CIV2282 – Transport and Traffic Engineering

Assignment 2
Intersection Turning Movement
Survey and Analysis

Department of Civil Engineering

Faulty of Engineering

Monash University

Dr. Euan Ramsay

GROUP C
Hayden Leong 28755871
James Ramm 28709782
Sahand Birgani 28815653
Oliver Yang 28809963

Date Submitted: 5/10/18

1. Executive Summary

Table of Contents
1. Executive Summary .......................................................................................................... I
2. Project Planning ............................................................................................................... 1
2.1. Survey Aims ......................................................................................................................... 1
2.2. Required Deliverables ......................................................................................................... 1
2.3. Task Breakdown .................................................................................................................. 1
2.4. Task Allocation .................................................................................................................... 2
2.5. Project Timeline................................................................................................................... 3
3. Development of Survey Method ........................................................................................ 3
3.1. Data collection methods ...................................................................................................... 3
3.2. Method Development .......................................................................................................... 3
3.3. Method Evaluation .............................................................................................................. 5
4. Risk Assessment ................................................................................................................ 5
4.1. Risk assessment .................................................................................................................... 5
4.2. Hazards involving risk to the safety of the participants .................................................. 6
4.3. Hazards involving risk to the accuracy of the data .......................................................... 6
5. Survey Outcome ................................................................................................................ 7
6. Data Presentation .............................................................................................................. 9
7. Intersection Performance Analysis ................................................................................ 13
8. Evaluation of Results ...................................................................................................... 15
9. Conclusion....................................................................................................................... 16
10. References ................................................................................................................... 16

I
2. Project Planning
2.1. Survey Aims

Figure 1 - Site B Location with Map (Left) and Satellite Image (Right) adapted from Intersection Tuning Movement Survey
and Analysis Brief Document

The aim of this survey was to design and implement an approach that would allow for the
collection and collation of turning movement traffic volumes at the three-approach roundabout
located at the intersection between Research Way and Scenic Boulevard (Figure 1). This was
to be partaken in a manner that would allow for simple and accurate investigation of the
intersection’s behaviour, and a subsequent analysis of the roundabout’s performance. This
information was to be presented in a technical report format, along with other key findings and
conclusions.
2.2. Required Deliverables
The key deliverables of this project are as follows:
 Approval of Site Safety Plan
 Planning and Design of Survey Method
 Completion of Risk Assessment
 Implementation of Survey and Description of Survey Outcome
 Presentation of Survey Data
 Analysis of Intersection Performance
 Reporting of Results and Proposed Optimisations
The above deliverables are to be contained within a technical report.
2.3. Task Breakdown
A task breakdown was conducted to provide an overview of the activities that were required
for the completion of the project. Firstly, the key milestones were identified;
 Approval of Site Safety Plan
 Conduct Survey
 Submit Survey Data
 Submit Report

1
Next, the tasks required to achieve each of the above milestones were recorded;
 Approval of Site Safety Plan
 Conduct Survey
o Develop Potential Survey Methods
o Test Developed Survey Methods and Select Most Appropriate
o Conduct Risk Assessment
 Submit Survey Data
 Submit Report
o Develop Report Format
o Survey Planning and Analysis Section of Report
o Survey Method Section of Report
o Risk Assessment Section of Report
o Survey Outcome Section of Report
o Data Presentation Section of Report
o Analysis of Intersection Performance Section of Report
o Evaluation of Results Section of Report
o Executive Summary
o Final Formatting/Editing
From this overview, each of the tasks and subtasks could be allocated, and a Gantt Chart
(Figure 2) could be developed to provide a timeline for the project. The submission of the
report was deemed to be the most time intensive, and this was considered when constructing
the project timeline.
2.4. Task Allocation
For most of the initial tasks that were required to be conducted prior to the traffic survey, it
was most beneficial for all members of the group to be involved. This allowed for everyone
to present a range of survey methods and provided the opportunity for discussion and debate
over the most appropriate approach.
Following the completion of the survey, the report was allocated as follows;
 Develop Report Format - Oliver
 Survey Planning and Analysis Section of Report - James
 Survey Method Section of Report - Sahhand & Hayden
 Risk Assessment Section of Report - Sahhand
 Survey Outcome Section of Report - James
 Data Presentation Section of Report - Oliver
 Analysis of Intersection Performance Section of Report - All
 Evaluation of Results Section of Report - Hayden
 Executive Summary - Sahhand
 Final Formatting/Editing - Oliver

2
 2.5. Project Timeline

Figure 2 - Gantt Chart of Task Allocation

Using the Gannet Chat for task allocation (Figure 2), it is easier for the team member to
follow and understand the deadline for each task needed to complete by. With the critical
path (shown in red in the Gannt Chart in Figure 2) indicates the task needed to complete
before the next task commence, team member can put in more focus on these tasks along the
critical path to ensures the survey project is delivery by the deadline.

3. Development of Survey Method

3.1. Data collection methods
In order to count and record the traffic flow, multiple methods were trialled and discussed.
These methods included using our phones’ notepad function, pen and paper and an online
website for tallying.
3.2. Method Development

Figure 3 – Example of Pen and Paper Method (North Approach)

3
The first method (Figure 3) that was trialled was pen and paper; a table on word was generated
with different movements and types of transportation for each column and it is printed prior to
the data collection at the roundabout. This method was effective for counting for a short period.
However, after period of utilisation of this method, it was concluded that pen and paper would
become difficult over a longer period without a suitable surface to write on. Pen and paper
method would have also been sensitive to weather changes, as the wind would make it difficult
to keep the paper flat and rain would damage the paper. Therefore, pen and paper method were
not suitable for the data collection.

Figure 4 – Example of Smartphone Notepad Method (North Approach)

The second method (Figure 4) was utilising individual's smartphones and its notepad function.
For this method, each member would have different rows for each movement of traffic flow
and method of transportation. To indicate one single unit of traffic passing through a particular
movement, a ‘1’ would be typed into the phone. Immediately, problems were discover as
frequently selecting different rows on a smaller phone can be very difficult. Another problem
was observed was the possibility of miscounting data typed into the phone and translate onto
the spreadsheet. The advantages of this method are portability, ability to use in almost any
weather condition, ability to screenshot and send to a shared drive. However, the disadvantages
are heavily outweighed the advantages, therefore, this procedure was not chosen.
The third and final method (Figure 5) was using a website (Tally Counter Store, N.D.) on our
mobile devices. This tally website had the ability to count up and down from a pre-set value.
This website had the function to label each separate counter, enabling members to name each
movement and transportation method on the website. Buttons on this website were large
enough to easily add or takeaway accidental counts. Similar to the second test, the ease of use
and a total value printed on the screen fixes both issues of usability and human error from the
previous test. Using a smartphone also came with the advantage of saving results online

4
ensuring data would not be lost, the portability of carrying a phone and unaffected by all
moderate weather conditions.

Figure 5 - Example of Website Tally (South Approaches)

3.3. Method Evaluation

The three methods were discussed as a team, and as a conclusion, the third method using the
tally website was selected for the traffic survey. Using a website meaning no software or
application is needed to be downloaded. Since the internet from Monash was enough to
facilitate a strong connection to the website, this allowing all member to participate. At the
end of the survey, screenshots of the telly were sent to a shared Google Drive, to ensure all
the data would not be lost. Also, the layout of the website made recording data incredibly
easy to translate onto the summary spreadsheet.

4. Risk Assessment
4.1. Risk assessment
In order to meet key objectives of a project, the participants must consider risks and potential
problems might impacting the project quality and/or the safety of the participants. In Australia,
regardless of the size of a group, are all required by law to follow Occupational Health and
Safety (OHS) legislation and identify the potential risks and hazards involved in their project.
Classify the risk and hazard by the seriousness and find strategies to control or mitigate these
hazards. Therefore, for the traffic engineering survey carried out on the 17th September, Group
C carried out a risk assessment analysis prior to the data collection, to ensure safety of the
participant and enhance the accuracy of the results.
In Table 1, we have created a Risk Assessment Matrix (Table 1 – Risk Assessment Matrix) to
determine the risk based on the severity of causing injuries (or the degree of impact) and the
likelihood of the injuries will occurring.
Table 1 – Risk Assessment Matrix

Likelihood
Rare Unlikely Likely Very likely Almost certain
Fatal Medium High High Extreme Extreme
Severity Severe Medium Medium High High Extreme
Moderate Low Medium Medium High High

5
 Minor Low Low Medium Medium High
Negligible Low Low Low Medium Medium

The potential hazards associated with the survey could be divided into two main categories:
Hazards involving risk to the safety of the participants, and hazards involving risks to the
accuracy of the data.
4.2. Hazards involving risk to the safety of the participants
Prior to the data collection, participants must acknowledge the potential risks and impact of
the risks. These risks include the potential mental and physical consequences of conducting
the survey that the participants may face. Using the risk assessment matrix (Table 1), the
risks is categorised, and relative safety measure and control is applied contained the risks.
Table 2 - Risks involving the safety of the participants

Hazard Likelihood Consequence Severity Risks Risk control

Verbal abuse Rare Causing Moderate/ Low/ Carrying a survey
from distress and high Medium explanation letter,
neighbours fear providing
and appropriate advice
pedestrians to the participants
to deal with such
incidents
Physical Likely Serious Severe High Wearing high
Accidents physical visibility vests
injury (Figure 6),
standing on the
safest spots to
record the data
Extreme unlikely Getting ill Minor Low/ Appropriate
weather Medium clothing according
conditions the expected
weather conditions

4.3. Hazards involving risk to the accuracy of the data

Table 3 - Risks with Higher Degree of Control by Participants

Hazard Likelihood Consequence Severity Risks Risk control

Equipment Likely Inaccurate Moderate Medium Fully charging
malfunction data mobile phones or
any device that will
be used for data
collection, ensuring
that any applications
used for data
collection are
reliable and not
prone to crashing

6
 Ineffective Likely Loss of data, Moderate Medium Devising a plan B in
data Inaccurate case the initial
collection data method does not
methods work effectively,
Testing the methods
prior to the actual
data collection

The second category of risks, includes the ones that is affecting the data being recorded.
These risks could also be further categorised into two sub-categories. The risks over which
the participants have a higher degree of control (Table 3), and the risks over which the
participants have little to no degree of control (Table 4).
Although the participants have very little control to control the risks in the table below, it is
important to acknowledge these risks and apply risk mitigation control to reduce the impact
from these risks.
Table 4 - Risks with Low Degree of Control by Participants

Hazard Likelihood Consequence Severity Risks Risk control

Major car Unlikely Inaccurate data due Severe Medium Conducting the
accidents to the heavy traffic survey on a
occurred caused by the different day
while the accident (same exact
data is being time and day of
collected the week)
Extreme Unlikely Fewer vehicles Moderate Medium Conducting the
weather may travel on those survey on a
conditions days for safety different day
reasons which (same exact
would result in time and day of
inaccurate data the week)
Road works Likely Interrupted traffic Moderate Medium Conducting the
where the flow and survey on a
data is being unpredicted different day
collected movement from (same exact
road work vehicles time and day of
the week) and
extra care
working with
moving plants

5. Survey Outcome
The survey was conducted on Monday 17th September 2018, from 12:00pm to 1:30pm,
utilising the method as discussed above in Section 2. Across this period, the highest hourly
volume observed was between 12:00pm to 1:00pm. The survey was conducted with all four
group members, spread across the locations as outlined within the Site Safety Plan.

7
Whilst traffic flow for each approach remained relatively consistent over the survey period,
there were noticeable increases in activity for isolated intervals. Traffic arrivals were also
observed to be quite sporadic across each of the 15-minute intervals, with extended periods of
no arrivals followed by the arrival of a relatively large number of vehicles. Heavy vehicle and
bicycle traffic remained low throughout the survey’s duration.
The recording of pedestrian movements at the Southern Approach raised a predicament;
whilst all the observed pedestrians utilised the signalised crossing, many did not use it
correctly or safety, opting to cross before the signal had been activated due to the extended
periods of zero to little traffic. Thus, whilst these pedestrians were recorded as utilising the
crossing, it should be noted that many of them did so incorrectly.

Figure 6 - Team Members are Wearing High-visibility Vest on Site as Part of the OHS Requirements

-highest volumes
-general traffic conditions
-strange pedestrian movements
-Ideal weather conditions
-problems with data collection:
--pedestrian movements on southern approach – majority did not use crossing properly/jay-
walking
-survey method improvements:
--rotate through approaches to help maintain concentration

8
6. Data Presentation

Figure 7 - Total Traffic Approach Site B between 12:00 - 13:00

Houly Traffic Volumes for Cars on Monday 17 September

South Approach North Approach West Approach

600

500

400
Vehicles

300

200

100

Figure 8 - Hourly Traffic Volumes for Cars on Monday 17 September

9
 Hourly Traffic Volumes for Heavy Vehicles on Monday 17
September
South Approach North Approach West Approach

35

30

25
Vehicles

20

15

10

Figure 9 - Hourly Traffic Volumes for Heavy Vehicles on Monday 17 September

Hourly Traffic Volumes for Bikes on Monday 17 September

South Approach North Approach West Approach

14

12

10
Vehicles

Figure 10 - Hourly Traffic Volumes for Bikes on Monday 17 September

10
 Site B Total Traffic Volume on Monday 17 September
Site B Total Traffic Volume

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Figure 11 - Site B Total Traffic Volume on Monday 17 September

Hourly Traffic Volumes Across Five Days

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

1400

1200

1000
Vehicles

800

600

400

200

Figure 12 - Hourly Traffic Volumes Across Five Days

11
 Site B Transport Mode Breakdown for Monday 17 September
South Approach North Approach West Approach

4000

3500

3000

2500
Vehicles

2000

1500

1000

500

0
Cars Heavy Vehicles Bikes

Figure 13 - Site B Transport Mode Breakdown for Monday 17 September

Figure 7 - Hourly Traffic Volumes for Pedestrians on Monday 17 September

12
7. Intersection Performance Analysis

Figure 14 - Signalised Intersection Layout (Left) and Movement (right)

Table 5 - Signalised Signal Phase Movement

Phase A Phase B Phase C

Figure 15 - Signalised Signal Phase Diagram

13
Table 6 - Peak Hourly Time and Volume

Time Period (Peaks) Volume

Morning 8:30 am - 9:30 am 913 veh/hr
Surveyed 12:00 am - 1:00 pm 574 veh/hr
Evening 4:30 pm - 5:30 pm 833 veh/hr

Table 7 - Traffic Delay and Queue Length of Peak Hour Time for Existing Roundabout

Morning North West South

Traffic Delay (s) 8.11 4.10 6.59
Queue Length (veh) 1.28 0.14 0.41

Surveyed North West South

Traffic Delay (s) 4.83 4.26 4.59
Queue Length (veh) 0.34 0.18 0.22

Evening North West South

Traffic Delay (s) 5.14 6.31 4.77
Queue Length (veh) 0.34 0.62 0.32

Table 8 - Traffic Delay and Queue Length of Peak Hour Time for Planned Signalised T-Intersection

Morning Movement Avg Delay (s/veh) Queue Length (veh)

1 3 0.17
2 7 0.33
Traffic Light
3 7 0.93
Cycle time
4 14 2.41
30 s
5 13 0.56
6 7 0.71

Surveyed Movement Avg Delay (s/veh) Queue Length (veh)

1 3 0.22
2 7 0.39
Traffic Light
3 7 0.64
Cycle time
4 14 0.89
25 s
5 13 0.59
6 7 0.42

Evening Movement Avg Delay (s/veh) Queue Length (veh)

1 5 0.92
2 10 0.94
Traffic Light
3 10 0.99
Cycle time
4 16 0.67
30 s
5 17 1.33
6 9 0.54

14
Using the data collected on Monday 17th September at ‘Site B’, the above figures and tables
have been formulated. The proposed signalised T-intersection can be seen in Figure 14
depicting the lanes and all the designed movements. Using the saturated flow and the table in
APPENDIX HERE, the number and types of lane was chosen for each approach. The
movements residing in their respective phases can be seen visually on the road in Table 5,
and through a diagram in Figure 15. The different phases signal the movements that will be
available for vehicles to take during that period. Table 6 records the hour block period that
experiences peak traffic volume. These peaks include, morning peak, evening peak and the
peak within the time surveyed by the group. These specific peaks have their respective
volumes presented in the table. For each of the defined peaks, their respective traffic delay
and queue lengths were calculated and recorded for each of the three approaches to site B.
Finally, in contrast to the delays and queue lengths of the existing roundabout, the proposed
signalised T-intersection's average delay and vehicle queue length for each movement,
experiencing the three defined peak periods as seen in Table 8. Since the signalised T-
intersection will need traffic lights at each approach, the cycle time has been calculated. The
cycle time is the time is takes for all phases to be completed, due to the changing traffic flows
throughout the day, each peaks period has its own cycle time as seen in Table 8.

8. Evaluation of Results
-compare critical values such as queue length, delay etc for signalised and rounabouts
-talk about the benefits of the two and the disadvantages
-when roundabouts are preferable over signalised (less conflict points)
-one approach in our site (north) had a higher volume compared to the others
-considerable low cycle time
-talk about jwalkers
-benefit pedestrians
-talk about why in this case signal in better:
Why I think signalised intersection are prefrable in this case: see below

15
Although roundabouts are very efficient in areas where pedestrian crossings are not common
and traffic volumes are relatively low, they are not as effective as signalised intersections
when there are a significant number of crossings and high traffic volume from one of the
approaches. In site B, from the data it is evident that, the volume from the north approach is
significantly greater than the other two. In addition, there were a significant number of
crossings in the south approach at which the majority of cars exited the roundabout. While
there was a traffic light for pedestrians in there, the long waiting time for the pedestrian light
to turn green caused many pedestrians to illegally cross the road creating potential
medium/high risks.
-clears cars, users in a car will be okay waiting a tad longer, pedestrians need to cross asap
-for low veh. Flow, it is beneficial to install signals for pedestrians
-we observed j-walking, due to the unsafe design of roundabout for pedestrians

9. Conclusion
-this section can be read as a standalone document
(executive summary is often put at the start of a document) I could do the initial executive
summary once everything is done and then you guys can improve it.
we could also have a summary at the end of the document
Include:
 What was done
 Key findings from survey
 Analysis
 Comparisons of intersection performance (im assuming between signlised and non-
signalised)
 <2 pages
 May contains simple tables and graphs, no maths/working out in here (I do not think
that we’d need graphs for this part. This is supposed to be mainly on how it was done
and what we concluded by the end of it)

10. References
TALLY COUNTER STORE. N.D. Tally Counter [Online]. Available:
https://tallycounterstore.com/online-counter [Accessed 14 September 2018].

*Insert URL below*

16