An attempt is made to evaluate criticism levelled at the three procedures (for design of the length and width of a weaving section; for checking merging operations and for estimating the percentage of through, on-ramp, and off-ramp traffic) presented in the manual, to re-assess those procedures in the light of the findings, and to review relevant research to see if there are results which could be applicable to the HCM65 procedures. The study concludes that the procedures have inconsistencies and inaccuracies and do not adequately cover geometrics ( the trajectory process of dynamic merging is not discussed) and do not discuss the importance of speed difference. The manual does not present theoretical discussions, and the procedures are not presented logically. Australian work involving simulations and a field study conducted in conjunction with the merging simulation, established an empirical (linear) relationship between gap acceptance parameters and relative speed. The work also includes suggestions for applying the results to practice in the interim before new standards are published.

  • Corporate Authors:

    ARRB Group Ltd.

    Vermont South, Victoria  Australia 
  • Authors:
    • Smith, NMH
    • SZWED, N
  • Publication Date: 1975-10

Media Info

  • Features: Figures; References; Tables;
  • Pagination: 86 p.

Subject/Index Terms

Filing Info

  • Accession Number: 00137685
  • Record Type: Publication
  • Report/Paper Numbers: ARR Rep. No. 54
  • Contract Numbers: Proj. No. 91130
  • Files: TRIS, ATRI
  • Created Date: Aug 23 1976 12:00AM