TRANSPORT and ROAD

RESEARCH LABORATORY

Department of the Environment

Department of Transport

TRRL LABORATORY REPORT 939

M I DAS: A COMPUTER PROGRAM TO ESTIMATE DELAYS AT JUNCTIONS

by

I J Burrow

Any views expressed in this Report are not necessarily those of the
Department of the Environment or of the Department of Transport

Traffic Systems Division

• Traffic Engineering Department
Transport and Road Research Laboratory
Crowthorne, Berkshire
1980
ISSN 0305-1293
 CONTENTS

Page

Abstract 1

1. Introduction 1

2. Program outline 1

3. Program components 2

3.1 Capacity calculations 2

3.1.1 Major/mi.n.or junctions 2

3.1.2 Roundabouts 2

3.1.3 Grade-separated junctions 3

3.2 Queueing delay 3

3.3 Geometric delay 3

4. Examples 4

4.1 Form of output 4

4.2 Example 1: small junction. 4

4.3 Example 2: grade-separated junction 5

° Discussion and summary 6

6. Acknowledgements 6

7. References 6

8. Appendix 1: The flow group structure in MIDAS 11

9. Appendix 2: Setting up an input fide 12

10. Appendix 3: Definitions of input parameters 16

11. Appendix 4: Output from example I 19

12. Appendix 5: Output from example 2 32

13. Appendix 6: Input for example 1 43

14. Appendix 7: Input for example 2 44

© CROWN COPYRIGHT 1980
Extracts from the text may be reproduced, except for
commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged
Ownership of the Transport Research
Laboratory was transferred from the
Department of Transport to a subsidiary of
the Transport Research Foundation on ! st
April 1996.

This report has been reproduced by

permission of the Controller of HMSO.
Extracts from the text may be reproduced,
except for commercial purposes, provided
the source is acknowledged.
 MIDAS: A COMPUTER PROGRAM TO ESTIMATE D E L A Y S A T JU N C TI ON S

ABSTRACT

The assessment of delays is an important step in deciding which type of

junction is the most suitable for handling a given traffic problem. A
computer program, MIDAS: Method for Intersection Delay ASsessment,
has been written to predict delays at junctions. A wide range of junction
types from small major/minor junctions and mini-roundabouts to large
free-flow interchanges are covered. The program incorporates capacity
and delay formulae recentlydeveloped at TRRL. Account may be taken
of seasonal and hourly variation in flow level and also of the effect of tidal
flows during the peak. The program calculates both the traffic dependent
queueing delay and also the geometric delay. The output includes details
of the performance of the junction as the flow varies through the year, and
problems with particular traffic streams may be identified.

1. INTRODUCTION

The assessment of delays is an important step in deciding which type of junction is the most suitable for
handling a given traffic problem. A computer program, MIDAS: a Method for Intersection Delay ASsess-
ment, has been written to enable these delays to be predicted by means of realistic junction capacity and
delay formulae.

Up to 20 possible junctions may be treated in one run of the program for comparative purposes.
MIDAS thus enables the performance-in delay terms of a number of junction types to be quickly assessed
under arange of traffic conditions.

2. PROGRAM OUTLINE

The program will deal with most of thenon-signalised 3-or 4-arm layouts includedin current Design
Standards (with the exception of grade-separated 3-arm layouts). The range thus includes small major/
minor junctions and mini-roundabouts at one extreme, and large free-flow interchanges at the other.
Detailed input data are required, describing traffic movements and geometry, but certain basic values are
built in for use when site-specific values are not provided. Traffic delays and capacities are calculated from
the latest available formulae. A flow chart showing the main elements of the program is given in Figure 1.
A Fortran listing is given in reference 1.

The program uses a system of flow groups similar to those used in COBA 2. In order to model the
variation of flow during the day, the hours of the year are divided into a number of 'flow groups', and the
flow in each is expressed as a proportion (often called the multiplier) of the annual average hourly flow.
When summed over all flow groups the product of multiplier and duration of flow group should equal the
total number of hours in a year. Separate multipliers for light and heavy vehicles may be used.
J

1
 In addition to the flow groups the program takes into account the seasonal variation of flow with the
time of year by means of scaling factors applied to the demand flows based on the 'site type' categories
defined in reference 3 (ie Urban Commuter, Low Flow, Rural Long Distance and Recreational). The
difference between the morning and evening peaks can be taken into account by specifying the degree of
tidality. The flow group structure is discussed in more detail in Appendix 1.

MIDAS warns the user of unsatisfactory junction operation. A warning is printed if the flow/
capacity ratio for any stream exceeds 0.85 (a figure often used as an 'acceptable' design standard), and a
further warning is printed if 1.0 is exceeded. When large delays are experienced at real junctions it is likely
that some changes will occur in the pattern of journeys made (for example re-assignment of trips, redistribution
within the network, suppression of demand): no attempt is made to model this explicitly. However, it is
indirectly taken into account by entering a maximum delay value. If the calculated delay per vehicle in any
traffic stream exceeds this value (usually 5 minutes), a warning is printed. The program continues to run,
but delays may optionally be restricted to the maximum value, or allowed to grow without a ceiling. The
use of time-dependent queueing relationships 4 ensures that calculated delays never become int~mite (as they
can do with the steady state theory commonly used in the past). However in these circumstances the
junction layout for which the warning was triggered should be carefully reconsidered. Guidance on t h e
setting up of input files is given in Appendix 2. Details of theinput requirements including definitions and
ranges of acceptable values are given in Appendix 3.

3. PROGRAM COMPONENTS

The program reads in the annual average daily total flow entering the junction on each arm and uses the
turning proportions, the flow group details and the percentage of heavy vehicles to produce the necessarY
demand flows for use in the capacity and delay routines, tn all cases a pcu value of 2 is assumed forheavy
vehicles. These flow calculations are carried out in the main program. Appropriate subroutines
are used to calculate the capacity of each junction type (see Section 311) and the traffic delay is then
calculated using subroutines described in Section 3.2. Finally geometric delay is calculated using subroutines
detailed in Section 3.3.

3.1 Capacity calculations

3.1.1 Major]minor.junctions. A range of major/minor junctions can be considered. On the minor

road(s) at a three-way junction or staggered crossroads either one (shared) lane or two lanes (one for each
stream) may be specified. At an unstaggered crossroads, two entry lanes are assumed on each of the
minor roads. With a two-lane entry at an unstaggered crossroads, traffic following the straight-ahead
movement is assumed to divide between the two lanes, according to the ability of the junction to cope
with the right-turning demand (more traffic uses the nearside lane if there is a high probability that the
offside lane is blocked by waiting right-turners).

The capacity of each non-priority flow is calculated using formulae based on those in SR 5825.
Certain details of the geometry of the junction are required, these are specified in Appendices 2 and 3.
The capacity calculations are performed in subroutine PRIOR.

3.1.2 Roundabouts. All types o f single island roundabout may be considered. The unified capacity
formula given in LR 9426 is used and applies to all at-grade roundabouts. It supersedes the previously
separate treatment of conventional 7 and offside-priority8,9 rou n dabouts. These calculations are performed
2
in subroutine CIRCLE. Information about the geometry of the junction, as detailed in Appendices 2 and
3 is required.

At a roundabout the capacity of an entry is dependent on the circulating flow which is in turn
determined by the flow admitted by the other entries. This interactive nature is taken into account by
subroutine CAPENT (a simphfied version of the subroutine in program ARCADy10).

3 . 1 . 3 Grade-separatedj u n c t i o n s . Four basic types of four-arm grade-separated junction can be

tested, all with dual 2- or 3-lane roads:-

i) Simple diamond;
ii) Flyover (or flyunder) with conventional large roundabout;
iii) Three-level roundabout;
iv) Free-flow layout.

Figure 2 shows these layouts schematically.

The capacity of the merging areas 11 is calculated in Subroutines MERGE (for three-level and free-
flow layouts) or MERGE1 (for two-level layouts). In all cases, it is assumed that merges operate with no
traffic dependent delay below capacity 12. Above capacity the delay is calculated according to the techniques
detailed in Section 3.2. It is also assumed that the diverges cause no traffic dependent delay. For the at-
grade components of these junctions subroutines PRIOR and CIRCLE are used as appropriate for the
capacity calculations, and the appropriate input data must be provided: for grade-separated roundabouts
a slightly modified form of the capacity formula 6 based on recent public road studies 13 is used.

3.2 Queueingdelay
The capacities available to the various streams at the junction are calculated from the geometric and
flow information as detailed in Section 3.1. The queueing delay is calculated by means of time-dependent
queueing theory 4. In order to represent realistically the growth and decay of queues and delays over a peak
period a'number of factors are taken into account. In addition to the demand flow and the capacity during
the peak, the duration of the peak, the nature of the traffic arrival and service pattern, and the flow and
capacity before and after the peak are considered.

During the peak flow group(s) subroutine FLOWDY is used to calculate the delay. It takes into
account the 'length of the peak' and the adjacent-to-peak flo~vs (the relationship between the delay
formulae and the flow group structure is more fully explained in Appendix 1). During the other flow
groups subroutine FLODEL is used. A full description of the type of formulae used is given in reference 4.

The delay to each traffic stream during each flow group is calculated separately, and summed to give
the total annual traffic delay.

3.3 Geometric delay

Geometric delay is that delay suffered by each vehicle owing just to the presence of the junction, and
occurs even in the absence of other vehicles. The program calculates geometric delay by assuming that
vehicles approach the junction at a specified speed, decelerate to a lower speed, travel a specified distance

3
 at the lower speed, and then accelerate to another specified speed. (These 'approach' and 'departure' speeds
are the speeds at a sufficient distance from the junction to be beyond its influence.) The program then
calculates the position of the 'entry point', where deceleration starts, and the 'exit point', where acceleration
is completed, using built in acceleration and deceleration rates, and the total time taken. It then subtracts
the time that would be taken to travel from the entry point to the centre of the junction at the approach
speed, and from the centre of the junction to the exit point at the departure speed.

In order to model geometric delay at this level of detail, subroutine GEOM is used and it is necessary
to provide site-specific input (see Appendices 2 and.3). For at-grade junctions if local values are not available,
default values of geometric delay are calculated by means of general formulael4,15, using subroutines MCD1
(major/minor) and MCD2 (roundabouts). For grade-separated junctions detailed input must be supplied.
A technique using general formulae will be incorporated later 16.

Geometric delay can be a significant part of the total delay especially at roundabouts and grade-separated
junctions. In these cases particular care should be taken to provide input as accurately as possible.

4. EXAMPLES

4.1 Form of output

Examples of the output from the program are shown in Appendices 4 and 5 which illustrate the range
of information given by the program. The input Fries used for these examples are shown in Appendices 6 and
7 (for instructions on setting up input Files Appendices 2 and 3 should be consulted). The individual examples
are dealt with in detail in Sections 4.2 and 4.3. The details of the demand flow patterns entered are printed
first, followed by the details of each junction considered - these include the junction geometry used for
Capacity calculations. The capacity and demand flow/capacity ratio of each relevant traffic stream is output,
to aid the identification of particular problems.

The program also calculates the delay per unit time during each flow group. This is numerically
equivalent to the average queue length and is printed out under the heading 'equivalent queue length'.
It is important to remember that this is the average of a broad distribution4. In order to reproduce this
figure by sampling real traffic a large numbei of measurements would be needed. In particular, to compare
the output with observations of peak hour delay and queues, frequent sampling during many peaks is
necessary.

Finally for each junction the total delay in thousands of vehicle-hours per year is printed, along with
the separate traffic and geometric delay components. The geometric delay suffered by each vehicle making
a particular movement is the same for all flow groups. However, the traffic delay varies with flow level,
and details of the junction performance are therefore given for each flow group.

4.2 Example 1: small junction

The output from a comparison (for a three-way-junction) between a major/minor priority junction and
a mini-roundabout is shown in Appendix 4. The junctions are intended to fit into approximately the same
outline. There is a total flow into the junction of 14,000 veh/day (10 per cent heavy vehicles on each arm).
Four thousand veh/day enter on the minor road (Bridge Road). Fifty per cent of the minor road traffic
turns left (during all flow groups). No seasonal pattern of flows is used but there is a tidal effect between
the morning and evening peaks. Forty per cent of the total peak hour traffic entering on the minor road
4
occurs during the morning and 60 per cent during the evening. The COBA 2 flow'groups are used (specified
by 0 in the 1 lth line of the input fde (Appendix 6) ) but flow group 4, the peak flow group, is split to
represent the tidal effect.

The program predicts a total delay of 26.057 thousands of hours per year at the major/minor junction.
This is composed of a traffic delay of 19.682 thousands of hours per year and geometric delay o f 6.376
thousands of hours per year. The total delay predicted for the roundabout is 14.466 thousands of hours
per year and consists of 6.503 thousands of hours per year traffic delay and 7.964 thousands of hours per
year geometric delay. (For both junctions the geometric delay has been calculated using the general
formulae provided in the program rather than site-specific data.) These figures show that the mini-roundabout
generates more geometric delay, mainly because it inhibits the straight-ahead major road traffic.

However, it is the better choice in terms of overall delay. A closer examination of the results for each
flow group shows that this is largely due to the excessive delays suffered by vehicles turning out of the minor
road'under the major/minor priority system during the evening peak. The difference in delay (caused by
the tidal effect) between the morning and evening peaks (flow groups 4 and 5) is clearly shown by the
difference in 'equivalent queue length'. The program calls attention to the unsatisfactory operation during
the evening peak (flow group 5) and the symbol (*3) is output indicating that the maximum delay value
(input as 300 seconds) has been exceeded, and that the delays have been held at that value. (The symbol
(* 1) output in the morning peak (flow group 4) shows that demand has exceeded 85 per cent of capacity.)
The substitution of a mini-roundabout for a priority junction in these traffic conditions is thus clearly
beneficial, bearing in mind the low cost of conversion.

4.3 Example 2: grade-separatedjunction

This example, shown in Appendix 5, illustrates a comparison between a two-level motorway
roundabout and a free-flow interchange. The input fde is shown in Appendix 7. The site is stated to be in
a recreational area and seasonal variation is thus taken into account. It will be seen that details of operation
are given for each season as well as for each flow group. The program has been supplied by the user with
specific flow groups which are printed out again in the output; no tidal effect is specified.

At each junction the merges are operating below capacity and cause no traffic delay (Section 3.1.3).
This means that there is no traffic delay at the free-flow interchange, which suffers only a geometric delay
of 150.090 thousands of hours per year. The roundabout shows a geometric delay of 140.393 thousands
of hours per year in addition to a traffic delay of 4.704 thousands of hours per year. It should be noted
that the traffic delay varies considerably with season of the year. For both junctions the geometric delay
has been calculated using site-specific data, which would need in practice to be carefully measured.

In the case modelled the roundabout is preferable in delay terms and would probably have lower cost
as well. However future traffic growth may lead to a sharp rise in traffic delay at the roundabout, while the
geometric delay will increase more slowly, and at about the same rate for each junction type. This could
be tested by running MIDAS again with the l~igher (predicted) flows.

5
 5. DISCUSSION AND SUMMARY

A computer program, MIDAS, has been developed which can be used as an aid in choosing the most suitable
type of junction for a particular situation. It makes a detailed assessment of the likely delays using the most
recently developed capacity and flow/delay formulae.

There are, of course, other factors to be considered when deciding on the appropriate layout for a
junction: for example safety, environmental effects, pedestrian facilities, driver comfort, and compatibility
with neighbouring junctions. However, vehicular delay is the major contributor to user cost, and as such
remains a prime determinant of choice. It is therefore important that a method is available for realistic
delay appraisal.

For simplicity no attempt has been made to incorporate the effects of traffic growth or the discounting
of benefits over time 2, but repeated runs of the program could enable both to be taken into account. In
addition, for investment appraisal, estimates of construction costs have to be considered.

This program is one of three recently developed at TRRL 10,17 and is currently available together
with a User Manual 18 through Highway Engineering Computer Branch of the Department of Transport.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The work described in this Report was carried out in the Traffic Systems Division (Division Head:
Mr G Maycock) of the Traffic Engineering Department of TRRL.

7. REFERENCES

1. BURROW, I J. MIDAS: a computer program to estimate delays at junctions - a FORTRAN listing.

TRRL WorkingPaper TSN67. Crowthorne, 1980 (unpublished). (Available on direct personal request.)

2. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. COBA - a method of economic appraisal of highway schemes.

Economics Highways Division, Department of Transport, 1979.

. BELLAMY, Patricia H. Seasonal variation in traffic flow. Department of the Environment Department
of Transport, TRRL Report SR 437. Crowthorne, 1979 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

. KIMBER, R M and Erica M HOLLIS. Traffic queues and delays at road junctions. Department of
the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report LR 909. Crowthorne, 1979 (Transport
and Road Research Laboratory).

. KIMBER, R M and R D COOMBE. The traffic capacity of major/minor priority junctions.

Department of the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report SR 582. Crowthorne,
1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

. KIMBER, R M. The traffic capacity of roundabouts. Department of the Environment Department

of Transport, TRRL Report LR 942. Crowthorne, 1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

6
 . PHILBRICK, M J. In search of a new capacity formula for conventional roundabouts. Department
of the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report LR 773. Crowthorne, 1977 (Transport
and Road Research Laboratory).

. KIMBER, R M and Marie C SEMMENS. A track experiment on the entry capacities of offside priority
roundabouts. Department of the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report SR 334.
Crowthorne, 1977 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

. GLEN, M G M, S L SUMNER and R M KIMBER. The capacity of offside priority roundabout entries.
Department of the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report SR 436. Crowthorne, 1978
(Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

10. HOLLIS, Erica M,'Marie C SEMMENS and Sharon L DENNISS. ARCADY: a computer program to
model capacities, queues and delays at roundabouts. Department of the Environment Department
of Transport, TRRL Report LR 940. Crowthorne, 1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

11. BURROW, I J. The capacity of motorway merges. Department o f the Environment, TRRL Report
LR 679. Crowthorne, 1976 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

12. BURROW, I J and N C DUNCAN. Journey time studies at motorway merges. TRRL Working
Paper TSN42. Crowthorne, 1977 (unpublished). (Available on direct personal request.)

13. SEMMENS, Marie C. The capacity of some grade-separated roundabout entries. TRRL Working
Paper TSN68. Crowthorne, 1980 (unpublished). (Available on direct personal request.)

14. McDONALD, M and D J ARMITAGE. Geometric delay at priority junctions. Technical Report.
Transportation Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southampton, 1978.

15. McDONALD, M and C NOON. Geometric delay at roundabouts. Technical Report. Transportation
Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southampton, 1977.

16. McDONALD, M and N B HOUNSELL. Geometric delay at motorway junctions. Working Paper.
• Transportation Research Group, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Southampton,
(unpublished).

17. SEMMENS,Marie C. PICADY: a computer program to model capacities, queues and delays at
major/minor junctions. Department of the Environment Department of Transport, TRRL Report
LR 941. Crowthome, 1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

18. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT. MIDAS User Manual. London, 1980 (HECB/Department of

Transport).

19. DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT. Technical Memorandum on the design of major/minor

priority junctions. Technical Memorandum H11/76. London, 1976 (Department of the Environment).

7
MAIN PROGRAM

t
Enter general I
traffic data

Subroutine Subroutine
PRIOR ~metric MCD1
No

I
l Yes

Subroutine
GEOM J t
11

~u~rou~ine Subroutine
MCD2

I Sobro~ne II Subroutine I
~ i GEOM I
4
JI =l Subroutine
GEOM

separated Yes Subroutine Subroutine

iu~u~-i0 diamond PRIOR
? n MERGE1

2-level
Subroutine
Roundabou CIRCLE
3-level
STOP

Subroutine I [ Subroutine
CAPENT " MERGE
Free-flow interchange

Fig. 1 SCHEMATIC FLOW CHART

( d e t a i l e d logic d e p e n d s on p r o g r a m structure - see t e x t )

 J,

(a) SIMPLE DIAMOND (b) TWO-LEVEL ROUNDABOUT

(C) THREE-LEVEL ROUNDABOUT (d) FREE-FLOW INTERCHANGE

Fig. 2 EXAMPLES OF TYPES OF GRADE-SEPARATED JUNCTIONS

(Not to scale)
Arm C Arm A
Major road Major road

Arm B
Minor road

(a) THREE-WAY JUNCTION

Arm D
Minor road

Arm C Arm A
Major road Major road

| •

Arm B
Minor road

(b) FOUR-WAY JUNCTION

Fig. 3 ARM LABELLING CONVENTION

 8. A P P E N D I X 1

THE FLOW GROUP STRUCTURE IN MIDAS

At any junction the level of flow will vary continuously throughout the year. It is clearly impractical to try
and model this variation at too fine a level of detail: it is however unsatisfactory simply to take the overall
average flow (since flow and delay are not linearly related). MIDAS models this variation by splitting the
annual flow into (up to 7) groups of hourly flows. (This is the equivalent of producing a frequency histo-
gram of ranges of hourly flow.) During each of these flow groups the hourly flow is assumed to be a constant
proportion (the multiplier) of the annual average hourly flow.

Low definition time-dependent queueing theory 4 is used in subroutine FLOWDY to estimate peak
hour delays. This requires that the adjacent-to-peak flows are taken into account. In all cases in MIDAS
it is assumed that the adjacent-to-peak flows correspond to those occurring in the flow group with the
second-to-highest flow group multiplier. It is thus assumed that peaks are caused by a reasonably steady
build-up of traffic rather than a sharp discontinuity.

In addition to the basic flow groups outlined above two further sub-divisions may be made. In many
cases the level of total flow into a junction may be the same for all peaks, but a marked difference between
morning and evening peaks may be observed for particular turning movements. This tidality may be
modelled in MIDAS by dividing the peak hour flow group into two groups of equal duration and applying
a further multiplying factor for each movement. (For each movement, other than U-turns, the user specifies
what proportion of the average of morning and evening peak hour flow occurs in the morning peak.) A
further division occurs if the user chooses to specify a seasonal variation. In this case each flow group is
split into four sub-divisions in order to represent the variation of flow level with season of the year. The
same seasonal scaling factors are applied to each flow group and the relationship between peak and
adjacent-to-peak flow groups outlined above is retained.

11
 9. APPENDIX 2
SETTING UP AN INPUT FILE

The input may be considered as a series of blocks some of whichmay be repeated as many times as required
and others omitted. The blocks, when present, must appear in order as specified here. A more detailed
description of the parameters and their ranges of acceptable values is given in Appendix 3. The use of
default values is also covered more fully in Appendix 3.

t KEY to variable types

A - Alphanumeric characters, left justified
I - Integers (only), right justified in fields of 10
I/R - Integers or reals, right justified in fields of 10

BLOCK A - General NAME TVPEt

First line Title ITLE A
Next line Date IDATE A
Next line Number of arms NA I
Next NA lines Names of arms NAMES A
Next line Annual average daily flow into junction DQ I/R
for each arm
Next line Average percentage heavy vehicles in flow PH I/R
for each arm
Next line 'Approach' speed for light vehicles for V I/R
each arm
Next line 'Departure' speed for light vehicles for V I/R
each arm

BLOCK B - Flow group information

First line Number of flow groups N

(if N = 0, N is reset to 4 and COBA flow
groups are used: next input requirements
are in block C)
Next line Multiplier for light vehicles for each flow GROUPL I/R
group
Next line Duration of each flow group GROUP I/R
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if NO then flow group multipliers for
heavy vehicles are same as light vehicles
and next input is from block C)
Next line Multipliers for heavy vehicles for each flow GROUPH I/R
group

12
BLOCK C - Turning proportions NAME

First line YES or NO JOPT A

(if YES turning proportions for light
vehicles are the same in all flow groups,
if NO turning proportions are not the same
for all flow groups)
Next line Turning proportions for light vehicles during QV I/R
flow group 1
(if YES in previous line then next N-1
lines are omitted)
Next N-1 lines Turning proportions for light vehicles during QV I/R
flow groups 2 to N
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if NO then turning proportions for heavy
vehicles are the same as for light vehicles,
and next input is from block D)
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if YES then turning proportions for
heavy vehicles are the same for all flow
groups,if NO turning proportions are not the
same for all flow groups)
Next line Turning proportions for heavy vehicles during QP I/R
flow group 1
(if YES in the previous line then next N-1
lines are omitted)
Next N-1 lines Turning proportions for heavy vehicles during QP I/R
flow groups 2 to N

BLOCK D - Seasonal and tidal peaking effects

First line Seasonal flow type (see reference 3) IPAT I

Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if NO, next NA lines are omitted)
Next NA lines Tidal peaking factor for each movement PK I
(excluding U-turns)
Next line Peak length IPKL I
Next line Maximum acceptable delay value DMAX I/R
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if YES delay is used as a cut-off value,
otherwise just as a warning)

13
 BLOCK E - Major/minor junctions NAME TYPE y
First line YES or NO JOPT A
(if NO then no (more) major/minor
junctions are to be considered - next
input from block F.
If YES and NA = 3 next line is omitted)
Next line Integer to indicate junction type JTYPE I
Next line Geometry of major road WW I/R
WCR I/R
Next line Geometry for non-priority movements W(3) I/R
(if NA = 4 then this line is repeated) VR(3) I/R
VL I/R
VR(1) I/R
w(1) I/R
w(2) I/R
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if YES detailed calculations of geometric
delay will be made, next input from
block J, if NO then general formulae will
be used and next input is from block M )

BLOCK F - Roundabouts

First line YES or NO JOPT A

(if NO then no (more) roundabouts are
to be considered. If NA = 4 next input
is from block G, if NA = 3 no further
input is required)
Next NA lines For each arm the geometric parameters V I/R
needed for capacity calculations E I/R
ELF I/R
R I/R
D I/R
PHI I/R
Next line YES or NO JOPT A
(if YES detailed calculations of geometric
delay will be made, next input from
block K, if NO then general formulae will
be used and next input is from the start of
this block)

BLOCK G - Grade-separated junctions

First line YES or NO JOPT A

(if NO then no (more) grade-separated
junctions to be considered. No further
input is required)
Next line Number of lanes on main carriageway LANE
Next line Integer to indicate junction type JTYPE
(if 7 next input from block H
if 8 or 9 next input from block I
if 10 next input from block L)
14
BLOCK H - Diamond junctions NAME TYPE t

First line Geometry for main carriageway WW I/R

(the 'main' carriageway in this case WCR I/R
comprises arms B and D)
Next 2 lines Geometry for each slip road w(3) IiR
VR(3) I/R
VL I/R
VR(1) I/R
W(1) I/R
W(2) I/R
(next input from block L)

BLOCK I - Grade-separated roundabouts

NA lines For each entry the geometric parameters V I/R

E I/R
ELF I/R
R I/R
D I/R
PHI I/R
(next input from block L)

BLOCK J - Detailed geometric delay at major/minor junctions

First line Speed through the junction for light VJ I/R

vehicles for each movement from arm A
Next NA-1 lines As in previous line for remaining arms VJ I/R
Next line Distance travelled through the junction D I/R
for each movement from arm A
Next NA-1 lines As in previous line for remaining arms D I/R
Next line Excess distance travelled due to the E I/R
presence of the junction for each move-
ment from arm A
Next NA-1 lines As in previous line for remaining arms E I/R
(next input from block E)

BLOCK K - Detailed geometric delay for roundabouts

As for block J but return to block F for
next input

BLOCK L - Detailed geometric delay at grade-separated junctions

As for block J but return to block G for
next input

BLOCK M - Geometric delay at major/minor junctions by general formulae

First line YES or NO JOPT A,

(if YES junction meets visibility standards
of H11/7619)
(next input from block E)
15
 10. APPENDIX3
DEFINITIONS OF INPUT PARAMETERS

The input is arranged in a series of blocks as described in Appendix 2. The input variables are defined here
in the order they appear in Appendix 2 and any restrictions on acceptable values are noted. The variable
JOPT is used on a number of occasions to allow the user to specify a choice between available options.
These choices are indicated as they occur in Appendix 2 and are thus omitted here. The only acceptable
values for JOPT are YES or NO. A diagram showing the arm labelling conventions is shown in Figure 3 ;
the program treats the arms in alphabetical order. In all cases characteristics such as turning movements
must be specified in clockwise order (ie left-turn, straight, right-turn, U-turn) for each arm.

BLOCK A - General RESTRICTIONS

ITLE Array containing title for run Up to 60 characters

IDATE Array containing date Up to 20 characters
NA Number of arms 3 or 4 only
NAMES Array containing a distinguishing name for each Up to 60 characters for each arm
arm (in order as in Figure 3)
DQ Array containing annual average daily flows in Non-negative
veh/day into the junction for each arm
PH Array containing the average percentage heavy Non-negative
vehicles on each arm Not greater than 100
V Array containing 'approach' and 'departure' Non-negative
speed for each arm in km/h (see Section 3.3)

BLOCK B - Flow group information

N The number of flow groups Integer 0 to 7

(if N = 0 then N is reset to 4 and COBA flow
groups are used)
GROUPL Array containing flow group multipliers for Non-negative
light vehicles. These specify the proportion o f in ascending order
the average hourly flow of light vehicles occurring see also note*
during each flow group
GROUP Array containing duration of each flow group Non-negative
in hours see also note*
GROUPH Array containing flow group multipliers for Non-negative
heavy vehicles in ascending order
(see GROUPL above) see also note*

* Note - The sum over all flow groups of the product of multiplier and duration should equal the number
of hours in a year. The sum of the durations should also equal the number of hours in a year. This is
normally taken as 8760 but to allow for the use of 8766 hours (365.25 days) a tolerance of I0 hours is
allowed.

BLOCK C - Turning proportions

QV Array containing turning proportions for Non-negative

light vehicles for each arm the sum over all
movements must be 1.0
QP Array containing turning proportions for As for QV above
16 heavy vehicles
BLOCK D - Seasonal and tidal peaking effects RESTRICTIONS

IPAT Indicates seasonal flow type 3 Integer 0 to 4

0 - no seasonal effect
1 - Urbad commuter
2 - Low flow non-recreational rural
3 - Rural long distance
4 - Recreational
PK Array containing the tidal peaking factors. These Non-negative
specify for each movement (excluding U-turns). Not greater than 100
the percentage of the average peakhour flow which
occurs during the am peak
IPKL' Indicates the length of the peak Integer 1,2 or 3
1 - short peak (half-hour) if integer outside this range
2 - average peak (one hour) is used, then it is reset to 2
3 - long peak (two hours)
This is used in queueing formulae
DMAX Maximum acceptable delay value in seconds. Non-negative
A technique to indirectly allow for the effects
of re-assignment etc (see Section 2)

BLOCK E - Major/minor junctions

JTYPE Indicates junction type at 4-way Integer 2, 3 or 4

2 - crossroads
3 - right-left staggered
4 - left-right staggered
WW The full major road width in metres excluding Not less than 6.5
any central reserve either by kerbed or ghost islands Not greater than 20
WCR The width in metres of any central reserve by Non-negative
kerbed islands Not greater than 10
W(3) The avaiiable lane width in metres for right-turning Not less than 2.2
major road traffic Not greater than 5.0
VR(3) The visibility in metres for right-turning major Non-negative
road traffic Not greater than 250
VL The visibility to the left for minor road traffic Non-negative
in metres Not greater than 250
VR(1) The visibility to the right for minor road traffic. Non-negative
in metres Not greater than 250
W(1) The available lane width in metres for left-turning Not less than 2.2
traffic from minor road Not greater than 5.0
W(2) The available lane width in metres for right-turning Not less than 2.2
traffic from the minor road Not greater than 5.0
(if W(2) is omitted (ie put equal to 0) then all In this case 0
traffic is assumed to use the 'left' lane, W(1)) is acceptable

A more detailed definition of these terms is given in reference 5. If the geometric parameters entered are
outside the specified range they are reset to the nearest value within the range and an appropriate message
given in the output.

17
BLOCK F - Roundabouts RESTRICTIONS

V The-approach half width in metres . Not less than 2.0

Not more than 12
E The entry width in metres Not less than 3.0
Not more than 16
Also E must not be less than V
ELF The length over which the flare is developed Not less than 1.0
in metres If V = E, then ELF is irrelevant
R The entry radius in metres Not less than 3.0
D The local value of the inscribed circle Not less than 13.0
diameter in metres
PHI A representation of the angle of conflict Non-negative
between entry and circulating flow in degrees Not more than 80

A more detailed deffmition of these terms is given in reference 6. If the geometric parameters are outside
the specified range they are reset to the nearest value within the range and an appropriate message given in
the output.

BLOCK G - Grade-separated junctions

LANE Number of lanes on the major road 2 or 3 only

JTYPE Indicates junction type Integer 7, 8, 9, 10
7 - simple diamond
8 - two-level roundabout
9 - three-level roundabout
10 - free-flow interchange

BLOCK H - D i a m o n d junctions

For each major/minor junction at the end of the slip.roads the geometric parameters are as defined in block E.
It should be noted that in this case arms B and D have priority and are considered as the 'major' road.

BLOCK I - Grade-separated roundabouts

For each arm the geometric parameters are as defined in block F. Where appropriate the straight-ahead
traffic is assumed to pass through the junction without using the roundabout.

BLOCKS J, K, L - Detailed geometric delay (see also Section 3..3)

VJ Array containing speed in km/h of light vehicles Non-negative

as they negotiate the junction for each movement
D Array containing the distance travelled at speed VJ Non-negative
in metres If VJ = 0 then the corresponding
D must also be 0
E Array containing the 'extra' distance travelled due Can take any value including
to the junction in metres. This represents the negative
difference in distance between travelling through
the junction and travelling to the mid-point of
the junction and out again
BLOCK M - Geometric delay at major/minor junctions by general formulae

The only input is a value for JOPT to state whether or not the junction meets the Department visibility
standards as laid out in H 11/7619
18
 11. APPENDIX 4

OUTPUT FROM EXAMPLE 1

I--
0 Z

=IZ
I
M~
I

~
' N
Z

~ 0 0 0

~2
z

0
o

$~ggg
LD

%
g

0 0
~ C ' ~

;~gggg~
C,

.<:
M ~ ~x

~ C
C ~, I--
l--

C~
e~
~"
gt D

~ _ O O C
I •

L"d M'~ ~If* I,,m

F-
~ C O ~
w
C ~ ~___C~C; ¸
.~(DI-- I-.- u.J

gX~ ~D i l l
=&g&
~J
" 0

u .11 O l I--

~ I 0 0 0 0 0

0
z
ID w ~ O Q O O 0

• ~

19
 0

I
I

I
I
, g
U Z

c-
~o

c?
t~3

i--

c
c.

UC. C O ~-*c o o U C C C D
-OU%C~ ,OU%C -4) *z% 0
•%- • • • •0 U'. 0
_-.r • • •
~ c c ~ C ; O C
< < < < <
l- (n &u
* Z
•-*~zl 0 o 0
:r -4" C -4" :~ -4"0-4" :r -4"0-4- > -.T C > - ~
g ~ tg~ • . • <~K • • • 0------ • • ,, '<~- • • m
W = C C < > '-* ~ 0 O 0
:r~ :r<
. ,-:,~ o~ o
,<
< 0 - 0 ~ < ~ o¢:> < C C O < 0 0 0
cu~,O O U % ~ OU%,O OU%,O
ill
• • •
z ~ O o c , ~ o o o Q~: O 0 0
0 < < .< < <
M

C~ 0 0 C
~ -J 0 0
l--
0
~n.,w Q.
Q.
-.~
0 0 0
z n- n-
t9 t9 ~9
z , ~ m u
tv

t~- i'~,'i~: I)C:

20
 0

I
I ~ - . ,-- ~-* 0

I
, g

O~

l--

t~ 0
)- 0
~. C.
0 un

q.~ C. 0 0 . ~ C ~ C ¸
C ~C' C'C' ~ o 0
,O~DO
~g~g
< <
F-
J ~ -2
u. I-- ~ 04 C f%l
~ C ~
~ O ~ o e l ~ e e a (.9_~- • • •
<~F-- ~ 0 0 0 ~ ' 0 0 0
-J< :r ~c

< 0 0 0
0"0,0
I-- ,-* D ~ l o I
z ~ 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0
,<
>
,lJ
O 0 0

X
O

Q 05- ~- -r

21
 0

0"

>'- 0

0 u'~

g g
'-'";%%
:E-. I'~ i ' ~ 0
IZ.

oF* (/)
i.U
¢'=~ 0:: ,P- ~ T-
:> o ,, ,, :>

LL/ I:~: l--- ~.--

:Z: ~ :

~ C' 03 ~r- ~ 0 ~-.- r,.. ~ c ~ N <E~ T - I%.-

Is • •
_~.. 0 O0 0~.
0.,=-

0 0 0 C. 0 0
p.-
F.- I--- I'-

0
_J O. e~

0 0 0

• :C nDi r~.,;, ~ ~ou

U4
L~ w
0 "~" -~'~-~
~ i ~ ~Y J v

22
 0

!
!

I ~"* * " ~ 0
I o~
I
, ~,

0,.

F.- "

I--

>- o

C ¢J, o ¢~O ¢:~ ¢~, I".- r " O

D:: • • •

0 O
.../¢~
I.i.. ! - - ee, t M ~ N

~ ¢.~ ~ - r..- o r,..

~ 0 .~,- I~.
z • • •

~K e.. 00M-,

O
M.I
O O o 0
F-

.,.t

--s
O O

u.I :E
O O O ::E" '~" =E~
..P
t~. ~ ,,C ¢ t

23
 o

!
| ~ 0

I
0

~ 7
u ~

O 0
g I--I--

m m

o o

O 0

_-,r c~: i ~ :

~- o
~.%

II H

a~

I-- ct~ i.- v-

l- z ~
H II l i o n

I.-4~

n~ M-J
"~4~ w
4~
¢Y H ~
~ z z 0
e~.l(
• ct~ Z
u.I Z P..q t , ~ . , J

~ 0 0
4~
0 • ,.4 ~.,e

x z I n,'u)
0 O w z

ua4~

:z: .1~ z
I.-4~ ! w t u ~ i _ae.,

X I.-Z

4K

24
 0

0 m

|
I
0

0
Q~

C.

O"

,..~_
z ~
u,.i z t,~',~O-
--m t.,u~ c
U,I
I-- e a >

0 r,.u 0 e.J
u,J~
0

o
~l~ C~ -
o u OC ~
O 0

0 O 0 0 O C
z .J

0
u
0
F-- 0
l,--

0 < ~,0 h-
g ~ U
C)
U v ~ v
IJ-
0 < t,.m.l~

(y)

> O ~ C A

g
_= ¢.,~P¢%1 qr-

v
LIJ

I",-
Z Z

~_ "¢T
f~

25
 ~2

I
! ,'..-

" I ,,-,,,-,,,-, 0

II M

, ~,

o
~ 0
~ Z
g

Q C
I I

v
%

o z ~

> ~-
g~
Ow ~

° ~

~ z z

O. C'>

J J

C 0

r,

0 o

0
u ~ u v ~

~ 0

~ v

Z Z Z Z

26
 0

!
!

~ Z

LIJ
)-

I.-
I.,i.I

¢pJ
>-
Ivh
0 u'~
¢..) ~ ~0
z T- f*u

C
to

I.-
L.~ I--
u.~ I--
._l ~ 0
I- Lu I--
,c~ 0 I.-- v u

~ 0

I--

l-
O
O, I--

27
 =[

r,
~C
C)

t5

l '~
I ,,,", , - , ,-, 0

I
, ~,
~,~ Z

.7

O,

~ 0
p ~ • • •

t',.

t t ~ O O C

--J U'~ C" L~ .

L~
-J

O U~

~ v ~,000
! • !
~ Z >- ..0 iv~ , 0
Q~
I--

U 11- uJ I
uJ I
I-- I
<:OI- I
O~:ul I
z I
,*.. !
I
F - .l~ ~'~ I O I-
: ~ 'It z I Q~ ~3
I.~ o. 0"~ " c, I
..-, ! := ~ r,-,O ~-
u) I | • • •
¢n z I
.~ uJ s.~ I

.-. I I". "~-

'~ I
I
x z I
I.M o I
.-. I
~.~ I- I
~=.
z I
IJ..f I.-- .1~

o. z ~ z
uJ tu uJ

28
 0

I
|

t ~ 0
I o:
I
, ~

W__

Z ¸ r,~ z ~
~..~ z I ~ ( ~ l~-
•.J L u I,,~ .,..i"(~£
•~[~ ._.Ic ¢--b C
e e o

I--

>- 0 < (~4 I',- ~ 3

U I~,"),,:I"(',J
"~. r%J ..4r-N
(.)
C OCC~ O ~ o c
..J ..If m--lf
10d 14.

Cb o.

l'-- 0 O
(.b
Z I.i.I .

g --,
O
.-I u v
0 ~g O
.J (,.~pv
u. 1,1.

i~1 .o ~ r ~
C ~ O A

< g
Z U ~.'IPl'-').<I'
,,~O.
~ v ~ v
w I.U

F--I"F--

L U I.U I,AI

29
 0

Q~

I
!
l
I
I
I
t
z

Qc

Z ~

> . . . > i i m

~ m 0 ~
a

I-

z
= &&&
.J
I.L £¢.

I--
~ ~ .

g --,
= _~

~ °*
0 ~ O A

< _~

x W

Z Z Z ~ Z

.30
 0

I
0
z

F.-

o,1

c, L¢~ ,o" ° °
r~ ,~.
v--

F-

F-
0 ~OW'- v U

~_ ~ o

Q
m

31
 12. APPENDIX 5
OUTPUT FROM EXAMPLE 2

t ~L~
~" G')
,el: l ,~
I ~ 0 0 0 0
O~-,M ~-.* I ,-.,~-,t-eO I-- l-i • • • •

J
0 0

Ig ~r
L~

t.u ~.4T-eO,r.-eO
0...I ~.-- qr-
cn

u I ~ I 0 0 0 0
C
~;JgJg

u.

F- I-'~.~-O

o '~d.~
¢n "It
C
cn .It >-
I-
U ~ v
4~
•- J 4~ J
>- 0 •- ~ .It 0
~"~ ~ 0 0 C:
U.~ t~
u C) .1~

_-9 4~ l-- C> ~'- t¢'l

,,,,it -2
0 •- I -I~ L~IZ
!
M~
¢J4~

-J.It UJ~--
~.~ .It M
¢). 4~
O l~... ~ t l.rl ...t
.It I--

C~4c 3
~g--&
4~
0,..~

--3
Z
0
Z ~ '~ m I~- m P.- '¢09 | M
0 LJ.I.~2~ 0
0 I F--
0
Z
!
! G9
.J v
0 0 0
0 I Z M3
-.J I~ 0 ~ Z Z Z Z a.
t, I •. J 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 "It
Z ~ . J ..If ._I I ~ IIJ ~LI IJJ"
M. U. I,~

32
 O

¢,.,.
~ O m

0~-.,-~*-* I ~ *-.*-*0

0 0

~t

C>

I--

C':
0
•.~ ,...t
~D

Z
~- C ~ 0 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0
G.
~ J * e

<

~ C ' C O 0 O O C O 0 t~.)00C~ ¸ 0
~ 0 ~
~ e m e O ~ m l O 0 l o l l
F-

< UO
0- l-- ~ m
mm
• ~ ~- I-- I- I-- l e o e
M
..I .~E :Z: ~E

< 0 ~ 0 0 O Q O ~

~ a l l a ~ m i I o o * * D
~ 0 0 0 0 ~ O C O 0 r.-
z I
0 ! < <
•- . I
I-- I
0 0 0 0
I-- I-- F--
~2 " < o. I N
0 I

!
0 0
z I
t~
z I

0 0
I-- !
Q.
 ~K
n.

o
iv

o ,n

:£
¢r

0 e-e ~-e e-e I "-' ,-" '-' 0

t
|
n~
0 C)
Z u Z

<

0
C
C
~- ,0
-f- .~

,-* ¢25

~ O C O C
m.
~ e e l e

Z
~.. _-2

f~
< I.u

~, LU 0 "~" ~"" 0 ~"" ~

I-- !-- I-'- e:( -s- • • • •

O W ~ -"r" , ~

0 <

e~ ,r-
~" ~ C~ ~ 0

i,l,J

0
I-- I--

X ~ n. n. n,
UU ,~
C)
n,,.

< ~ I~- t ~ tv n~

34
 0

0 0
7 u Z

e,,-
0

w
I--

0
0
.0
-t-.

Z
~,- 0 ~ 0
a o D e l e o e
~ ~ ,
0
U u

C,
m s e m

..1-
I.u ~ . ~
e e o c ~ o e m 0

g |
!'- I-- I-- I--
f ~ :::) ¢/) I:~:
v

I-- I

0 ,eC
¢,,.
ir~ i.l~ t%t Ln. "' !

C) I

I
l/~ (,0 I,~ ( / ) >- I
i..e I - t i-~ I.,.e oO I C 0 C ¸
Ir
, ~ ~t,~ u ~, r~ I
::~ |
0 I
X -J I
u. I
I 0 0

z !
~ u ~

u.i I

r.

35
 ~T

0 0
Z ~ Z

.7.

"~ O(~ 'T- O0 0

o e e e
~ . ~ "'- ~ CO, g¢2~ G

C.

~;.-m ~-o ~ ~O C OO T -
o e o e
~=gggg
LUcY,~=.. v'-¢~l

e e e e • • J •

~ m

U.l

v O
I-- I--

~ ~
x ~ 0,

0
r,-

~ m u ~
l,U
¢.9 0 0 ~
.-I
e~

36
 :E

r,
Xggg

0 a~

~2

|
0
~ m ~ m m
t ,-,,-,,-,0
! cc
|
I o:
0 0
Z L~ z

o ~

C~ ~Ngggg
0

~2

~ 0 o 0 o
~ 0 0 0 0

u ~ o o o 0

0
O0

.q )- 09 O 0 (D CD

0 I'-- m..,o • • • •

I-

.g 0

0
i.- ,0

>- 0

I--
r-,

I--
e,,
t~
e~ •w I
o 142, I- |
Lu I
~ . ~
u~ ~ 0 ~ 0 I
z |
0
d~. . ~ !
G') ~.9 cn I
O~ z |
IA~ .. 0 I ~ 0 0 0 0
"-" I
I%1 ~ | o o o o
Z I
tu I O ~

•... ~. '-4 I

I
X z i
um o I
,-, !
I-- I
z l

I--I-l-I--
Z Z Z Z
IJ41&t l ~ IJ4

37
 0

I
"" I

0 0
Z ¢..I, Z

I,- I--
Z ~ Z ~.~ Z ~
U-t Z C . . 0 ~ 0
L~
I,- ) f i l l >
-,..~ogJ ..,&&jg ) I i l l

UJ

0 0
C:
0
F- ".~
~ v

~" Z
>- C .~ C,-O- 0, o0

J&&& C::- c,
• t •
c> c~ c~
•
o ggg& o &J&&
J
(:D

u ~ ~ A
C

t.m ~ . , 0 ~ ,,00.

I-- I--
(/) ~- C ,~.
.J ~ v v u v
Z

I-q ',0

O A 0,'~
.,h O= ,_It*,* _.1 e,-
IA,'T" I~'~" l a . "P"
e,~ j
Z ~ Zr,.,} T- ~'-- Z¢.~ ~'- ~-- ZL.J,
.,~a.

X ~ ~ O.l U~I I.U

Z Z Z Z
0 0

>=- :1,- ).- >-

• t.v- I X ~.- 1~
I . - l=.- I-- I--
Z Z Z Z Z Z Z Z
I.IJ I.&ll IJi.I Wj
 0

0 =3

r~

I
+e.,, l

e+,, I
I
n.,, l
0 C3
Z ~.~ Z

Z
~C

- ~,~

D~
0

2+

-t-
r. I--I-- I.- I--
Z ~ Z Z ~
~ Z ~
. J L U ,="- 0 0 ~,-- ~
,¢~ --.I C~ ,~- O T=-
) I I I l
•-.., P.= C C. ~ C

tU 0 "' O ~
uJ
0 Cr
C"
C
0
I.- W3
"7- v

(/3
D,. ~,.= .
,~ , O ,r- ~ O e O
~.~ ,W~ IV3 ,0 N u r'-('~I~-~ --

-J -..It
o
J
&&&&

r.

DC
r~ ~ . ~

~a,;
I.I.I ,,~r~. I.UO J U ~ ~ v ~ v
&.~

n,+" l,n j , O

I~ +"+"~I"
Ill =+
C ~ C ~

gr) f¢') Orb(l)

"~ ILl ~'~..",+

U~.-~ Z ~ ~
~ v
.

0
Z Z Z
O0 0 ~ u ~ 0 0

I,M W I,Ll

Z Z Z Z Z Z Z ~ Z Z Z Z Z Z ~

39
 0

~ 0 ~

0 0
Z f.~ Z

IE ~" "

r. I--I'- I--I--
0 Z Z~ Z 't,,~ Z ~
uu~ Z 0 -.t ~0 .,..t
~t
• o .i •
~g~gg I s l e

O ~ O ~
u.~
0

0
0

>-. 0 N 0 N 0"'
U O0 ~ 0 CO ~r~ U ~
0 I-
o o e l

Z
Z
"-~
o &~g& O 0 0 C o
.,-I
&g&,g o gggg
0

I'- 12.

0
Jr-,,"

I--!-- ~ U ~
¢/) ~,,. 0
~.UO J U v ~ v ~ v

O A O ~
¢M
tl'~ ¢,/)
i...e
• . ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 ~

z U N ~ N ~ z ~ O ~ 0 Z U ~
~'~ v- Ir-
!~ Z v
X ~ ~

Z Z Z Z
O" 0

~ . ~ ~

~ Z Z Z Z ~ Z Z " Z Z Z Z
14WI I&ll I ~ l I , ~

40
 0

0 ~

~r
E

i ~ 0
!
r~
0 0
Z u

c
e(:,

r.
c

I--

~: I

•- I
I
I- ,0 o." I
"' I
c.. I
I
z c,~ I
)- 0 ~" I c, O- C"
I".-. ~ C.
C. I • • u I
~" I •,,!" c L ~,
I
!
C. I
C I

'~ I
l-
I
I ,~C -J

0 I ,,~ uJ I--
:z: I
g ~ !- I.--I-l-- ['- I I.u I--
I v I
,al: 0 w C~ I
:,- f
• uc I
I ' ~ , 0 I ~ ",0 ..z I la.. uJ i,~
uJ I
"" I
I
--J I
,cC I
r / ) ~#'~ ii/) f,o
z I

X
I-- I
0 !
I-- I

41
 e~

I--, 0

:E e,..

I
I ~.
I
I ,,,..,, ,-., ,,"', C ,
e,- I l,Y
I
n-" I

C:

i-"

c"
c~ I

Ua I

I
~-~ z C C ~
"" I C~ C~
"--, !
C ~.- 0 1

I
" l
C !
G I
Z
0

I >-
U I
Z I )- .-I
"--I 0 1
m: I .-I ~ E.
F - F - I-- I-- I l.u l.-
"" I
I
>- I n,. l.IJ
w~
I-- •--a I tL ~
z • "' l U, -~" m
I.U C:~ I
~ eo I I~F U.l 0
r...~ .IK I
I'~ .
I
u,.l~ I11
I
Z II
I~ --.J z ~ u.I Z I
~D U r'~ M~ '~C I
I:C [
--l II
X ~
I I'- I
F- 0 1
I'- I
uJ.l~
0
z

42
 13. A P P E N D I X 6

INPUT FOR EXAMPLE I

C>C~O

,O ,O ~--

• ~'% 12"~ 12",

M% ~ - ~-- ,r-

C~ C~ C : C'

J 222
•r- w-
C
C"
Lr'.

C C. C~ C_ C " C'- ¢"~ C C'

C: C C C C~ C'~ &f', If',

U'. ,.0,0 f~J w'- w--
w'-

C
I--

~ C C C -0 l.r~ -..÷ C: C~ <T ¸ C~(t.

L " .<t , O 0C. ,/3 0C
C.C ~ -¢~. C " ~":,
f'G JJ~
%..-
<

cn I--
t.~
ooc. ~ U.,Y
OCC(%JC ll$%LZ%
,,C~ ,.,,~" I."- C:" a.,,O
0 ( r fJ) C' CC, CCC C • D o m
I,Ll (~C I~, ~D~

~- ...} O ,--~ (Z
•~ I-- ,-' ~ D (,9
X ~ {#'~ ~ :It I~ O till 143144 C ~ O ~ O ~
Z )- ~ >- Z ~ Z Z

C ~ O C O ~ O ~ C O ~ C ,C C ~ O ~ C O C C O ~ O C ' ~ C ' ~ O ~ O

O C ~ C O O ~ C C - C ~ O O O O O O O C O C ~ C C C C ~ C O C ~ O O O
COC. O 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O ~ C O O C C O ~ O C C O O C C O 0 0 C ' C C C ' C
O O O O O O O O ~ O O ~ O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O C ' O ~ O ~ O O O
O C O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O C O O O O C O O O O O ~ O O ~ C O O

43
 14. A P P E N D I X 7
INPUT F O R E X A M P L E 2

o c o c ,

~ Ù o c .

0
0
0
C C C, C'~d~. I~', &r, u " , O O C OOC~-C

CC. O 0 ~ 0 0 C'O 0 L,% t¢~ t.~ ~ - , 0 OOC. C C. O 0

• • ~-- -.t -4" -4" -.t -.t ~ t -4' -4" ~-- l~'3~- I~3
C. t r ' 1.3 I~, i..3 i~3 ¢.d f~ ~ ¢%1

~0 -,o o0 , o o.,~o w,c. ,~o u~o c o o o oc. c

" " * • • - - ~- -4" .'- -4" 12% ~ l"% ~ ¢ O ~ C O

"" ~ ~ o o o o ~

I I I !

xo 0 O O k~ O O Lu uu
Z Z )=" Z ~ :)" :,-

O O C O O C O C ' O O O O O O O C C , C C C O C. C ~ C - O O C. O C, C~O C O O O O C . O O O C O O C-O (D ~--.O C, O OC, C . C~ O O O

goooogocggoogoo~ oo~oooogooc oog, o o o o o o o o o = o ® o = ooooocoo2ggoc ooooo
~ O C O CC, O C O C O C O C ' O C OCC, CO O C C' C' C 0 0 C.C. C 0 C' C, CZ" C, 0 0 0 0 C ~ 0 C-O,O C.O

44

(737) Dd0536380 1,500 5/80 HPLtdSo'ton G191S

PRINTED IN ENGLAND
 ABST R ACT

MIDAS: a computer program to estimate delays at junctions: I J BURROW: Department

of the Environment Department of Transport, T R R L Laboratory Report 939: Crowthorne,
1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory). The assessment of delays is an important
step in deciding which type of junction is the most suitable for handling a given traffic
problem. A computer program, MIDAS: Method for Intersection Delay ASsessment, has
been written to predict delays at junctions. A wide range of junction types from small
major/minor junctions and mini-roundabouts to large free-flow interchanges are covered.
The program incorporates capacity and delay formulae recently developed at TRRL. Account
may be taken o f seasonal and hourly variation in flow level and also of the effect of tidal
flows during the peak. The program calculates both the traffic dependent queueing delay
and also the geometric delay. The output includes details of the performance of the junction
as the flow varies through the year, and problems with particular traffic streams may be
identified.

ISSN 0 3 0 5 - 1 2 9 3

ABSTRACT

MIDAS: a computer program to estimate delays at junctions: I J BURROW: Department

of the Environment Department of Transport, T R R L Laboratory Report 939: Crowthorne,
1980 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory). The assessment of delays is an important
step in deciding which type of junction is the most suitable for handling a given traffic
problem. A computer program, MIDAS: Method for Intersection Delay ASsessment, has
been written to predict delays at junctions. A wide range of junction types from small
major/minor junctions and mini-roundabouts to large free-flow interchanges are covered.
The program incorporates capacity and delay formulae recently developed at TRRL. Account
may be taken o f seasonal and hourly variation in flow level an.d also of the effect of tidal
flows during the peak. The program calculates both the traffic dependent queueing delay
and also the geometric delay. The output includes details of the performance of the junction
as the flow varies through the year, and problems with particular traffic streams may be
identified.

ISSN 0 3 0 5 - 1 2 9 3