Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449

12th International Conference "Organization and Traffic Safety Management in large cities",
SPbOTSIC-2016, 28-30 September 2016, St. Petersburg, Russia

Efficiency Analysis of Roundabout with Traffic Signals

Nikolay Nikitin a*, Victor Patskan b, Iulia Savina c
Immanuel Kant Baltic Federal University, 14 A. Nevsky Str., Kaliningrad, 236041, Russia

Abstract

Roundabouts begin to be used more often instead of crossroads with traffic signals. A simulated model was applied for the
performance assessment of a roundabout. The modeling of a roundabout confirmed the existence of big transport delays at this
site of the street and road network. To prevent congestion at roundabouts it is necessary to know that crosswalks located in direct
proximity to driveways/exit roads of a roundabout seriously reduce its traffic capacity.
© 2017
© 2016The TheAuthors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier B.V.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
B.V. This
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 12th International Conference "Organization and Traffic
Peer-review under responsibility
Safety Management of the organizing committee of the 12th International Conference “Organization and Traffic Safety
in large cities".
Management in large cities”
Keywords: roundabout; traffic stream; VISSIM; traffic capacity

1. Introduction

Junctions play an important role in functioning of the street and road network. In places where several roads
connect, junctions make it possible to control a number of vehicles which can move at the same time on the
connected roads. The traffic capacity of a junction in urban conditions directly influences the traffic capacity of all
the street and road network of the city, especially on roads with high traffic densities.
It is necessary to direct crossing and turning traffic streams in such a way as to ensure maximum safety and
performance of a junction [SE “ROSDORNII” (2006)].
The number of roundabouts is constantly growing in Russia at the junctions of the main roads with average or
big densities.
When designing or reconstructing a junction engineers often face a choice between a roundabout and a crossroad

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +0-000-000-0000 ; fax: +0-000-000-0000 .

E-mail address: ninikitin@kantiana.rua*, vipatskan@kantiana.rub, yulya.savina.94@bk.ruc

2352-1465 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of the 12th International Conference “Organization and Traffic Safety
Management in large cities”
doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2017.01.072
444 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449

with traffic signals. In order to make a choice it is necessary to define which of these junctions has bigger traffic
capacity [SoyuzDorNII) (1975)].
A roundabout which is correctly designed has increased traffic capacity in comparison with the unregulated
traffic. The increase in traffic capacity is observed even when the streams of turning vehicles prevail [MADI (1980).
However, the existence of big pedestrian and bicycle streams reduces positive effects of roundabouts to zero.
The majority of traffic circles is built in places with high population concentration where dense pedestrian streams
are expected. According to the Traffic Rules of the Russian Federation a driver is obliged to reduce the speed
beforehand before a crosswalk and to let pedestrians pass even if there is only one of them [State Duma (1995)]. So,
a combination of pedestrians crossing the road in direct proximity to the traffic circle and big traffic streams driving
in the traffic circle reduces the total traffic capacity and a level of transport service of roundabouts.
This effect is widely known, however, it is hardly possible to determine precisely the critical levels of traffic and
pedestrian streams at which problems arise, as traffic circles are often designed individually, without taking into
account transport and construction recommendations [CJSC “SoyuzDorNII” (2013)].
Pedestrians crossing a road influence both incoming and outgoing streams of vehicles of the roundabout. The
influence on outgoing streams is more important as the vehicles leaving the roundabout can block the streams from
other road junctions, which leads to reduction of traffic capacity of the site of the street and road network.

2. Preparation of the model

The performance of a roundabout directly depends on the balance of traffic streams [MADI (2012)]. It can
appear, for example, when a stream from the main direction blocks a driveway to the traffic circle from the
secondary directions or in cases when a left stream prevails from the main direction. Similar situations cause traffic
jams and delays when moving on this site of the street and road network.
The main stream on the traffic circle can be:
x Big continuous traffic stream
x Small but constant stream from the secondary direction which has an advantage over the main one
The PTV VISSIM software is intended for building computer models of sites of the street and road network. In
the present work this software was used for the analytical analysis of a roundabout with traffic signals.
The input data was collected by means of video filming at the roundabout of Vasilevsky Square and two nearby
crossroads [FSUE “ROSDORNII” (2013)]. The roundabout was modeled by means of VISSIM [PTV AG (2015)].
Two cases were considered at microscopic modeling: with pedestrian streams and without them. The configuration
of the roundabout is presented in Figure 1.
 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449 445

Fig. 1. Roundabout at Vasilevsky Square.

The roundabout was modeled to assess the transport situation. The analysis included collection of information on
the following indicators: total time on the way, total time on the way for separate vehicles depending on a route,
total time of delay, total number of stops and an average number of stops of one vehicle.

3. Comparison of the results

The start of the model was carried out ten times with different starting numbers. The presented results are an
average value of these ten repetitions. The model parameters used in VISSIM are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Settings for VISSIM micromodeling.

Driving speed
Motor cars 40 km/h (with
zones of decrease
to 30 km/h)
Freight transport 40 km/h
Public transport 30 km/h
Pedestrians 5 km/h
Bicyclists 10 km/h

Conflict zones Standard settings

Diameter of the internal island of the traffic 28 m
circle

The roundabout at Vasilevsky Square has four access routes. The traffic streams and directions of traffic obtained
as a result of video filming processing which were used when modeling are presented in Table 2. There are also
three crosswalks with dense streams.
446 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449

Table 2. Traffic and pedestrian streams at Vasilevsky Square.

Chernyakhovsky Street (conventional cars per hour)
To the right 641
Directly 701
To the left 1,521
9 April Street (conventional cars per hour)
To the right 349
Directly 1,006
To the left 611
Litovsky Val Street (conventional cars per hour)
To the right 712
Directly 1,393
To the left 96
A. Nevsky Street (conventional cars per hour)
To the right 1,137
Directly 1,261
To the left 120
Pedestrians (per hour)
Chernyakhovsky 483
9 April 168
Litovsky Val 140
As it is possible to notice from Table 2, a serious loading both on the side of motor transport and on the side of
pedestrian traffic is due to the roundabout.
Simulations in VISSIM were used for the analysis of interrelation between the delay time and traffic streams in
case of different ways of the traffic control at the roundabout. The model was calibrated and compared to the data of
field investigations. Because of unsuccessful configuration of the roundabout the priority rules were used in the
model instead of conflict zones.
In the process of modeling the following options of traffic regulation at the roundabout were considered:
x With fixed phases for all road users (real situation).
x Unregulated traffic.
x Transfer of crosswalks situated near the traffic circle under the ground (lack of pedestrian streams).
x
Figure 2 presents a signal program which was defined as a result of field observations over the crossroads:
 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449 447

Time intervals No Cycle time Displacement Switching point

Signal group Signal sequence

in Chernyakhovsky

in Litovsky Val

in 9 April

Fig. 2. Signal program of the roundabout.

As it can be observed, the program with fixed time is very simple. When calculating the cycle and separate
phases various peculiarities of the junction were not taken into account, such as:
x Streetcar service preventing traffic on the traffic circle.
x Large traffic streams in the straight direction and to the left.

It can be also noted that one of the roads remains unregulated, which reduces efficiency of traffic signals.
At field investigations problems with traffic capacities on the approaches to the crossroads caused by the
existence of pedestrian streams were noticed. The results of microscopic modeling confirmed the existence of the
problem, which is shown in the following table.
Table 3. Results of VISSIM micromodeling at the fixed time of traffic lights.
Average delay time for the streets, seconds
Chernyakhovsky Street
To the right 129.74 sec
Directly 132.31 sec
To the left 135.20 sec
9 April Street
To the right 40.13 sec
Directly 43.76 sec
To the left 45.54 sec
Litovsky Val Street
To the right 39.05 sec
Directly 42.88 sec
To the left 43.45 sec
A. Nevsky Street
To the right 15.09 sec
Directly 20.62 sec
To the left 23.98 sec
Average delay time, seconds 86.64 sec

The micromodeling results have shown that pedestrian streams directly influence the performance of the
roundabout. The present fact is conditioned by geometry of this site of the street and road network. Pursuant to the
448 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449

legislation of the Russian Federation, if a pedestrian crosses a road with more than 2 traffic lanes, the crosswalk
must be equipped with traffic lights. According to Table 3, it can be noted that the approach to the traffic circle
which is not equipped with traffic lights and has no pedestrian streams crossing it possesses the smallest indicators
of the delay time.
At the next stage of work the micromodeling of the junction without traffic signalization of pedestrian streams
was executed. The results obtained when considering such a configuration are presented in Table 4.

Table 4. Results of VISSIM micromodeling with unregulated pedestrian streams.

Average delay time, seconds
Chernyakhovsky Street
To the right 131.22 sec
Directly 133.20 sec
To the left 136.34 sec
9 April Street
To the right 43.88 sec
Directly 45.71 sec
To the left 49.45 sec
Litovsky Val Street
To the right 40.10 sec
Directly 46.29 sec
To the left 47.98 sec
A. Nevsky Street
To the right 16.75 sec
Directly 21.58 sec
To the left 25.58 sec
Average delay time, seconds 91.27 sec

When comparing the micromodeling results for situations with and without traffic signalization of pedestrian
streams it is possible to draw a conclusion about the necessity of traffic signalization at this site of the street and
road network. Pedestrian streams at this site are very dense and constant, which in the absence of signalization leads
to a stream delay even in case of crossing only by one person.
In the latter case the situation at which pedestrian streams do not interact with traffic streams was modeled, that
is crosswalks are taken away under the ground. The similar reconstruction demands serious financial expenses,
however, the obtained results which are given in Table 5 speak for the expediency of the similar decision.

Table 5. Results of VISSIM micromodeling in the absence of pedestrians.

Average delay time, seconds
Chernyakhovsky Street
To the right 41.95 sec
Directly 45.64 sec
To the left 46.01 sec
9 April Street
To the right 19.95 sec
Directly 22.36 sec
To the left 25.54 sec
Litovsky Val Street
To the right 20.08 sec
Directly 23.21 sec
 Nikolay Nikitin et al. / Transportation Research Procedia 20 (2017) 443 – 449 449

To the left 24.00 sec

A. Nevsky Street
To the right 18.60 sec
Directly 21.06 sec
To the left 22.33 sec
Average delay time, seconds 42.03 sec

The roundabout has considerable advantages in comparison with the crossroads with traffic signals, especially in
intervals between rush hours [Federal Highway Administration (2000), Transportation Research Board (2007)].
According to the results of the roundabout modeling, one may state that the roundabout will have the maximum
traffic capacity in the absence nearby of pedestrian streams crossing approaches to the traffic circle.

4. Conclusion

The objective of this investigation consisted in consideration of the roundabout for performance assessment in
the presence of steady big pedestrian streams crossing the carriageway just before the traffic circle. The additional
objective was to build a computer model which would be as close as possible to the current situation in the process
of micromodeling. The data which were used when building the model were taken from the design documentation
and files of video surveillance. The visual observation indicated considerable influence of traffic light phases which
were formed because of big pedestrian streams. The model without traffic signalization also showed that pedestrians
significantly influence the performance of this site of the street and road network. The critical levels of traffic and
pedestrian streams causing a sharp fall in the junction performance were not revealed in this investigation. In the
course of the investigation the software for micromodeling made it possible to calculate delays at the site of the
street and road network.

References
All-Union Road Scientific Research Institute (SoyuzDorNII) (1975). VSN (Industrial construction standards) 103-74. Technical instructions for
design of road intersections and junctions [Tehnicheskie ukazanija po proektirovaniju peresechenij i primykanij avtomobil'nyh dorog].
Moscow: Transport, 34 p. (in Russian).
CJSC “All-Union Road Scientific Research Institute” (CJSC “SoyuzDorNII”) (2013). SP (Set of rules) 34.13330.2012. Automobile roads
(Revised SNiP (construction rules and regulations) standard 2.05.02-85* [Aktualizirovannyj SNiP 2.05.02-85*]). Federal Autonomous
Establishment “Federal Center of standardization and technical evaluation of conformity in the sphere of construction” (FAU “FTsS”),
Moscow, 112 p. (in Russian).
Federal Highway Administration (2000). Roundabouts: An Informational Guide. Publication No. FHWA–RD-00-67, June 2000, 277 р.
Federal State Unitary Enterprise “Russian Road Scientific Research Institute” (FSUE “ROSDORNII”) (2013). ODM (Industry-specific road
guidance document) 218.2.032-2013. Methodological recommendations for traffic census on roads [Metodicheskie rekomendacii po uchetu
dvizhenija transportnyh sredstv na avtomobil'nyh dorogah]. Moscow: Rosavtodor, 33 p. (in Russian).
Moscow Automobile and Road Construction State Technical University (MADI) (1980). Methodological guidelines for design of road
roundabouts [Metodicheskie ukazanija po proektirovaniju kol'cevyh peresechenij avtomobil'nyh dorog]. Moscow: Transport, 131 p. (in
Russian).
Moscow Automobile and Road Construction State Technical University (MADI) (2012). ODM (Industry-specific road guidance document)
218.2.020-2012. Methodological recommendations for assessment of road capacity [Metodicheskie rekomendacii po ocenke propusknoj
sposobnosti avtomobil'nyh dorog]. Moscow: Informavtodor, 148 p. (in Russian).
PTV AG (2015). Vissim 8 User Manual, Karlsruhe, Germany 680 p.
State Duma (1995). Federal Law No. 196-FZ (dd 10.12.1995) (revised on 01.05.2016) “On Traffic Safety” [Federal'nyj zakon ot 10.12.1995 N
196-FZ (red. ot 01.05.2016) “O bezopasnosti dorozhnogo dvizhenija”]. Moscow (in Russian).
State Establishment “Russian Road Scientific Research Institute” (SE “ROSDORNII”) (2006). GOST (All-Union State Standard) R 52289-2004.
Traffic control devices. Rules of application of traffic signs, markings, traffic lights, guardrails and delineators [GOST R 52289-2004
“Tehnicheskie sredstva organizacii dorozhnogo dvizhenija. Pravila primenenija dorozhnyh znakov, razmetki, svetoforov, dorozhnyh
ograzhdenij i napravljajushhih ustrojstv”]. Moscow: Standartinform, 102 p. (in Russian).
Transportation Research Board (2007). NCHRP Report 572. Roundabouts in the United States. National Research Council. Washington, D.C.,
125 p.