-up and lost time should be examined and adjusted, if needed. LINSIG
applies platoon dispersion models. The effect of heavy vehicles on platoon dispersion is not well understood.
Platoon dispersion parameters may need to be reviewed where their effect on performance is significant
such as in modelling traffic progression.
AIMSUN workshop
The modification to reaction time should be treated carefully and revised as a last resort as it is a critical
parameter. When long vehicles turn, the through movement of adjacent lanes may be blocked due to the
swept path of the vehicle, causing turn blocking. Turn blocking could be modelled in AIMSUN by encoding
suitable traffic management rules, such as conditional lane or turn closure.
VISSIM workshop
It was suggested that acceleration and turn speed be calibrated accurately, as intersection capacity is very
sensitive to these parameters.
5.3 Heavy Vehicle Surveys

The field survey data served as a basis for parameter development in the traffic modelling software. The field
survey data included heavy vehicle length, clearance, acceleration, start-up and saturation headways,
through and turning speeds, critical gap, follow-up headway, passenger car unit, and powertrain analysis.
Vehicle length
There was significant variation in length in each heavy vehicle class, for example, rigid trucks can range from
two-axle (5.5 m) to four-axle (12.5 m) trucks. Vehicle length in models should be calibrated based on actual
site-specific vehicle length.
Clearance space
The average clearance space ranged from 2.3 m to 2.9 m. Passenger vehicles tended to allow for more
clearance space when following larger trucks, i.e. 2.3 m to 2.5 m clearance for smaller vehicle types, while
clearance with larger vehicles was 3.3 m. Rigid trucks keep a relatively constant clearance of 2.4 m to 2.7 m.
Larger trucks also set a uniform clearance space of 2.7 m to 2.9 m.
Acceleration
Acceleration of vehicles was highest just after the stop line. The average acceleration of heavy vehicles just
after the stop line ranged from 2.9 m/s2 for rigid trucks to 1.6 m/s2 for B-doubles and double road trains.
Start-up and saturation headway
The start-up headway of heavy vehicles ranged from 3.8 s to 8.4 s for through movements. Saturation
headways of heavy vehicles ranged from 2.8 s to 4.5 s. Headways for turning movements were higher,
particularly for larger heavy vehicle types.

Turning speed
The turning speed of heavy vehicles ranged from 11 km/h to 18 km/h at the middle of a restricted turn. Heavy
vehicle speed during an unrestricted turn manoeuvre ranged from 19 km/h to 26 km/h in the middle of the
turn.
Critical gap for priority-controlled movements
The critical gap for heavy vehicles ranged from 5.6 s for rigid trucks to 9.0 s for B-doubles.
Powertrain analysis
Small rigid truck acceleration decreased by 0.1 to 0.2 m/s2 when fully laden depending on the gradient. Other
truck types were less sensitive with acceleration decreasing by less than 0.1 m/s2. Trucks bigger than a
small rigid truck decreased their acceleration by around 0.2 m/s2 when the gradient was +5%, or
approximately 0.04 m/s2 per 1% gradient. The small rigid truck is less sensitive to gradient.
5.4 Parameter Development
SIDRA
Passenger car equivalent values for application to SIDRA were prepared. Passenger car equivalents for
through movement ranged from 1.5 for rigid trucks to 2.0 for double road trains. Turning vehicle factors for
SIDRA were also prepared, which included one set for unrestricted turns and another set for restricted turns.
Parameters for gap acceptance were also prepared for various heavy vehicle types.
LINSIG
LINSIG’s key parameters for modelling heavy vehicles are passenger car unit and saturation flow rate. PCU
factors were prepared. This project excluded the impact of the saturation flow rate and the default values
were used.
AIMSUN
Optimal ranges of the maximum acceleration, reaction time and turn speed parameters were identified that
would result in realistic start-up and saturation headways, including for through movement, unrestricted turn
and restricted turn.
VISSIM
VISSIM parameter development resulted in a set of Wiedemann 74 parameters (i.e. additive and
multiplicative parts of safety distance) and turn speed limits for both unrestricted and restricted turn. The
analysis also resulted in a set of acceleration functions. While a recommended parameter set was proposed
for rigid trucks and single articulated, no recommended parameter sets can be confidently made for
B-doubles and double road trains due to the small samples which caused extreme parameter values to be
used in order to get close to observed values. More data is needed for these vehicle classes.

5.5 Suggestions for Future Study

It was found that microsimulation models were sensitive to a number of parameters, and setting model
parameters so that they accurately replicate the start-up headways and saturation headways under various
heavy vehicle traffic conditions requires setting parameters carefully within a range of values. It is
recommended that the microsimulation parameters are analysed under more varied conditions and sites to
improve confidence in them. Moreover, it is suggested that further disaggregation of the five vehicle types is
required to allow for finer scenario testing. The methodology developed in this report can be used as a guide
to optimise and generalise the microsimulation parameters.

References
Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd 2018, ‘SIDRA intersection 8 user guide’, Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd, Balwyn,
Vic.
Ashworth, R 1968, ‘A note on the selection of gap acceptance criteria for traffic simulation studies’,
Transportation Research, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 171-5.
Austroads 1991, A study of heavy vehicle swept path performance, SR 48, Australian Road Research Board,
Vermont South, Vic.
Austroads 2006, Automatic vehicle classification by vehicle length, AP-T60-06, Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2013, Austroads design vehicles and turning path templates guide, AP-G34-13, Austroads,
Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2017, Guide to traffic management part 3: traffic studies and analysis, AGTM03-17, Austroads,
Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2018, Modelling for high productivity vehicles in metropolitan areas, AP-R558-18, Austroads,
Sydney, NSW.
Austroads 2019, Passing lanes: safety and performance, AP-R596-19, Austroads, Sydney, NSW.
Blanksby, C, Patrick, S, Fraser, S, Ritzinger, A & Luk, J 2007, ‘Review of passenger car equivalency factors
for heavy vehicles’, contract report VC72780-01-03, ARRB Group, Vermont South, Vic.
Cao, X, Kim, I & Young, W 2018, ‘An evaluation of the lane change execution models in traffic simulations’,
ARRB conference, 28th, 2018, Brisbane, Qld, ARRB Group, Vermont South, Vic.
Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure 2013, Aimsun traffic simulation model development
manual, DPTI, Adelaide, SA.
Haldane, M & Bunker, J 2002, ‘Examining the impact of large freight vehicles on signalised intersection
operation’, Australian Institute of Traffic Planning and Management national conference, 2002, Perth, WA,
AITPM, Thornleigh, NSW, pp. 255-68.
JCT Consultancy 2014, LinSig 3.2 user guide, JCT Counsultancy Ltd, Nettleham, UK.
Kutadinata, R, Truong, L, Espada, V & Espada, I 2018, ‘Right-turn vehicle speed survey’, contract report
PRJ18025, ARRB Group, Vermont South, Vic.
Main Roads Western Australia 2018, Main Roads operational modelling guidelines, report D17#502268,
MRWA, Perth, WA.
McGehee, D, Mazzae, EN & Baldwin, GHS 2000, ‘Driver reaction time in crash avoidance research:
validation of a driving simulator study on a test track’, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics
Society Annual Meeting, vol. 44, no. 20, pp. 3-320-3-323.
McLean, JR 1989, Two-lane highway traffic operations theory and practice, Gordon and Breach Science
Publishers, London, UK.
Moridpour, S & Rose, G 2010, ‘Lane changing behaviour of heavy vehicle divers’, ARRB conference, 24th,
2010, Melbourne, Vic, ARRB Group, Vermont South, Vic, 12 pp.

National Heavy Vehicle Regulator 2016, National heavy vehicle mass and dimension limits, NHVR,
Newstead, Qld.
Peng, J, Parnell, J & Kessissoglou, N 2019, ‘A six-category heavy vehicle noise emission model in
free-flowing condition’, Applied Accoustics, vol. 143, pp. 211-221.
PTV Group 2018, PTV VISSIM 10 user manual, PTV AG, Karlsruhe Germany.
Standards Australia 2018, Parking facilities: part 2: off-street commercial vehicle facilities, AS 2890.2:2018,
Standards Australia, Sydney, NSW.
Transport and Infrastructure Council 2016, Australian Transport Assessment and Planning Guidelines PV2
Road Parameter Values, TIC, Canberra, ACT.
Transport and Main Roads 2002, Toowoomba bypass AIMSUN 2 traffic model, Queensland Department of
Transport and Main Roads, Brisbane, Qld.
Tian, Z, Troutbeck, R, Kyte, M, Brilon, W, Vandehey, M, Kittelson, W & Robinson, B 2000, ‘A further
investigation on critical gap and follow-up time’, International symposium on highway capacity, 4th, 2000,
Maui, Hawaii, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 397-408.
Triggs, T & Harris, W 1982, Reaction time of drivers to road stimuli, HFR-12, Human Factors Group,
Department of Psychology, Monash University, Vic.
Troutbeck, R 1979, Overtaking critical gaps, AIR 197-8, Australian Road Research Board, Vermont South,
Vic.
TSS-Transport Simulation Systems 2014, Aimsun 8 users’ manual, TSS-Transport Simulation Systems,
London, UK.
Yang, G, Xu, H, Wang, Z & Tian, Z 2016, ‘Truck acceleration behavior study and acceleration lane length
recommendations for metered on-ramps’, International Journal of Transportation Science and
Technology, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 93-102.

Appendix A LINSIG Sensitivity Test

The purpose of the sensitivity tests was to examine the impact of variations in PCU factors and the resulting
LINSIG operational outputs. It is noted that the sensitivity test excluded the impact of the saturation flow rate,
and the LINSIG default saturation flow rate was used. To undertake the assessment, a simplistic three-way
signalised intersection was modelled, similar to the layout for the Ballarat Road/Moore Street intersection
which was one of the surveyed locations. Separate models were developed for each assessed vehicle class,
the only difference between them (apart from the trip matrices) being the lane connector mean cruise speeds
for turning movements. These were coded in accordance with the surveyed turning speeds for each vehicle
class. Figure A 1 shows the layout and phasing.
Figure A 1: LINSIG test network
Three simplistic base trip matrices were developed, with increasing volumes, assumed to be passenger
vehicles. The base matrices were developed to ensure that when the assessment was undertaken,
saturation was achieved. These are shown in Table A 1.

Table A 1: Base trip matrices, in passenger vehicles
Origin/destination A B C Total
Low-volume scenario
A 0 50 200 250
B 50 0 50 100
C 200 50 0 250
Total 250 100 250 600
Medium-volume scenario
A 0 100 300 400
B 100 0 100 200
C 300 100 0 400
Total 400 200 400 1000
High-volume scenario
A 0 150 400 550
B 150 0 150 300
C 400 150 0 550
Total 550 300 550 1400
Each base trip matrix was factored up in order to develop trip matrices for each vehicle class to be assessed
i.e. separate trip matrices for rigid trucks, single articulated B-double and double road train. PCU matrices for
triple road trains could not be developed as PCU factors could not be obtained from the survey results.
Two sets of each class matrices were developed. The first method involved factoring the base matrices in
accordance with the MRWA PCU conversion factors. For this exercise, the same factors as those discussed
in the SIDRA assessment were used. Each O-D cell value in the base trip matrices was factored up by the
same PCU factor.
The second method considered the PCU factors obtained from the survey, and accounted for the different
PCU factors for through, unrestricted turns and restricted turns.
A summary of the total traffic in each resultant trip matrix is shown in Table A 2.
Table A 2: Total trip matrix volume (PCU) for sensitivity testing of PCU factors
Total trip matrix volume, PCU
MRWA PCU factors Surveyed PCU factors

Vehicle type
HV proportion HV proportion
Low Medium High Low Medium High

Rigid truck 1200 2000 2800 966 1604 2244
Single articulated truck 1800 3000 4200 1290 2166 3040
B-double 2400 4000 5600 1668 2844 4016
Double road train 2400 4000 5600 1748 2976 4202
Triple road train 3000 5000 7000 N/A N/A N/A
While it is unrealistic that such proportions of heavy vehicles would be present in a traffic stream, the table
shows that the PCU factor, and the method in which it is applied, has a significant impact on the resulting trip
matrices in PCUs. The percentage difference equivalent outputs from the two methods is as high as 44%.
This also has a significant impact when assessing outputs from the LINSIG models. This is demonstrated in
Table A 3, summarising the average delay in seconds per PCU output by LINSIG.

Table A 3: Average delay outputs of LINSIG under different PCU factor assumptions
Average delay outputs, s
MRWA PCU factors Surveyed PCU factors

Vehicle type
HV proportion HV proportion
Low Medium High Low Medium High

Rigid truck 23 27 31 22 25 28
Single articulated truck 24 31 45 24 28 32
B-double 26 39 179 26 32 48
Double road train 26 39 179 26 32 54
Triple road train 28 93 319 N/A N/A N/A
As with the previous results, the assumptions around PCU factors and their application can potentially have
a significant impact on LINSIG output results. While it is unrealistic that such proportions of heavy vehicles
would be present in a traffic stream, the potential impact or discrepancy would increase with larger vehicle
classes and an increasing proportion of heavy vehicles.
It should be noted that the assessment undertaken is for a simple signalised three-way intersection. The
method in which different PCU factors can be used for specific turn movements may be applied to any single
intersection LINSIG model. However, the methodology could not be applied to a network model. Perhaps
assumptions around relative proportions of left, through and right turns could be used to establish an
average PCU factor, which will be smaller than those currently utilised by MRWA.

Appendix B VISSIM Calibration Issue of Double

Road Trains
The shape of the two acceleration curves and the relationship between them play a key role in the simulation
of heavy vehicle dynamic characteristics including the start-up headway and saturation headway. The issue
where the double road train stops permanently on a slope is explained in detail below.
The critical rules for selecting the acceleration value from the two curves are:
• At given speeds (km/h) the acceleration value from both curves is determined as the percentile value
between the minimum and medium acceleration curves or the medium and maximum acceleration curves
(boundaries). This percentile value is based on the Power/Weight ratio for the vehicles with category
HGV.
• If the power/weight ratio is less than 7 it is capped at 7 kW/tonne and the minimum acceleration
(boundary) value for the given speed is selected from both curves for comparison. Similarly, if the
power/weight ratio is higher than 30 it is capped at 30 kW/tonne and the maximum acceleration
(boundary) value for a given speed is selected for comparison.
• If the power/weight ratio is between 7 and 18.5, the corresponding acceleration is calculated by linear
interpolation between the minimum and medium acceleration curves. Similarly, if the Power/Weight ratio
is between 18.5 and 30, the corresonding acceleration is calculated by linear interpolation between the
medium and maximum acceleration curves.
• The percentile value from the maximum acceleration curve is reduced on gradients (slopes) by –0.1 m/s2
per 1% of gradient. The percentile value from the desired acceleration curve is not affected by gradients.
• It is always the lowest value that is getting selected between the value derived from the maximum
acceleration curve and the desired acceleration curve and this value is then assigned to the vehicle for
that simulation step. If the two values are equal than either curve can provide the assigned value.
The snapshot of the simulation which catches the moment when the double road train (DRT) starts climbing
the 3% gradient is shown in Figure B 1. The DRT speed starts to drop and then the DRT stops permanently
with both acceleration and speed equal to 0 (Figure B 2). The Quick View window shows, the power and
weight values of 388.25 kW and 49.10155 tonnes randomly assigned to the DRT highlighted in pink. The
OMV power distribution range is 350–400 kW and the OMV weight distribution is 28–89 tonnes. Figure B 1
shows the negative acceleration value of –0.06 m/s2 and the very low speed of 1.09 km/h immediately before
the DRT stops.

Figure B 1: Double road train (OMV template) hits the 3% gradient
Figure B 2: Double road train (OMV template) permanently stops on gradient
The two acceleration curves (maximum and desired) for the DRT are shown in Figure B 3 and Figure B 4.
The percentile value is obtained from the following power/weight ratio:
Power/Weight = 388.25/49.10155 = 7.9071 kW/t

As the DRT speed is decreasing, the acceleration is changing until the speed reaches the value of zero. In
order to determine algebraically why the DRT had to stop, the power/weight ratio value needs to be used.
This value provides the percentile for interpolation of the acceleration value at speed 0 from both the
maximum and desired acceleration curves. The values (Figure B 3) for the maximum acceleration curve are:
• minimum acceleration 0.202 m/s2
• medium acceleration 0.742 m/s2
• maximum acceleration 1.674 m/s2.
Given the minimum power/weight ratio of 7 kW/t corresponds to a minimum acceleration of 0.202 m/s2 and
the medium power/weight ratio of 18.5 kW/t is equivalent to medium acceleration of 0.742 m/s2 then the DRT
power/weight ratio of 7.9071 kW/t corresponds to the acceleration of 0.24459 m/s2.
The critical values (Figure B 4) at speed 0 for the desired acceleration curve are:
• minimum acceleration 0.202 m/s2
• medium acceleration 0.254 m/s2
• maximum acceleration 0.450 m/s2.
The value of 0.20610 m/s2 is calculated using the same analogy as for the desired acceleration curve. The
value calculated from the desired acceleration curve is smaller and would be assigned to DRT but before this
the adjustment needs to be done to the value from the maximum acceleration curve by reducing it by
0.1 m/s2 per 1% of gradient. Since the gradient is 3%, this value is reduced by 0.3. Hence:
0.24459 – 0.3 = –0.05541 ~ –0.06 m/s2 at speed 0 km/h
And the DRT vehicle stops as it has a negative acceleration at speed 0 km/h (Figure B 1 and Figure B 2).
Figure B 3: Maximum acceleration curve for double road train (OMV template)
There are two ways to overcome this issue:

• by modifying the maximum acceleration curve which in this case would require moving up only minimum
acceleration curve and median acceleration curve, or
• by changing the weight distribution which in return changes the power/weight ratio and affects the
interpolation process and where the final acceleration value is picked up from.

In this calibration exercise it was the weight distribution that was changed so instead of 28–89 tonnes the
range was reduced to 18–19 tonnes. This range ensures that the Power/Weight ratio always lies above the
median acceleration DRT curve. If the interpolation carried out above is now repeated for the speed of
0 km/h then the result is:
Power/Weight = 388.25 / 19 = 20.434 kW/t which now corresponds to 0.89874 m/s2 for the maximum
acceleration curve, and 0.28696 m/s2 for the desired acceleration curve. Again, the maximum acceleration
value needs to be reduced by 0.3 m/s2 (for a 3% gradient) which results in 0.59874 m/s2.
This time the value from the desired acceleration curve is lower and the acceleration of 0.28696 m/s2 is
assigned to the DRT vehicle. If instead of a 3% gradient, there was a gradient of 7% then the value from the
maximum acceleration curve would be recalculated as 0.19874 m/s2 and the value from the maximum
acceleration curve would be assigned to the DRT vehicle.
It is evident from the above relationship between the two curves that the maximum acceleration effectively
represents ‘reserve acceleration capacity’ that can be utilised at larger gradients.
At the same time it is important that this complex relationship between the two curves on slopes needs to be
taken into account if the curves are modified. In other words, if the two curves are modified to accommodate
the start-up headway and saturation headway, they can become less useful and accurate on slopes. In some
cases, this could also lead to vehicles being stopped permanently in the middle of simulation.
The recommendation is that two curves can only be modified if at the same time the reserve capacity
function of the maximum acceleration curve is properly taken into account. However, this requires further and
more comprehensive surveys and is challenging enough to be a separate project.
Figure B 4: Desired acceleration curve for double road train (OMV template)

Appendix C VISSIM Mixed Traffic Checking

Issue of Double Road Trains
During the mixed traffic checking stage for sites in Western Australia using the OMV default parameters,
vehicle types for double road train could not cope with the coded gradient on exit links which caused vehicles
of this type to start blocking the traffic flow (Figure C 1). All gradients on exit links were reduced to 2% to
enable the simulation and double road trains to proceed further. This value was found as the highest
possible gradient which default double road train vehicles could climb (Figure C 2).
Figure C 1: Double road train stuck on link with gradient of 7%
Source: Bing Maps 2019, ‘Ballarat Rd/Moore St Intersection, Melbourne’, image, Microsoft, WA, USA, viewed on 13 June
2019, <https://www.bing.com/maps/aerial>.

Figure C 2: Reduced gradients on WA site for unrestricted turn movements

Appendix D Acceleration Functions for VISSIM

Calibration
The maximum acceleration curves and values used for VISSIM calibration are shown in Figure D 1 –
Figure D 5 and Table D 1 – Table D 5, respectively.
Figure D 1: Maximum acceleration curves for 2-axle truck
Table D 1: Maximum acceleration values for 2-axle truck
Maximum acceleration, m/s2 (vertical)

Speed, km/h (horizontal)
Calibrated Min. Max.
0 3.80 0.81 7.80
10 3.59 0.81 7.80
20 1.61 0.81 4.36
30 1.30 0.81 2.68
40 1.30 0.81 2.10
50 1.24 0.61 2.10
60 0.95 0.47 1.91
70 0.72 0.35 1.45
80 0.52 0.25 1.05
90 0.34 0.16 0.68
100 0.16 0.08 0.34
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure D 2: Maximum acceleration curves for 3-axle articulated
Table D 2: Maximum acceleration values for 3-axle articulated

Calibrated Min Max
0 2.35 0.61 6.39
10 2.22 0.61 6.39
20 1.00 0.61 3.58
30 0.81 0.61 2.20
40 0.81 0.61 1.72
50 0.73 0.49 1.72
60 0.56 0.37 1.70
70 0.42 0.28 1.28
80 0.30 0.20 0.92
90 0.19 0.12 0.58
100 0.08 0.05 0.26
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure D 3: Maximum acceleration curves for 4-axle articulated
Table D 3: Maximum acceleration values for 4-axle articulated

Calibrated Min Max
0 2.35 0.47 6.39
10 2.22 0.47 6.39
20 1.00 0.47 3.58
30 0.81 0.47 2.20
40 0.81 0.44 1.72
50 0.73 0.33 1.72
60 0.56 0.25 1.70
70 0.42 0.19 1.28
80 0.30 0.13 0.92
90 0.19 0.08 0.58
100 0.08 0.03 0.26
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure D 4: Maximum acceleration curves for B-double
Table D 4: Maximum acceleration values for B-double

Calibrated Min Max
0 1.03 0.25 1.98
10 0.97 0.25 1.98
20 0.44 0.25 1.10
30 0.35 0.25 0.68
40 0.35 0.25 0.53
50 0.35 0.23 0.53
60 0.28 0.17 0.53
70 0.22 0.13 0.41
80 0.16 0.10 0.30
90 0.11 0.06 0.21
100 0.06 0.03 0.12
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure D 5: Maximum acceleration curves for double road train
Table D 5: Maximum acceleration values for double road train

Calibrated Min Max
0 0.74 0.20 1.67
10 0.70 0.20 1.67
20 0.31 0.20 0.94
30 0.25 0.20 0.58
40 0.25 0.20 0.45
50 0.23 0.16 0.45
60 0.17 0.12 0.41
70 0.13 0.09 0.32
80 0.10 0.07 0.23
90 0.06 0.04 0.16
100 0.03 0.02 0.09
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

The desired acceleration curves and values used for VISSIM calibration are shown in Figure D 6 –
Figure D 7 and Table D 6 – Table D 7, respectively.
Figure D 6: Desired acceleration curves for 2-axle truck
Table D 6: Desired acceleration values for 2-axle truck

Calibrated Min Max
0 1.30 0.81 2.10
10 1.30 0.81 2.10
20 1.30 0.81 2.10
30 1.30 0.81 2.10
40 1.30 0.81 2.10
50 1.24 0.61 2.10
60 0.95 0.47 1.91
70 0.72 0.35 1.45
80 0.52 0.25 1.05
90 0.34 0.16 0.68
100 0.16 0.08 0.34
110 0.00 0.00 0.00

Figure D 7: Desired acceleration curves for 3-axle truck
Table D 7: Desired acceleration values for 3-axle truck

Calibrated Min Max
0 0.81 0.55 1.07
10 0.81 0.55 1.07
20 0.81 0.55 1.07
30 0.81 0.55 1.07
40 0.81 0.55 1.07
50 0.73 0.42 1.07
60 0.56 0.32 0.85
70 0.42 0.24 0.64
80 0.30 0.17 0.45
90 0.19 0.10 0.29
100 0.08 0.04 0.13
110 0.00 0.00 0.00


AP-R609-19 Improving - The Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters To Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

AP-R609-19 Improving - The Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters To Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

AP-R609-19 Improving - The Reliability of Heavy Vehicle Parameters To Support More Accurate Traffic Modelling PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Research Report

Improving the Reliability of Heavy Vehicle

Abstract About Austroads

Austroads 2019 | page i

Austroads 2019 | page ii

3.10 Passenger Car Unit ........................................................................................................................ 33

Austroads 2019 | page iii

Austroads 2019 | page iv

Table 4.1: Vehicle length parameters for SIDRA .......................................................................................... 37

Austroads 2019 | page v

Austroads 2019 | page vi

1.1 Key Issue

1.3.1 Vehicle Types

Austroads 2019 | page 1

The parameters relevant to these movements are as follows:

1.5 Scope of the Report

Austroads 2019 | page 2

2. Literature Review and Consultation

2.1 Modelling Software

Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Austroads 2019 | page 3

Table 2.2: MRWA suggested PCU factors for SIDRA

Vehicle type PCU factor

Source: MRWA (2018).

Figure 2.1: Turning movements defined in SIDRA for TCE determination

Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Table 2.3: TCE factors in SIDRA

TCE factors by movement type

Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Table 2.4: Default critical gap and follow-up headway in SIDRA

Vehicle type Movement type Critical gap Follow-up headway

Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Austroads 2019 | page 4

Table 2.5: Gap acceptance and opposing vehicle factor in SIDRA

Source: Akcelik & Associates Pty Ltd (2018).

Table 2.6: MRWA suggested PCU factors for LINSIG

Vehicle type PCU factor

Source: MRWA (2018).

Austroads 2019 | page 5

Figure 2.2: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model

Source: JCT Consultancy (2014).

Table 2.7: LINSIG priority-controlled intersection capacity model – typical parameters

Source: JCT Consultancy (2014).

Austroads 2019 | page 6

Table 2.8: AIMSUN parameters prepared by DPTI of South Australia

Minimum Maximum Deceleration

Source: DPTI (2013).

Table 2.9: AIMSUN parameters prepared by TMR of Queensland

Austroads 2019 | page 7

Source: TMR (2002).

Figure 2.3: AIMSUN acceleration model

Source: Based on TSS (2014).

There are three types of reaction times in AIMSUN as follows:

Austroads 2019 | page 8

MRWA (2018) TMR (2002)

Figure 2.4: AIMSUN critical gap model at priority-controlled intersections

Source: Based on TSS (2014).

Vehicle type Parameter Value