Low-speed merging maneuvers performed within a free-flow stream are believed to trigger congestion. These accelerating moving bottlenecks introduce local constraints that can disturb the flow at a local or global scale. Low-speed merging maneuvers are also suspected to cause capacity drop. Using the kinematic wave theory, this paper explores the analytical solution of a simple first-order model when moving boundary conditions are introduced. The paper shows that shock waves initiated by low-speed merging maneuvers are a linear transformation of the moving boundary conditions, no matter the shape of the moving boundary condition. These results are then applied to typical situations to show that the interaction of two moving boundaries can modify the analytical solution of the problem. The results are then extended to multiple merging maneuvers to show that they can interact. Every possible interaction between two identical merging maneuvers is explored to identify the conditions that lead to global congestion. Finally, these results are used to propose an analytical formulation of the capacity drop for multiple merging maneuvers at a single location. It is shown that capacity drop is related to the demands on the minor and major streams and to the speed of the merging vehicle.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ElefteriadouL., RoessR. P., and McShaneW. R.Probabilistic Nature of Breakdown at Freeway Merge Junctions. In Transportation Research Record 1484, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1995, pp. 80–89.
2.
ElefteriadouL., HallF. L., BrilonW., RoessR. P., and RomanaM. G.Revisiting the Definition and Measurement of Capacity. In 5th International Symposium on Highway Capacity and Quality of Service, Yokohama, Japan, 2006.
3.
HallF. L., and Agyemang-DuahK.Freeway Capacity Drop and the Definition of Capacity. In Transportation Research Record 1320, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1991, pp. 91–98.
4.
PersaudB., YagarS., and BrownleeR.Exploration of the Breakdown Phenomenon in Freeway Traffic. In Transportation Research Record 1634, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998, pp. 64–69.
5.
LavalJ. A.Linking Synchronized Flow and Kinematic Waves. Proc. Traffic and Granular Flow, Springer, Berlin, 2005, pp. 521–526.
6.
ChungK., RudjanakanoknadJ., and CassidyM. J.Relation Between Traffic Density and Capacity Drop at Three Freeway Bottlenecks. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 41, No. 1, 2007, pp. 82–95.
7.
CassidyM. J., and BertiniR. L. Some Traffic Features at Freeway Bottlenecks. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 33, No. 1, 1999, pp. 25–42.
8.
BertiniR. L., and LealM. T.Empirical Study of Traffic Features at a Freeway Lane Drop. Journal of Transportation Engineering, Vol. 131, No. 6, 2005, pp. 397–407.
9.
CassidyM. J., and RudjanakanoknadJ.Increasing the Capacity of an Isolated Merge by Metering Its On-Ramp. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 10, 2005, pp. 896–913.
10.
AhnS., and CassidyM. J.Freeway Traffic Oscillations and Vehicle Lane-Change Maneuvers. In Proceedings of 17th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Pergamon, London, 2007, pp. 691–710.
11.
Hadj-SalemH., and PapageorgiouM.Ramp Metering Impact on Urban Corridor Traffic: Fields Results. Transportation Research Part A, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1995, pp. 303–319.
12.
PapageorgiouM., Hadj-SalemH., and MiddlehamF.ALINEA Local Ramp Metering: Summary of Fields Results. In Transportation Research Record 1603, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1997, pp. 90–98.
13.
CoifmanB., MishalaniR., WangC., and KrishnamurthyS.Impact of Lane-Change Maneuvers on Congested Freeway Segment Delays: Pilot Study. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1965, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2006, pp. 152–159.
14.
WangC., and CoifmanB.The Effect of Lane-Change Maneuvers on a Simplified Car-Following Theory. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 9, No. 3, 2008, pp. 523–535.
15.
DuretA., AhnS., and BuissonC.Spatiotemporal Analysis of Impacts of Lane Changing Consistent with Wave Propagation. Presented at 88th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2009.
16.
LighthillM. J., and WhithamG. B.On Kinematic Waves I: Flood Movement in Long Rivers; On Kinematic Waves II: A Theory of Traffic Flow on Long Crowded Roads. In Proceedings of the Royal Society, Vol. 229(A), 1955, pp. 281–345.
17.
RichardsP. I.Shockwaves in the Highway. Operations Research, Vol. 4, 1956, pp. 42–51.
18.
MauchM., and CassidyM. J.Freeway Traffic Oscillations: Observations and Predictions. In Proceedings of 15th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Pergamon, Adelaide, Australia, 2002, pp. 653–674.
19.
NewellG.A Simplified Theory of Kinematic Waves in Highway Traffic, I: General Theory; II: Queuing at Freeway Bottlenecks; III: Multi-Destination Flows. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 27, No. 4, 1993, pp. 281–313.
20.
PayneH. J.Models of Freeway Traffic and Control: Mathematical Models of Public Systems. In Simulation Council Proceedings Series, Vol. 1, 1971, pp. 51–61.
21.
LebacqueJ.-P., and LesortJ.-B.Macroscopic Traffic Flow Models: A Question of Order. Proc. 14th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Pergamon, Jerusalem, Israel, 1999, pp. 3–25.
22.
Del CastilloJ. M., PintadoP., and BenitezF. G.The Reaction Time of Drivers and the Stability of Traffic Flow. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 28, No. 1, 1994, pp. 35–60.
23.
DaganzoC. F.Requiem for a Second-Order Fluid Approximation of Traffic Flow. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1995, pp. 277–286.
24.
ZhangH. M.A Non Equilibrium Traffic Model Devoid of Gas-Like Behaviour. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2002, pp. 275–290.
25.
LeclercqL.Bounded Acceleration Close to Fixed and Moving Bottlenecks. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 41, No. 3, 2007, pp. 309–319.
26.
LavalJ. A., and DaganzoC.Lane Changing in Traffic Streams. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 40, No. 3, 2006, pp. 251–264.
27.
LavalJ., and LeclercqL.Microscopic Modeling of the Relaxation Phenomenon Using a Macroscopic Lane-Changing Model. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 42, No. 6, 2008, pp. 511–522.
28.
DuretA., AhnS., and BuissonC.Passing Rates to Measure Relaxation and Impact of Lane-Changing in Queue. Computer-Aided Civil and Infrastructure Engineering, Special Issue. In press.
29.
DaganzoC. F., and LavalJ. A.Moving Bottlenecks: A Numerical Method That Converges in Flows. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 9, 2005, pp. 855–863.
30.
BrackstoneM., and McDonaldM.Car-Following: A Historical Review. Transportation Research Part F, Vol. 2, No. 4, 1999, pp. 221–224.
31.
NewellG.A Simplified Car-Following Theory: A Lower-Order Model. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 36, No. 3, 2002, pp. 195–205.
32.
AhnS., CassidyM. J., and LavalJ. A.Verification of a Simplified Car-Following Theory. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 38, No. 5, 2004, pp. 431–440.
33.
DuretA., BuissonC., and ChiabautN.Estimating Individual Speed–Spacing Relationship and Assessing Ability of Newell's Car-Following Model to Reproduce Trajectories. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2088, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008, pp. 188–197.
34.
DaganzoC. F.A Variational Formulation of Kinematic Waves: Basic Theory and Complex Boundary Conditions. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 2, 2005, pp. 187–196.
35.
DaganzoC. F.A Variational Formulation of Kinematic Waves: Solution Methods. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 39, No. 10, 2005, pp. 934–950.
36.
ChiabautN., BuissonC., and LeclercqL.Fundamental Diagram Estimation Through Passing Rate Measurements in Congestion. IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems, Vol. 10, No. 2, 2009, pp. 355–359.
37.
LeclercqL.Hybrid Approaches to the Solutions of the Lighthill–Whitham–Richards Model. Transportation Research Part B, Vol. 41, No. 7, 2007, pp. 701–709.
38.
LebacqueJ.-P.A Finite Acceleration Scheme for the First-Order Macroscopic Traffic Flow Models. Proc. 8th IFAC Symposium on Transportation Systems, Pergamon, Chania, Greece, Vol. 2, 1997, pp. 805–901.
39.
GiorgiF., LeclercqL., and LesortJ.-B.A Traffic Flow Model for Urban Traffic Analysis: Extensions of the LWR Model for Urban and Environmental Applications. Proc. 15th International Symposium on Transportation and Traffic Theory, Pergamon, Adelaide, Australia, 2002, pp. 393–415.
