DEPARTMENT OF

CIVIL ENGINEERING

TECHNICAL SEMINAR
(CVSE78)
TOPIC: INTERCHANGES
Jayanthsai HM - 1MS20CV048
Joel Joseph Mampilly - 1MS20CV050
Prajwal CS - 1MS20CV078
Pratheek Reddy - 1MS20CV081

GUIDE: Dr. Vivek R Das

INTRODUCTION TO INTERCHANGES

•A BRIDGE THAT ELIMINATES INTERSECTION

CONFLICTS THROUGH VERTICAL SEPARATION OF
ROADWAYS.
•ALSO KNOWN AS GRADE SEPARATED
INTERSECTIONS, THEY REDUCE HAZARDS AND
DELAYS COMPARED TO GRADE INTERSECTIONS.
•CONFIGURATIONS DESIGNED BASED ON TRAFFIC
FLOW, TOPOGRAPHY, LAND USE, CONTROLS, RIGHT-
OF-WAY, AND MOVEMENTS.
•GOAL: ELIMINATE GRADE CROSSING CONFLICTS,
FIG 1.HEBBAL INTERCHANGE
FACILITATE MERGING, DIVERGING, AND WEAVING AT
LOW RELATIVE SPEEDS TO ENHANCE SAFETY AND
CAPACITY.
CLASSIFICATION OF INTERCHANGES

1.SYSTEM INTERCHANGE
MAINTAINS FREE-FLOW FOR MAJOR MOVEMENTS
CONNECTS MAJOR ROAD TO MAJOR ROAD (EXPRESSWAYS, HIGHWAYS)
2.SERVICE INTERCHANGE
DOES NOT MAINTAIN FREE-FLOW FOR ALL MAJOR MOVEMENTS
CONNECTS MAJOR ROAD TO MINOR ROAD (HIGHWAYS, ARTERIALS)
3.CLASSIFICATION BASED ON GRADE SEPARATION
PARTIAL GRADE SEPARATION (3-ARM AND 4-ARM) Judge Harry Pregerson Interchange, Los Angeles, California

TOTAL GRADE SEPARATION (3-ARM AND 4-ARM)

COMMON GEOMETRIC CONFIGURATIONS

•TRUMPET: SIMPLE DESIGN, SINGLE LOOP RAMP, URBAN

AREAS WITH LOW TRAFFIC.

•DIAMOND: DIAMOND SHAPE, EASY LEFT TURNS, VARIATIONS

LIKE SINGLE-POINT, SPLIT, TIGHT.

•CLOVERLEAF: LOOP RAMPS, FULL ACCESS, NO TRAFFIC

SIGNALS, PARTIAL CLOVERLEAF VARIANT.

•ROTARY: CIRCULAR TRAFFIC FLOW, REDUCES CONGESTION,

ROUNDABOUT INTERCHANGE WITH VARYING ENTRY/EXIT.

•DIRECTIONAL: COMPLEX, SEPARATE LEVELS, HIGH TRAFFIC

VOLUMES, SINGLE-POINT URBAN INTERCHANGE (SPUI).
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERCHANGES

● INTERCHANGE SPACING:
URBAN AREAS: MAINTAIN A MINIMUM 1.6 KM
SPACING BETWEEN INTERCHANGES.
RURAL AREAS: INTERCHANGES SHOULD BE
SPACED OVER 4.8 KM APART TO MINIMIZE
DISRUPTIONS AND ENSURE SAFETY.

● ACCESS CONTROL:
ACCESS POINTS DETERMINED BY Approximate land requirements of interchanges are as
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION, TRAFFIC presented in Table 4.1.

CHARACTERISTICS, LAND USE,

ENVIRONMENT, DESIGN, AND ECONOMIC
CONSIDERATIONS.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS FOR INTERCHANGES

● LANDUSE:
INTERCHANGE AREAS ATTRACT VARIOUS LAND DEVELOPMENTS BASED ON MARKET
DEMAND, SITE CHARACTERISTICS, AND LOCAL OBJECTIVES.

● FACTORS FOR GRADE SEPARATION:

1. DESIGN CONSIDERATION: FOCUS ON CONTINUOUS FLOW ON EXPRESSWAYS.
2. SAFETY: GRADE SEPARATION MAY REDUCE ACCIDENTS AT PROBLEMATIC AT-GRADE
INTERSECTIONS.
3. CONGESTION: INTERCHANGE WARRANTED IF AT-GRADE INTERSECTION SERVICE
LEVEL IS UNACCEPTABLE.
4. SITE TOPOGRAPHY: GRADE SEPARATION CAN BE MORE FEASIBLE IN AREAS WITH
CHALLENGING TOPOGRAPHY.
5. TRAFFIC VOLUME: DESIRABLE AT CROSSROADS WITH HEAVY TRAFFIC TO ELIMINATE
CONFLICTS.
6. ROAD-USER BENEFITS: IF COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS SHOWS BENEFITS EXCEED COSTS
OVER THE INTERCHANGE'S SERVICE LIFE.
 GEOMETRIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
• DESIGN VEHICLES: MOTORIZED VEHICLES THAT INFLUENCE HIGHWAY DESIGN
CHARACTERISTICS.
• TYPES OF DESIGN VEHICLES: DETERMINED BY ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION AND EXPECTED
VEHICLE PROPORTIONS.
• IMPORTANCE: INFLUENCES ROAD WIDTH, TURNING RADII, SIGHT DISTANCE, ALIGNMENTS,
AND MORE.
• REFERENCE MATERIALS: IRC:3 FOR VEHICLE DIMENSIONS AND WEIGHTS, IRC:SP:41 FOR
• TYPES OF RAMPS
INTERSECTION AND DESIGN
DESIGN.
CONSIDERATIONS FOR RAMPS:
FOUR BASIC TYPES OF RAMPS:
1. LEFT TURNING (DIAGONAL OR OUTER
CONNECTION).
2. LOOP (RIGHT TURNS WITH LEFT EXIT).
3. SEMI-DIRECT (RIGHT TURNS WITH PARTIAL
DEVIATION).
4. DIRECT (RIGHT TURNS WITH NATURAL
GEOMETRIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
• RAMP DESIGN SPEED: RELATES TO THE MAJOR INTERSECTING HIGHWAY’S DESIGN
SPEED.

• HORIZONTAL CURVATURE: PREFER CIRCULAR CURVES WITH TRANSITIONS; MINIMUM

RADII SPECIFIED.

• SIGHT DISTANCE: ENSURED FOR SAFE STOPPING CONDITIONS, MEASURED AT DRIVER'S

EYE LEVEL

• RAMP PROFILES: CONSIST OF TANGENT GRADE, VALLEY CURVE, AND SUMMIT CURVE.

• GRADE LIMITATION: TANGENT GRADES LIMITED TO 4% (MAX 6%).

 GEOMETRIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
• LATERAL CLEARANCE: DESIRABLE TO CARRY FULL ROADWAY WIDTH THROUGH UNDERPASS.

• VERTICAL CLEARANCE: MINIMUM 5.5M FOR URBAN UNDERPASSES AFTER CONSIDERING

FUTURE NEEDS.

• OVERPASS STRUCTURES: LESS CRITICAL CLEARANCES WITH 225MM WIDE KERB AND OPEN-
TYPE PARAPET.

• CROSS-SECTION: TWO-WAY DIVIDED TYPE WITH MEDIAN WIDTH AND SHOULDER

SPECIFICATIONS.

• RAMP TERMINALS: ENTRANCE AND EXIT TERMINAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS, INCLUDING

ACCELERATION AND DECELERATION LANES.
CASE STUDIES
Literature Paper Title
Innovative Diamond Interchange
Designs: How to Increase Capacity
and Minimize Cost
by David Stanek, P.E.
Objectives
Determine potential project
alternatives.
Analyze interchange configurations
based on preliminary design-year
peak hour volumes.
Optimize signal timings using
Synchro.
Evaluate effects of signal
coordination, origin-destination
flows, and queues using VISSIM.
Aim for Level of Service D at study
intersections.
Consider realignment of the
frontage road (Country Club
Drive).
Results
Recommended three alternatives:
Single-loop Partial Cloverleaf:
Lower construction cost.
Single Point Diamond: Higher
construction cost but more local
street capacity.
Diverging Diamond: Lower
construction cost with improved
intersection capacity, although
cross street progression may suffer.
Gap Analysis
Diamond interchanges often used in
low-turning volume areas.
Partial cloverleaf interchange offers
higher capacity but can be costly
due to built-up areas.
Innovative diamond interchanges
can provide higher capacity in a
similar footprint to tight diamond
interchanges.
Acknowledges the existence of
various interchange designs not
covered in the paper and
recommends a comprehensive
review using state transportation
department design manuals.
Literature Paper Title
Proposal of a highly effective and
affordable highway interchange -
ITL Interchange
by Goran Jovanović, Rafko Atelšek
Objectives
Increase interchange capacity by
offering efficient traffic flow.
Enhance traffic safety by
minimizing conflict points.
Minimize construction costs to
ensure affordability.
Results
ITL Interchange, designed for four-
way interchanges, demonstrates
superior performance.
It eliminates conflict points,
enhancing traffic safety.
The inclusion of shorter left
directional ramps improves traffic
flow.
The interchange's two-level design
significantly reduces construction
costs.
Gap Analysis
ITL Interchange surpasses other
interchange designs in multiple
aspects.
Its shorter ramp lengths contribute
to efficient construction.
Lower construction and
maintenance costs make it cost-
effective.
Further safety assessments are
needed to validate its safety
features.
Literature Paper Title
Safety performance assessment of
extra-urban road interchanges: a
review of the Italian Road
Inspection methodology.
by Stefano Zampino
Objectives
To critique and improve the
existing Road Safety Inspection
(RSI) report scheme for
interchanges.
To propose a more effective filing
system for objectively assessing the
safety performance of singular
sites, especially interchanges.
To revise the RSI report based on
qualitative scoring and integrate
data from other institutions and
Human Factor Safety Evaluation
Method (RSE_HF).
To apply the revised RSI procedure
to three different interchanges and
compare the results with the present
Italian guidelines.
Results
The study introduces a simplified
tool for assessing the safety of road
interchanges, focusing on
components impacting driver
behavior to prevent errors.
Application results of the revised
Road Safety Inspection (RSI)
approach are compared to the
current checklist, demonstrating the
effectiveness of the integrated
approach.
The integrated approach helps
identify areas for improvement in
interchange safety, whether through
maintenance improvements such as
better signage layout or structural
changes like lane reconfiguration.
Gap Analysis
Lack of specific findings and
quantitative data hinders the
assessment of the proposed
approach's effectiveness.
Inadequate methodology details,
which are essential for evaluating
the study's rigor.
Absence of a clear scope and
impact assessment, leaving
questions about the scale of
application and potential safety
improvements.
The study lacks validation and
future research directions, leaving
unexplored avenues for further
enhancement.
CONCLUSIONS
• EXPLORED VARIOUS ASPECTS OF HIGHWAY INTERCHANGES, STARTING WITH IRC 92
GUIDELINES.
• COVERED TYPES, CLASSIFICATIONS, AND GEOMETRIC DESIGN PRINCIPLES.
• PRESENTED THREE REAL-WORLD CASE STUDIES TO ILLUSTRATE EFFECTIVE
INTERCHANGE SOLUTIONS.

KEY TAKEAWAYS:

1. INTERCHANGE CLASSIFICATION AND PROPER DESIGN ARE CRUCIAL FOR

PERFORMANCE.
2. REAL-WORLD CASE STUDIES DEMONSTRATE PRACTICAL APPLICATION.
3. DESIGN QUALITY DIRECTLY IMPACTS TRAFFIC FLOW AND SAFETY.
 REFERENCES
WEBSITES:
1. HTTPS://WWW.SCIENCEDIRECT.COM/ - PAPERS
2. HTTPS://SCHOLAR.GOOGLE.COM/ - PAPERS
3. HTTPS://LAW.RESOURCE.ORG/ - IRC 92

IMAGE REFERENCES:
4. HTTPS://WWW.THENEWSMINUTE.COM/KARNATAKA/BENGALURU-
S-HEBBAL-FLYOVER-REVAMP-RESUME-AFTER-THREE-YEARS-
171008
5. HTTPS://WWW.THESTRUCTURALENGINEER.INFO/NEWS/
SPECTACULAR-INTERCHANGES-AROUND-THE-WORLD
THANK YOU