Evaluating Operational Features of Three Unconventional Intersections under Heavy Traffic Based on CRITIC Method

Binghong Pan, Shangru Liu, Zhenjiang Xie, Yang Shao, Xiang Li and Ruicheng Ge
Additional contact information
Binghong Pan: Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
Shangru Liu: Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
Zhenjiang Xie: Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
Yang Shao: Institute of Posts, School of Modern Posts (Logistics School), Xi’an University of Posts & Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China
Xiang Li: Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
Ruicheng Ge: Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China

Sustainability, 2021, vol. 13, issue 8, 1-30

Abstract: Conventional four-legged intersections are inefficient under heavy traffic requirements and are prone to congestion problems. Unconventional intersections with innovative designs allow for more efficient traffic operations and can increase the capacity of the intersection, in some cases. Common unconventional designs for four-legged intersections include the upstream signalized crossover intersection (USC), continuous flow intersection (CFI), and parallel flow intersection (PFI). At present, an increasing number of cities are using such unconventional designs to improve the performance of their intersections. In the reconstruction of original intersections or the design of new intersections, the question of how to more reasonably select the form of unconventional intersection becomes particularly critical. Therefore, we selected a typical intersection in Xi’an for optimization and investigated traffic data for this intersection. The traffic operations, with respect to the four solutions of a conventional intersection, USC, CFI, and PFI, were evaluated using the VISSIM software. Then, we evaluated the suitability of each solution under different situations using the CRITIC (CRiteria Importance Through Intercriteria Correlation) method, which is a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) method that enables a more comprehensive and integrated evaluation of the four solutions by taking into account the comparative intensities and conflicting character among the indices. The results show that the conventional intersection is only applicable to the case of very low traffic volume; PFI has the advantage in the case of moderate and high traffic volume; CFI performs better in the case of high traffic volume; and USC is generally inferior to CFI and PFI, although it has greater improvement, compared with the conventional solution, in a few cases.

Keywords: unconventional four-legged intersection; USC; CFI; PFI; VISSIM; MCDM; CRITIC method (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4098/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4098/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4098-:d:531475

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().