Level of Service

1
Chapter 6
Highway Capacity and Level of Service Analysis
Seek to measure Highway Performance (Congestion).
Needed for:
Highway construction
Congestion relief
Problems:
Wide variation of highway conditions:
Different roadway types (Freeway, multilane, etc.)
Number of lanes and width of lanes
Vehicle mix (cars vs. trucks)
Shoulder widths
Temporal variation in traffic flow over the day and
over the peak hour
6 LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPT

The level of service provides a qualitative ranking of the
traffic operational conditions experienced by users of a
facility
Highway Capacity Manual defines the LOS categories for
freeways and multilane highways as follows:
Level of Service A free-flow conditions (traffic operates at

free flow speeds as defined in Chapter 5). Individual users
are virtually unaffected by the presence of others in the
traffic stream. Freedom to select desired speeds and to
maneuver within the traffic stream is extremely high. The
general level of comfort and convenience provided to
drivers is excellent.
Level of Service B allows speeds at or near free-flow speeds,

but the presence of other users in the traffic stream begins
to be noticeable. Freedom to select desired speeds is
relatively unaffected, but there is a slight decline in the
freedom to maneuver within the traffic stream relative to
LOS A.
Level of Service C speeds at or near free-flow speeds, but the

freedom to maneuver is noticeably restricted (lane changes require
careful attention on the part of drivers). The general level of comfort
and convenience declines significantly at this level. Disruptions in the
traffic stream, such as an incident (for example, vehicular accident or
disablement), can result in significant queue formation and vehicular
delay. In contrast, the effect of incidents at LOS A or LOS B are
minimal, and cause only minor delay in the immediate vicinity of the
event.
Level of Service D conditions where speeds begin to decline

slightly with increasing flow. The freedom to maneuver
becomes more restricted and drivers experience reductions
in physical and psychological comfort. Incidents can
generate lengthy queues because the higher density
associated with this LOS provides little space to absorb
disruption in the traffic flow.
Level of Service E LOS E represents operating conditions at

or near the roadways capacity. Even minor disruptions to
the traffic stream, such as vehicles entering from a ramp or
vehicles changing lanes, can cause delays as other vehicles
give way to allow such maneuvers. In general,
maneuverability is extremely limited and drivers experience
considerable physical and psychological discomfort.
Level of Service F describes a breakdown in vehicular flow.

Queues form quickly behind points in the roadway where
the arrival flow rate temporarily exceeds the departure rate,
as determined by the roadways capacity (Chapter 5).
Vehicles typically operate at low speeds in these conditions
and are often required to come to a complete stop, usually
in a cyclic fashion. The cyclic formation and dissipation of
queues is a key characterization of LOS F.
10
LOS A
LOS B
12
LOS C
LOS D
14
LOS E
LOS F
16
7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION

7.1 Base Conditions
lane widths,
lateral clearances,
access frequency (non access controlled highways),
terrain;
traffic stream conditions such as the effects of heavy
vehicles (large trucks, buses and RVs), and
driver population characteristics.
Process:
1. Free-Flow Speed
The free-flow speed (FFS) is the mean speed of traffic as
measured when flow rates are low to moderate (specific values
are given under the individual sections for each roadway type).
18
2. Analysis Flow Rate

The highest volume in a 24-hour period (the peak-hour
volume) is used for V in traffic analysis computations.
However, this hourly volume is adjusted for:
The temporal variation of traffic demand within the
analysis hour,
the impacts due to heavy vehicles and,
characteristics of the driving population.
3. Determine LOS
8 BASIC FREEWAY SEGMENTS

8.1 Base Conditions and Capacity
3.6 m (12-ft) (minimum lane widths,
1.8 m (6-ft) minimum right-shoulder clearance between
edge of travel lane and objects (utility poles, retaining
walls, etc.) that influence driver behavior,
0.6 m (2-ft) minimum median lateral clearance,
only passenger cars in the traffic stream,
5 or more lanes in each travel direction (urban areas only),
3 km (2-mi) or greater interchange spacing,
level terrain (no grades greater than 2%), and
20
a driver population of mostly familiar roadway users.

Capacity:
Table 6.2 The Relationship Between Free-Flow Speed and
Capacity on Basic Freeway Segments
Free-Flow
Speed
(mi/h)
75
70
65
60
55
Capacity
(pc/h/ln)
2400
2400
2350
2300
2250
Free-Flow
Speed
(km/h)
120
110
100
90
Capacity
(pc/h/ln)
2400
2350
2300
2250
8.2 Service Measure

The service measure for basic freeway segments is density.
Density, as discussed in Chapter 5, is typically measured in
terms of passenger cars per mile per lane (pc/mi/ln)
(pc/km/ln), and therefore provides a good measure of the
relative mobility of individual vehicles in the traffic stream.
Recalling Eq. 5.14 from Chapter 5,
q = uk
Where:
q = flow in veh/h, u = speed in mi/h (km/h) and,
k = density in veh/mi (veh/km).
(6.1)
22
So density is therefore calculated as flow divided by speed.

Once the flow and speed values have been determined
according to the given conditions, a density can be
calculated and then referenced in Table 6.1 or Fig. 6.2 to
arrive at a level of service for the freeway segment.
Table 6.1 LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments

Criteria
Maximum density (pc/mi/ln)
Average speed (mi/h)
Maximum v/c
Maximum service flow rate
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
LOS
C
26
70.6
0.76
35
62.2
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1350
1830
2170
2400
FFS = 70 mi/h
11
18
70.0
70.0
0.32
0.53
26
68.2
0.74
35
61.5
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1260
1770
2150
2400
FFS = 65 mi/h
11
18
65.0
65.0
0.30
0.50
26
64.6
0.71
35
59.7
0.89
45
52.2
1.00
1170
1680
2090
2350
FFS = 60 mi/h
11
18
60.0
60.0
0.29
0.47
26
60.0
0.68
35
57.6
0.88
45
51.1
1.00
1080
1560
2020
2300
FFS = 55 mi/h
11
18
55.0
55.0
0.27
0.44
26
55.0
0.64
35
54.7
0.85
45
50.0
1.00
1430
1910
2250
A
B
FFS = 75 mi/h
11
18
75.0
74.8
0.34
0.56
820
770
710
660
600
990
NOTE: The exact mathematical relationship between density and v/c has not always been maintained at LOS boundaries because of the use of rounded values.
Density is the primary determinant of LOS. The speed criterion is the speed at maximum density for a given LOS. LOS F is characterized by highly unstable and
variable traffic flow. Prediction of accurate flow rate, density, and speed at LOS F is difficult.
Figure 6.1 Basic Freeway Segment Speed-Flow Curves and

Level of Service Criteria.
How reasonable is using just density to measure LOS?
Car drivers believe worse level of service if:
Higher density
Only 4-lane freeway
Between 21 and 65 years old
College graduate
Do not use freeway every day
Do not regularly drive to work
Lower average speed
Higher standard deviation for speed
Higher flow
Higher percentage of trucks

Bad visibility (fog etc.)
Higher standard deviation of headways
Truckers believe worse level of service if:

Drive less than 40,000 miles/year
Higher density
Only 4-lane freeway
Higher standard deviation for speed
Higher standard deviation of headways
Lower percentage of trucks
8.3 Determining Free-Flow Speed

The FFS for basic freeway segments is the mean speed of
passenger cars operating in flow rates up to 1300 passenger
cars per hour per lane (pc/h/ln).
If the FFS is to be estimated rather than measured, the
following equation can be used, which accounts for the
roadway characteristics of lane width, right-shoulder lateral
clearance, number of lanes, and interchange density.
FFS = BFFS fLW fLC fN fID
(6.2)
Where:
FFS = estimated free-flow speed in mi/h (km/h),
BFFS = estimated free-flow speed, in mi/h (km/h), for
base conditions,
fLW = adjustment for lane width in mi/h (km/h),
fLC = adjustment for lateral clearance in mi/h (km/h),
fN = adjustment for number of lanes in mi/h (km/h), and
fID = adjustment for interchange density in mi/h (km/h).
The BFFS is assumed to be :
110 km/h (70 mi/h) for freeways in urban areas, and
120 km/h (75 mi/h) for freeways in rural areas.
Lane Width Adjustment

When lane widths are narrower than the base 3.6m (12 ft),
the adjustment factor fLW is used to reflect the impact on
free-flow speed.
Table 6.3 Adjustment for Lane Width
Lane Width
(ft)
12
11
10
Reduction in Free-Flow
Speed, fLW (mi/h)
0.0
1.9
6.6
Lateral Clearance Adjustment
When obstructions are closer than 1.8 m (6 ft) (at the roadside)
from the traveled pavement the adjustment factor fLC is used to
reflect the impact on FFS.
Table 6.4 Adjustment for Right-Shoulder Lateral Clearance
RightShoulder
Lateral
Clearance (ft)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Reduction in Free-Flow Speed, fLC (mi/h)

Lanes in One Direction
2
0.0
0.6
1.2
1.8
2.4
3.0
3.6
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Number of Lanes Adjustment

A freeway segment with five or more lanes in a direction is the
base condition with respect to free-flow speed. Adjustments in
FFS for fewer directional lanes are shown in Table 6.5.
Table 6.5 Adjustment for Number of Lanes on Urban Freeways
Number of Lanes
Speed, fN
(One Direction)
mi/h
km/h
0.0
0.0
5
4
1.5
2.4
3
3.0
4.8
2
4.5
7.3
Note: For all rural freeway segments, fN is 0.0.
Interchange Density Adjustment

When interchanges are spaced more frequently than one every
two miles (one every 3.2 km), the traffic disturbances generated
from merging and diverging movements will reduce the FFS.
Table 6.6 Adjustment for Interchange Density
Interchanges per
Mile
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
Reduction in FreeFlow Speed, fID (mi/h)

0.0
1.3
2.5
3.7
5.0
6.3
7.5
(6.2)
8.4 Determining Analysis Flow Rate

The analysis flow rate is calculated using the following
equation.
vp
V
PHF N f HV f p
(6.3)
Where:
vp = 15-min passenger-car equivalent flow rate (pc/h/ln),
V = hourly volume (veh/h),
PHF = peak-hour factor,
N = number of lanes,
fHV = heavy-vehicle adjustment factor, and
fp = driver population factor.
Peak-Hour Factor
To account for this varying arrival rate, the peak 15-minute
vehicle arrival rate within the analysis hour is used for practical
traffic analysis purposes.
8.4.1
PHF =
V
V
V15 4 SF
(6.4)
Where:
PHF = peak-hour factor,
V = hourly volume for hour of analysis,
V15 = maximum 15-min flow rate within peak hour,
4
= number of 15-min periods per hour.
SF= service flow is the actual rate of flow for the peak 15min period expanded to an hourly volume and expressed
in vehicles per hour.
Equation 6.4 indicates that the further the PHF is from unity,
the more peaked or nonuniform the traffic flow during the hour.
Example, consider two roads both of which have a peak-hour
volume, V, of 1800 veh/h. The first road has 600 vehicles
arriving in the highest 15-min interval and the second road has
500 vehicles arriving in the highest 15-min interval.
The first road has a more nonuniform flow, as indicated by a
PHF of 0.75 [1800/(600 4)] that is further from unity than the
second roads PHF of 0.90 [1800/(500 4)].
8.4.2
Heavy Vehicle Adjustment
Large trucks, buses and recreational vehicles have

performance characteristics (slow acceleration and inferior
braking) and dimensions (length, height, and width) that
have an adverse effect on roadway capacity.
The adjustment factor fHV is used to translate the traffic
stream from base to prevailing conditions.
The fHV correction term is determined by first getting the

passenger-car equivalent (PCE) for each large truck, bus,
and/or recreational vehicle in the traffic stream.
These values represent the number of passenger cars that
would consume the same amount of roadway capacity as a
single large truck, bus, or recreational vehicle.
These passenger-car equivalents are denoted ET for large
trucks and buses, and ER for recreational vehicles, and are a
function of roadway grades because steep grades will tend
to magnify the poor performance of heavy vehicles as well
as the sight distance problems caused by their larger
dimensions (the visibility afforded to drivers in vehicles
following heavy vehicles).
For segments of freeway that contain a mix of grades, an

extended segment analysis can be used as long as no single
grade is steep enough or long enough to significantly impact
the overall operations of the segment.
As a guideline, an extended segment analysis can be used
for freeway segments where no single grade that is less than
3% is more than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) long, or no single grade
that is 3% or greater is longer than 0.25 mi (0.4 km).
If an extended segment analysis is used, the terrain must be
generally classified according to the following definitions:
Level Terrain Any combination of horizontal and vertical

alignment permitting heavy vehicles to maintain approximately
the same speed as passenger cars. This generally includes short
grades of no more than 2%.
Rolling Terrain Any combination of horizontal and vertical
alignment that causes heavy vehicles to reduce their speed
substantially below those of passenger cars but does not cause
heavy vehicles to operate at their limiting speed for the given
terrain for any significant length of time or at frequent intervals
(not having Fnet(V) = 0 due to high grade resistance as
illustrated in Fig. 2.6).
Mountainous Terrain Any combination of horizontal and vertical
alignment that causes heavy vehicles to operate at their limiting
speed for significant distances or at frequent intervals.
Table 6.7 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Extended

Freeway Segments
Factor
ET (trucks and buses)
ER (RVs)
Level
1.5
1.2
Type of Terrain
Rolling Mountainous
2.5
4.5
2.0
4.0
Any grade that does not meet the conditions for an extended
segment analysis must be analyzed as a separate segment
because of its significant impact on traffic operations. In
these cases, grade-specific PCE values must be used.
Table 6.8 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Trucks and Buses on Specific Upgrades
Upgrade
(%)
Length
(mi)
<2
All
0.0-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00-1.50
> 1.50
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00-1.50
> 1.50
0.0-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00
0.00-0.25
> 0.35-0.30
> 0.30-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
>1.00
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.30
> 0.30-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00
2-3
> 3-4
> 4-5
> 5-6
>6
2
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
5.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
7.0
4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
3.5
1.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
ET
Percentage of Trucks and Buses
5
6
8
10
15
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.5
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.0
4.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.0
2.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
4.5
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
5.5
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
20
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.5
2.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
25
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.5
2.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Table 6.9 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for RVs on Specific Upgrades
Upgrade
(%)
Length
(mi)
Length
(km)
All
0.00-0.50
> 0.50
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50
All
0.0-0.8
0.8
0.0-0.4
0.4-0.8
0.8
0.0-0.4
0.4-0.8
0.8
0.0-0.4
0.4-0.8
0.8
> 2-3
> 3-4
> 4-5
>5
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
2
1.2
1.2
3.0
1.2
2.5
3.0
2.5
4.0
4.5
4.0
6.0
6.0
4
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.2
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.0
3.5
3.0
4.0
4.5
5
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.2
2.0
2.5
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
4.0
4.0
ER
Percentage of RVs
6
8
10
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.2
1.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
3.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.5
3.0
3.0
4.5
3.5
3.0
15
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.5
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
20
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
25
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
Table 6.10 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Trucks and Buses on Specific Downgrades
Downgrade
(%)
Length
(mi)
Length
(km)
<4
4-5
4-5
> 5-6
> 5-6
>6
>6
All
4
>4
4
>4
4
>4
All
6.4
> 6.4
6.4
> 6.4
6.4
> 6.4
5
1.5
1.5
2.0
1.5
5.5
1.5
7.5
ET
Percentage of Trucks
10
15
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
4.0
4.0
1.5
1.5
6.0
5.5
20
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
3.0
1.5
4.5
Sometimes it is necessary to determine the cumulative

effect on traffic operations of several significant grades in
succession. For this situation, a distance-weighted average
may be used if all grades are less than 4% or the total
combined length of the grades is less than 4000 ft.
Example, a 2% upgrade for 1000 ft (305 m) followed
immediately by a 3% upgrade for 2,000 ft (610 m) would
use the equivalency factor for a 2.67% upgrade [(21000+3
2000)/3000] for 3000 ft (914 m) or 0.568 mi.
For information on additional analysis situations of
composite grades, refer to the Highway Capacity Manual
[Transportation Research Board 2000].
Once the appropriate equivalency factors have been obtained,

the heavy vehicle adjustment factor fHV is:
f HV =
1
1 + PT ET 1 + PR E R 1
(6.5)
Where:
fHV = heavy-vehicle adjustment factor,
PT = proportion trucks and buses in the traffic stream,
PR = proportion recreational vehicles in the traffic stream,
ET = passenger car equivalency for trucks and buses, from
Tables 6.7, 6.8 and/or 6.10), and
ER = passenger car equivalency for recreational vehicles,
from Tables 6.7, and/or 6.9).
8.4.3
Driver Population Adjustment
Under base conditions, the traffic stream is assumed to

consist of regular weekday drivers and commuters.
Such drivers have a high familiarity with the roadway and
generally maneuver and respond to the maneuvers of other
drivers in a safe and predictable fashion.
But weekend drivers or recreational drivers are a problem.
Such drivers can cause a significant reduction in roadway
capacity relative to the base condition of having only
familiar drivers.
To account for the composition of the driver population, the

fp adjustment factor is used and its recommended range is
0.85 1.00.
Normally, the analyst should select a value of 1.00 for
primarily commuter (or familiar driver) traffic streams. But
for other driver populations (for example, a large
percentage of tourists), the loss in roadway capacity can
vary from 1 to 15%.
The exact value of the driver population correction is
dependent on local conditions and requires data collection
to determine the exact percentage reduction.
8.5 Calculating Density and Determining LOS

Using the alternative notation to Eq. 6.1 (q = uk):
D
vp
S
Where:
D = density in pc/mi/ln,
vp = flow rate in pc/h/ln, and
S = average passenger-car speed in mi/h
(from Figure 6.2).
(6.6)
S is
not

6.3.6 Relationship of a Maximum Service Flow (MSF) and

Level of Service (LOS)
Table 6.1 provides the level of service corresponding to
maximum service flows, traffic densities and speeds.
Table 6.1 shows that each level of service has a maximum
volume-to-capacity ratio that corresponds to the maximum
service flow rate.
Maximum service flow (MSFi):
MSFi = cj x (v/c)i
(6.7)
MSFi = maximum service flow rate per lane for level of service
i under ideal conditions in pcphpl. In other words can be
defined as the highest service flow that can be achieved while
maintaining the specified level of service i, assuming ideal
roadway conditions.
(v/c)i = maximum volume-to-capacity ratio associated with
level of service i for a specified number of freeway lanes.
cj= per-lane capacity under ideal conditions for a freeway with
a specified number of lanes j. cj for four-lane freeways (two
lanes in each direction) and six or more lanes is 2200 pcphpl
and 2300 pcphpl respectively. Note that the value of c j equals
the maximum service flow rate at LOS E in Table 6.1 because
the maximum volume-to-capacity ratio at LOS E is equal to

one [i.e. (v/c)E = 1]
Relationship of a maximum service flow and level of service:
SFi= MSFi x N x fw x fHV x fp
SFi= V15 x 4
(6.8)
(see 6.4)
Where:
SF is the service flow rate (veh/h) for level of service i under
prevailing conditions for N lanes (in one direction) in vehicles
per hour
fw is a factor to adjust for the effects of less than ideal lane

widths and/or lateral clearances (distance from the roadway
edge to objects on the side of the roadway)
fHV is a factor to adjust for the effect of heavy vehicles in the
traffic stream
fp is a factor to adjust for the effect of nonideal driver
populations
Combine Equations 6.7 & 6.8:
SFi = cj x (v/c)i x N x fw x fHV x fp (6.9)
LECTURE WEEK 2
EXAMPLE 6.1
A six-lane urban freeway (three lanes in each direction) is on
rolling terrain with a 113 km/h (70 mph) free-flow speed,
3.3 m (11-ft) lanes, with obstructions 0.6m (2 ft) from the
right edge of the traveled pavement, and 1.5 interchanges per
km (mile). The traffic stream consists of primarily
commuters. A directional weekday peak-hour volume of 2200
vehicles is observed with 700 vehicles arriving in the most
congested 15-min period. If the traffic stream has 15% large
trucks and buses and no recreational vehicles, determine the
level of service.
SOLUTION
Determine the free-flow speed:
With:
BFFS = 70 mi/h (urban freeway)...would be 75 mi/h if
rural
Sub-standard lane width:

fLW = 1.9 mi/h (Table 6.3)
Lane Width
(ft)
12
11
10
Speed, fLW (mi/h)
0.0
1.9
6.6
Sub-standard lateral clearance:

fLC = 1.6 mi/h (Table 6.4)
Table 6.4 Adjustment for Right-Shoulder Lateral Clearance
RightShoulder
Lateral
Clearance (ft)
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Reduction in Free-Flow Speed, fLC (mi/h)

Lanes in One Direction
2
0.0
0.6
1.2
1.8
2.4
3.0
3.6
0.0
0.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
2.0
2.4
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
Number of lanes:
fN = 3.0 mi/h (Table 6.5)
Table 6.5 Adjustment for Number of Lanes on Urban Freeways
Number of Lanes
Speed, fN
(One Direction)
mi/h
km/h
0.0
0.0
5
4
1.5
2.4
3
3.0
4.8
2
4.5
7.3
Interchange density:
fID = 5.0 mi/h (Table 6.6)
Table 6.6 Adjustment for Interchange Density
Interchanges per
Mile
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
Reduction in FreeFlow Speed, fID (mi/h)

0.0
1.3
2.5
3.7
5.0
6.3
7.5
FFS = 70 1.9 1.6 3.0 5.0 = 58.5 mi/h

With:
BFFS = 70 mi/h (urban freeway)
fLC = 1.6 mi/h (Table 6.4)
fN = 3.0 mi/h (Table 6.5)
fID = 5.0 mi/h (Table 6.6)
FFS = 70 1.9 1.6 3.0 5.0 = 58.5 mi/h
Determine the flow rate from Eq. 6.3.

vp
V
PHF N f HV f p
With:
PHF
2200
0.786
700 4
N = 3 (given)
fp = 1.0 (commuters)
ET = 2.5 (rolling terrain, Table 6.7)

Freeway Segments
Factor
ER (RVs)
Level
1.5
1.2
Type of Terrain
Rolling Mountainous
2.5
4.5
2.0
4.0
From Eq. 6.5:

f HV =
1
= 0.816
1 + 0.15 2.5 1
with PT = 0.15
So,
vp
2200
1143 .4 1144
0.786 3 0.816 1.0
pc/h/ln
From Fig. 6.2:

For a flow rate of 1144 and a FFS of 58.5 mi/h yields LOS C.

Or, using 58.5 from Fig. 6.2.

Density from Eq. 6.6.
D
1144
19.56
58.5
pc/mi/ln
From Table 6.1, it can be seen that this corresponds to LOS C.

(18.0 [max density for LOS B] < 19.56 < 26.0 [max density for
LOS C]).
Thus, this freeway segment operates at level of service C.

Criteria
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
LOS
C
26
70.6
0.76
35
62.2
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1350
1830
2170
2400
FFS = 70 mi/h
11
18
70.0
70.0
0.32
0.53
26
68.2
0.74
35
61.5
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1260
1770
2150
2400
FFS = 65 mi/h
11
18
65.0
65.0
0.30
0.50
26
64.6
0.71
35
59.7
0.89
45
52.2
1.00
1170
1680
2090
2350
FFS = 60 mi/h
11
18
60.0
60.0
0.29
0.47
26
60.0
0.68
35
57.6
0.88
45
51.1
1.00
1080
1560
2020
2300
FFS = 55 mi/h
11
18
55.0
55.0
0.27
0.44
26
55.0
0.64
35
54.7
0.85
45
50.0
1.00
1430
1910
2250
A
B
FFS = 75 mi/h
11
18
75.0
74.8
0.34
0.56
820
770
710
660
600
990
EXAMPLE 6.2
Consider the freeway and traffic conditions in Example 6.1. At
some point further along the roadway there is a 6% upgrade
that is 1.5 mi long. All other characteristics are the same as in
Example 6.1. What is the level of service of this portion of the
roadway and how many vehicles can be added before the
roadway reaches capacity (assuming that the proportion of
vehicle types and the peak-hour factor remain constant)?
SOLUTION
To determine the LOS of this segment of the freeway, we note
that all adjustment factors are the same as those in Example 6.1
except fHV, which must now be determined using an
equivalency factor, ET, drawn from the specific upgrade tables
(in this case Table 6.8).
From Table 6.8, with 15% large trucks and buses, ET = 3.5.
Table 6.8 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Trucks and Buses on Specific Upgrades
Upgrade
(%)
Length
(mi)
<2
All
0.0-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00-1.50
> 1.50
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00-1.50
> 1.50
0.0-0.25
> 0.25-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00
0.00-0.25
> 0.35-0.30
> 0.30-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
>1.00
0.00-0.25
> 0.25-0.30
> 0.30-0.50
> 0.50-0.75
> 0.75-1.00
> 1.00
2-3
> 3-4
> 4-5
> 5-6
>6
So,
2
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
1.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
5.0
2.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
7.0
4
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
3.5
1.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.0
3.0
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
ET
Percentage of Trucks and Buses
5
6
8
10
15
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.5
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.0
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
3.0
3.0
4.5
4.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
5.0
4.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.5
2.0
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.0
2.5
4.0
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
4.5
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
5.0
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
5.5
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
20
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.5
2.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
25
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
2.0
2.0
2.5
2.5
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.0
3.5
2.0
2.5
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
f HV =
1
= 0.727
1 + 0.15 3.5 1
(down from 0.816 in Example 6.1)

pc/h/ln
(up from 1144 in Example 6.1)
vp
2200
1283.3 1284
0.786 3 0.727 1.0
The average passenger car speed remains 58.5 mi/h (still on the
flat portion of the curve in Fig. 6.3), thus
D
1284
21.95
58.5
pc/mi/ln (19.56 in Example 6.1)
which still gives LOS C from Fig 6.3 and Table 6.1.

To determine how many vehicles can be added before

capacity is reached, the hourly volume at capacity must be
computed.
Recall that capacity corresponds to a volume-to-capacity
ratio of 1.0 (the threshold between LOS E and LOS F).

Criteria
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
LOS
C
26
70.6
0.76
35
62.2
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1350
1830
2170
2400
FFS = 70 mi/h
11
18
70.0
70.0
0.32
0.53
26
68.2
0.74
35
61.5
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1260
1770
2150
2400
FFS = 65 mi/h
11
18
65.0
65.0
0.30
0.50
26
64.6
0.71
35
59.7
0.89
45
52.2
1.00
1170
1680
2090
2350
FFS = 60 mi/h
11
18
60.0
60.0
0.29
0.47
26
60.0
0.68
35
57.6
0.88
45
51.1
1.00
1080
1560
2020
2300
FFS = 55 mi/h
11
18
55.0
55.0
0.27
0.44
26
55.0
0.64
35
54.7
0.85
45
50.0
1.00
1430
1910
2250
A
B
FFS = 75 mi/h
11
18
75.0
74.8
0.34
0.56
820
770
710
660
600
990
The maximum service flow rate that can be accommodated

for a free-flow-speed of 58.5 mi/h is 2285 pc/h/ln (by linear
interpolation of Table 6.1).
At 55mi/h, 2250; at 60mi/h, 2300.
Interpolating: X/50 = 3.5/5 which gives X=35,
so 2250+35=2285.
Eq. 6.6 is used to solve for the hourly volume based upon the
maximum service flow rate,
vp
V
PHF N f HV f p
2285
V
0.786 3 0.727 1.0
which gives V = 3917 veh/h.

This means that about 1717 vehicles (3917 2200) can be
added to the peak hour before capacity is reached.
Note that the assumption that the peak-hour factor would
remain constant as the roadway approaches capacity is not
very realistic. In practice it is observed that, as a roadway
approaches capacity, the PHF gets closer to 1.
CE 361
In-Class Design Problem #6: Freeway level of service
A four-lane urban freeway is located on rolling terrain, has

12-ft lanes, no lateral obstructions within 6 ft of the
pavement edges, and an interchange every 2 miles. The
traffic stream consists of cars, buses, and large trucks (no
recreational vehicles). A weekday directional peak-hour
volume of 1800 vehicles (familiar users) is observed with
700 arriving in the most congested 15-min period. If a
level of service no worse than D is desired, determine the
maximum number of large trucks and buses that can be
present in the peak-hour traffic stream and the traffic
density.
9 MULTILANE HIGHWAYS
Similar to freeways in most respects, except:
vehicles may enter or leave the roadway at at-grade
intersections and driveways,
multilane highways may or may not be divided (by a barrier
or median separating opposing directions of flow), whereas
freeways are always divided,
traffic signals may be present,
design standards (such as design speeds) are sometimes
lower than those for freeways, and
the visual setting and development along multilane

highways is usually more distracting to drivers than in the
freeway case.
Multilane highways are usually four or six lanes
(both directions),
have posted speed limits between 40 and 60 mi/h (65
and 100 km/h), and
can have physical medians, medians that are twoway left-turn-lanes (TWLTLs), or opposing
directional volumes that may not be divided by a
median at all.
Procedure will be valid only for sections of highway that are

not significantly influenced by large queue formations and
dissipations resulting from traffic signals (this is generally
taken as having traffic signals spaced 2.0 mi [3.2 km] apart or
more),
do not have significant on-street parking,
do not have bus stops with high usage, and
do not have significant pedestrian activity.
Figure 6.5 Example Multilane Highways (divided and undivided)
Table 6.11 LOS Criteria for Multilane Highways

LOS
Free-Flow
Speed
60 mi/h
55 mi/h
50 mi/h
45 mi/h
Criteria
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
11 18
26 35
40
60.0 60.0 59.4 56.7 55.0
0.30 0.49 0.70 0.90 1.00
660 1080 1550 1980 2200
11 18
26 35
41
55.0 55.0 54.9 52.9 51.2
0.29 0.47 0.68 0.88 1.00
600
990 1430 1850 2100
11 18
26 35
43
50.0 50.0 50.0 48.9 47.5
0.28 0.45 0.65 0.86 1.00
550
900 1300 1710 2000
11 18
26 35
45
45.0 45.0 45.0 44.4 42.2
0.26 0.43 0.62 0.82 1.00
490
810 1170 1550 1900
Figure 6.6 Multilane Highway Speed-Flow Curves and Level of Service

Criteria.
9.1
Base Conditions and Capacity
12-ft minimum lane widths,

12-ft minimum total lateral clearance from roadside
objects (right shoulder and median) in the travel direction,
only passenger cars in the traffic stream,
no direct access points along the roadway,
a divided highway,
level terrain (no grades greater than 2%),
a driver population of mostly familiar roadway users, and
a free-flow speed of 60 mi/h or more.
As was the case with the freeway level of service analysis,

adjustments will have to be made when non-base conditions
are encountered.
The capacity, c, for multilane highway segments, in pc/h/ln is
given in Table 6.12. From Table 6.11, again note that these
capacity values correspond to the maximum service flow rate
at LOS E and a v/c of 1.0.
Table 6.12 The Relationship Between Free-Flow Speed and

Capacity on Multilane Highway Segments
Free-Flow Speed
mi/h
60
55
50
45
Capacity
(pc/h/ln)
2200
2100
2000
1900
9.2 Service Measure

Density is again the service measure for determining level
of service for multilane highways.
Note, unlike freeways, the density threshold for LOS E
varies by speed for multilane highways, as can be seen in
Table 6.11.
The density thresholds for LOS A-D are the same for
multilane highways and freeways.
9.3 Determining Free-Flow Speed

The FFS for multilane highways is the mean speed of
passenger cars operating in flow rates up to 1400 passenger
cars per hour per lane (pc/h/ln).
If the FFS is to be estimated rather than measured, the
following equation can be used, which accounts for the
roadway characteristics of lane width, lateral clearance, the
presence (or lack) of a median, and access frequency.
FFS = BFFS f LW f LC f M f A
(6.7)
Where:
FFS = estimated free-flow speed in mi/h,
BFFS = estimated free-flow speed, in mi/h, for base
conditions,
fLW = adjustment for lane width in mi/h,
fLC = adjustment for lateral clearance in mi/h,
fM = adjustment for median type in mi/h, and
fA = adjustment for the number of access points along the
roadway in mi/h.
Base free-flow speed (BFFS):

7mi/h higher than the speed limit for roads posted
40 and 45mi/h
5 mi/h higher than the speed limit for roads posted
50 mi/h and above
9.3.1
Lane Width Adjustment
The same lane width adjustment factor values are used for
multilane highways as are used for freeways. Thus, Table 6.3
should be used for multilane highways as well.
Lane Width
(ft)
12
11
10
Speed, fLW (mi/h)
0.0
1.9
6.6
9.3.2 Lateral Clearance Adjustment

The adjustment factor for potentially restrictive lateral
clearances (fLC) is determined first by computing the total
lateral clearance, which is defined as,
TLC = LC R LC L
(6.8)
Where:
TLC = total lateral clearance in ft (m),
LCR = lateral clearance on the right side of the traveled
lanes to obstructions (retaining walls, utility poles,
signs, trees, etc.), and
LCL = lateral clearance on the left side of the traveled

lanes to obstructions.
For undivided highways, there is no adjustment for left-side
lateral clearance because this is already taken into account
in the fM term (LCL = 6 ft in Eq. 6.8).
If an individual lateral clearance (either left or right side)
exceeds 6 ft, 6 ft is used in Eq. 6.8.
Highways with TWLTLs are considered to have an LCL
equal to 6 ft.
Once Eq. 6.8 is applied, the value for fLC can be determined
directly from Table 6.13.
Table 6.13 Adjustment for Lateral Clearance

Total
Lateral Clearancea (ft)
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
Four-Lane
Six-Lane
Highways
Highways
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.3
1.8
1.7
3.6
2.8
5.4
3.9
Median Adjustment
Values for the adjustment factor for median type, fM, are
provided in Table 6.14.
9.3.3
Table 6.14 Adjustment for Median Type

Median Type
Undivided highways
Divided highways (including TWLTLs)
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
1.6
0.0
(km/h)
2.6
0.0
Access Frequency Adjustment

The final adjustment factor in Eq. 6.7 is for the number of
access points per mile, fA.
Defined to include intersections and driveways (on the right
side of the highway in the direction being considered) that
significantly influence traffic flow (no driveways to
individual residences or commercial service driveways.
9.3.4
Table 6.15 Adjustment for Access-Point Frequency
Access Points/Mile
0
10
20
30
40
Reduction in FFS(mi/h)
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
9.4 Determining Analysis Flow Rate

The analysis flow rate for multilane highways is determined
in the same manner as that for freeways, using Eq. 6.3.
There minor difference for multilane highways. An
extended segment (general terrain type) analysis can be
used for multilane highway segments if:
grades of 3% or less do not extend for more than 1 mi
(as opposed to 0.5 mi for freeway) or
any grades greater than 3% do not extend for more
than 0.5 mi (as opposed to 0.5 mi for freeway).
9.5 Calculating Density and Determining LOS

Same as freeways but slightly different speed-flow curves
and level of service criteria are used for multilane highways
(see Table 6.11 and Fig. 6.4).
To determine density, average passenger-car speed is found
by reading from the y-axis of Fig. 6.4 for the corresponding
analysis flow rate (vp) and free-flow speed.
EXAMPLE 6.3
A four-lane undivided highway has 11-ft lanes, with 4-ft
shoulders on the right side. There are 7 access points per mile
and the posted speed limit is 50 mi/h. What is the estimated
free-flow speed?
SOLUTION
Use Eq. 6.7 to arrive at an estimated free-flow-speed.
With:
BFFS = 55 mi/h (assume FFS = posted speed + 5 mi/h)
Lane Width
(ft)
12
11
10
Speed, fLW (mi/h)
0.0
1.9
6.6
fLC = 0.4 mi/h (Table 6.13, with TLC = 4 + 6 = 10 from

Eq. 6.8, with LCL = 6 ft because highway undivided)
Total
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
fM = 1.6 mi/h (Table 6.14)
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
Four-Lane
Six-Lane
Highways
Highways
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.3
1.8
1.7
3.6
2.8
5.4
3.9

Median Type
Undivided highways
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
1.6
0.0
(km/h)
2.6
0.0
fA = 1.75 mi/h (Table 6.15, by interpolation, 7 per mile)

Access Points/Mile
0
10
20
30
40
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
Substitution gives:
FFS = 55 1.9 0.4 1.6 1.75 = 49.35 mi/h
which means that the more restrictive roadway characteristics

relative to the base conditions result in a reduced free-flow
speed of 5.65 mi/h.
EXAMPLE 6.4
A six-lane divided highway is on rolling terrain with 2 access
points per mile and has 10-ft lanes, with a 5-ft shoulder on the
right side and a 3-ft shoulder on the left side. The peak-hour
factor is 0.80 and the directional peak-hour volume is 3000
vehicles per hour. There are 6% large trucks, 2% buses, and
2% recreational vehicles. A significant percentage of nonfamiliar roadway users are in the traffic stream (the driver
population adjustment factor is estimated as 0.95). No speed
studies are available, but the posted speed limit is 55 mi/h.
Determine the level of service.
SOLUTION
We begin by determining the FFS by applying Eq. 6.7,
With:
BFFS = 60 mi/h (assume FFS = posted speed + 5 mi/h)

Lane Width
(ft)
12
11
10
Speed, fLW (mi/h)
0.0
1.9
6.6
fLC = 0.9 mi/h (Table 6.13, TLC = 5 + 3 = 8 from Eq. 6.8)

Total
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
Four-Lane
Six-Lane
Highways
Highways
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
0.9
1.3
1.3
1.8
1.7
3.6
2.8
5.4
3.9
fM = 0.0 mi/h (Table 6.14)

Median Type
Undivided highways
Reduction in FFS
(mi/h)
1.6
0.0
(km/h)
2.6
0.0
fA = 0.5 mi/h (Table 6.15, by interpolation, 2 Access

points/mi)
Access Points/Mile
0
10
20
30
40
Substitution gives,
0.0
2.5
5.0
7.5
10.0
FFS = 60.0 6.6 0.9 0.0 0.5 = 52.0 mi/h
Determine the analysis flow rate using Eq. 6.3,

vp
With:
V = 3000 veh/h (given)
N = 3 (given)
PHF = 0.8 (given)
ET = 2.5 (Table 6.7)
ER = 2.0 (Table 6.7)
V
PHF N f HV f p

Freeway Segments
Factor
ER (RVs)
Level
1.5
1.2
Type of Terrain
Rolling Mountainous
2.5
4.5
2.0
4.0
fp = 0.95 (given)
From Eq. 6.5,
f HV =
1
= 0.877
1 + 0.08 2.5 1 + 0.02 2 1
Substitution gives,
vp =
3000
= 1500.3 pc/h/ln
0.8 3 0.877 0.95
Using Fig. 6.4, construct a speed-flow curve for 52 mi/h FFS

(drawing it parallel to the curves for 55 and 50 mi/h) with
1500.3 pc/h/ln flow rate gives LOS D.
Figure 6.7 Multilane Highway Speed-Flow Curves and Level of

Service Criteria.
EXAMPLE 6.5
A local manufacturer wishes to open a factory near the segment
of highway described in Example 6.4. How many large trucks
can be added to the peak-hour directional volume before
capacity is reached? (Assume only trucks and buses are added
and that the PHF remains constant).
SOLUTION
Note that the FFS will remain unchanged at 52 mi/h.
Table 6.11 shows:
capacity for FFS = 55 mi/h is 2100 pc/h/ln
for FFS = 50 mi/h is 2000 pc/h/ln,
linear interpolation gives a capacity of 2040 pc/h/ln
at a FFS of 52 mi/h.
Table 6.11 LOS Criteria for Multilane Highways

LOS
Free-Flow
Speed
60 mi/h
55 mi/h
50 mi/h
45 mi/h
Criteria
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
11 18
26 35
40
60.0 60.0 59.4 56.7 55.0
0.30 0.49 0.70 0.90 1.00
660 1080 1550 1980 2200
11 18
26 35
41
55.0 55.0 54.9 52.9 51.2
0.29 0.47 0.68 0.88 1.00
600
990 1430 1850 2100
11 18
26 35
43
50.0 50.0 50.0 48.9 47.5
0.28 0.45 0.65 0.86 1.00
550
900 1300 1710 2000
11 18
26 35
45
45.0 45.0 45.0 44.4 42.2
0.26 0.43 0.62 0.82 1.00
490
810 1170 1550 1900
The current number of large trucks and buses in the peakhour traffic stream is 240 (0.083000) and the current
number of recreational vehicles is 60 (0.023000).
Let Vnt be the number of new trucks so the combination of
Eqs. 6.3 and 6.5
f HV =
1
1 + PT ET 1 + PR E R 1
(6.5)
gives,
V+Vnt
vp =
PHF N
1
1 240 Vnt
V+V
nt
60
ET 1
E R 1
V+V
nt
f
p
With:
vp = 2040 pc/h/ln,
V = 3000 veh/h (Example 6.4),
N = 3 (Example 6.4),
PHF = 0.8 (Example 6.4),
ET = 2.5 (Example 6.4),
ER = 2.0 (Example 6.4), and
fp = 0.95 (Example 6.4).

3000+Vnt
2040 =
0.80 3
1 240 Vnt
3000+V
nt
0.95
60
2.5 1
3000+Vnt
2 1
which gives
( 492), which is the number of trucks that
can be added to the peak hour before capacity is reached.
Vnt 492.5
In-Class Design Problem #7:

Multilane highway level of service
A new four-lane undivided multilane highway is being planned
with 11-ft lanes, 4-ft right-hand shoulder, and a 50 mi/h speed
limit. One 3% downgrade is 4.5 mi long and there will be 4
access points per mile. The peak-hour directional volume
along this grade is estimated to consist of 1800 passenger cars,
130 large trucks, 30 buses, and 40 recreational vehicles. The
driver population adjustment factor is estimated to be 0.90. If
the peak-hour factor is 0.85, what is the level of service of this
highway segment?
10 TWO-LANE HIGHWAYS
Pages 200 to 211
Two classes:
Class I (motorists expect high speed) and
Class II (less of a high-speed expectation
Level of service measured by average travel speed (ATS) or,
Percent time spent following (PTSF)
See text for additional information on procedures etc.
11 DESIGN TRAFFIC VOLUMES

How determine number of lanes to provide?
Select a design-hourly volume
Problem:
Variability in traffic volumes by time of day, day of
week, time of year, and type of roadway.
Intracity Route
10.0
8.0
6.0
Percent of Daily Traffic
4.0
2.0
12:00 AM
6:00 AM
12:00 PM
6:00 PM
12:00 AM
6:00 PM
12:00 AM
Intercity Route
10.0
8.0
6.0
4.0
2.0
12:00 AM
6:00 AM
12:00 PM
Time of Day
Figure 6.8. Examples of hourly and daily variation
150
Monthly Average Daily Traffic as
Percent of AADT
140
130
120
110
100
AADT
90
80
70
60
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun.
Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
Month
Figure 6.9 Example of Monthly Traffic Volume

Variations for Business and Recreational Access
Route
Solution:
Work with percentages of the annual average daily

traffic, AADT (in units of vehicles per day and
computed as the total yearly traffic volume divided
by the number of days in the year).
Convert AADT into Design Hourly Volume (DHV)
Figure 6.10 Highest 100 Hourly Volumes Over a One-year

Period for a Typical Roadway.
Design practice in the United States uses a design

hourly volume (DHV) that is between the 10th and
50th highest volume hour of the year.
Most common hourly volume used for roadway
design is the 30th highest hourly volume of the year.
In practice, the K-factor is used to convert annual
average daily traffic (AADT) to the 30th highest
hourly volume. K is defined as
DHV
K =
AADT
(6.15)
Where:
K=
a factor used to convert annual average daily

traffic to a specified annual hourly volume,
DHV = design hourly volume (typically, the 30th highest

annual hourly volume), and
AADT = the roadways annual average daily traffic.
For freeways and multilane highways, interest is in

directional traffic flows.
Need a factor is needed to reflect the proportion of peakhour traffic volume traveling in the peak direction.
Denoted as D to get the directional design-hour volume
(DDHV) by application of
DDHV = K D AADT
(6.16)
Where:
DDHV = directional design-hour volume,
D = directional distribution factor to reflect the proportion
of peak-hour traffic volume traveling in the peak
direction, and
EXAMPLE 6.8
A freeway is to be designed as a passenger-car-only facility
for an AADT of 35,000 vehicles per day. It is estimated that
the freeway will have a free-flow speed of 70 mi/h. The
design will be for commuters and the peak-hour factor is
estimated to be 0.85 with 65% of the peak-hour traffic
traveling in the peak direction. Assuming that Fig. 6.7
applies, determine the number of 12-ft (3.6-m) lanes required
(assuming no lateral obstructions) to provide at least LOS C
using the highest annual hourly volume and the 30th highest
annual hourly volume.
SOLUTION
By inspection of Fig. 6.7, the highest annual hourly volume has
K1 = 0.148.
So,
DDHV
= K1 D AADT
= 0.148 0.65 35,000 = 3367 veh/h
At LOS C for a FFS of 70 mi/h. From Table 6.1, we see

that this value is 1770 pc/h/ln.

Criteria
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
Maximum v/c
(pc/h/ln)
LOS
C
26
70.6
0.76
35
62.2
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1350
1830
2170
2400
FFS = 70 mi/h
11
18
70.0
70.0
0.32
0.53
26
68.2
0.74
35
61.5
0.90
45
53.3
1.00
1260
1770
2150
2400
FFS = 65 mi/h
11
18
65.0
65.0
0.30
0.50
26
64.6
0.71
35
59.7
0.89
45
52.2
1.00
1170
1680
2090
2350
FFS = 60 mi/h
11
18
60.0
60.0
0.29
0.47
26
60.0
0.68
35
57.6
0.88
45
51.1
1.00
1080
1560
2020
2300
FFS = 55 mi/h
11
18
55.0
55.0
0.27
0.44
26
55.0
0.64
35
54.7
0.85
45
50.0
1.00
1430
1910
2250
A
B
FFS = 75 mi/h
11
18
75.0
74.8
0.34
0.56
820
770
710
660
600
990
Use Eq. 6.3 to find vp, based on an assumed number of

lanes.
.
Compare vp to the maximum service flow rate of 1770 will

determine whether we have an adequate number of lanes.
With V = DDHV, and assuming a four-lane freeway, Eq. 6.3
gives,
vp
3367
1980.6
0.85 2 1.0 1.0
pc/h/ln
With:
fLW = 1.0 (Table 6.2; 12-ft lanes, no obstructions)
fHV = 1.0 (no heavy vehicles)
fp = 1.0 (commuters)
Value is higher than 1770, so we need to provide more
lanes. The calculation is repeated, this time with an
assumed six-lane freeway.
vp
3367
1320.4
0.85 3 1.0 1.0
pc/h/ln
1320.4 < 1770, 3 lanes each direction necessary for LOS C.

For the 30th highest hourly annual volume, Fig. 6.7 gives K30
= K = 0.12, which, when used in Eq. 6.16 gives
DDHV
= K D AADT
= 0.12 0.65 35,000 = 2730 veh/h
Apply Eq. 6.3, with an assumed four-lane freeway, yields

vp
2730
1605.9
0.85 2 1.0 1.0
pc/h/ln
This value is less than 1770, so a four-lane freeway (two lanes

each direction) is adequate for this design traffic flow rate.

Level of Service

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Level of Service

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Level of Service

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

6 LEVEL OF SERVICE CONCEPT

Level of Service A free-flow conditions (traffic operates at

Level of Service B allows speeds at or near free-flow speeds,

Level of Service C speeds at or near free-flow speeds, but the

Level of Service D conditions where speeds begin to decline

Level of Service E LOS E represents operating conditions at

Level of Service F describes a breakdown in vehicular flow.

7 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMINATION

2. Analysis Flow Rate

8 BASIC FREEWAY SEGMENTS

a driver population of mostly familiar roadway users.

8.2 Service Measure

So density is therefore calculated as flow divided by speed.

Table 6.1 LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments

Figure 6.1 Basic Freeway Segment Speed-Flow Curves and

Higher percentage of trucks

Truckers believe worse level of service if:

8.3 Determining Free-Flow Speed

Lane Width Adjustment

Lateral Clearance Adjustment

Reduction in Free-Flow Speed, fLC (mi/h)

Number of Lanes Adjustment

Note: For all rural freeway segments, fN is 0.0.

Interchange Density Adjustment

Reduction in FreeFlow Speed, fID (mi/h)

FFS = BFFS fLW fLC fN fID

8.4 Determining Analysis Flow Rate

Heavy Vehicle Adjustment

Large trucks, buses and recreational vehicles have

The fHV correction term is determined by first getting the

For segments of freeway that contain a mix of grades, an

Level Terrain Any combination of horizontal and vertical

Table 6.7 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Extended

Sometimes it is necessary to determine the cumulative

Once the appropriate equivalency factors have been obtained,

Driver Population Adjustment

Under base conditions, the traffic stream is assumed to

To account for the composition of the driver population, the

8.5 Calculating Density and Determining LOS

Figure 6.2 Basic Freeway Segment Speed-Flow Curves and

6.3.6 Relationship of a Maximum Service Flow (MSF) and

the maximum volume-to-capacity ratio at LOS E is equal to

fw is a factor to adjust for the effects of less than ideal lane

Sub-standard lane width:

Sub-standard lateral clearance:

Reduction in Free-Flow Speed, fLC (mi/h)

Reduction in FreeFlow Speed, fID (mi/h)

FFS = 70 1.9 1.6 3.0 5.0 = 58.5 mi/h

Determine the flow rate from Eq. 6.3.

Table 6.7 Passenger Car Equivalents (PCEs) for Extended

From Eq. 6.5:

From Fig. 6.2:

Figure 6.3 Basic Freeway Segment Speed-Flow Curves and

Or, using 58.5 from Fig. 6.2.

From Table 6.1, it can be seen that this corresponds to LOS C.

Table 6.2 LOS Criteria for Basic Freeway Segments

(down from 0.816 in Example 6.1)