2001Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation Research BoardRequires access

Percent Time-Spent-Following as Performance Measure for Two-Lane Highways

R.Tapio Luttinen

Open publisher page 58 citations

Abstract

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) uses percent time-spent-following (PTSF) as the primary level-of-service (LOS) measure for two-lane highways. On Class I highways, average travel speed is used as an auxiliary measure. The new HCM provides methods for both twoway and directional estimation of PTSF, although the methods are not totally compatible. On Finnish two-lane highways, PTSF is lower than that estimated by the HCM 2000 methodology. Also, the impact of directional distribution is greater, whereas the impact of no-passing zones is less. From the beginning of the motorized transportation era, traffic engineers have searched for methods to define the traffic capacity of highways. Capacity estimation is not enough, however; traffic engineers and road users are both interested in the quality of traffic flow. After almost a century, this search is not yet over. In fact, transportation telematics has increased the need for reliable descriptions of quality traffic flow by using performance measures and concepts that are easily understood by road users. Several performance and service measures (to assign a LOS) suggested for two-lane highways are discussed. The properties of PTSF are discussed in more detail because PTSF has been the most important service measure for two-lane highways since HCM 1985. The estimation of PTSF and its adjustment for prevailing conditions in HCM 2000 are compared by the use of data from Finland. Finally, the applicability of PTSF as a service measure is evaluated against a set of qualifications.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) uses percent time-spent-following (PTSF) as the primary level-of-service (LOS) measure for two-lane highways. On Class I highways, average travel speed is used as an auxiliary measure. The new HCM provides methods for both twoway and directional estimation of PTSF, although the methods are not totally compatible. On Finnish two-lane highways, PTSF is lower than that estimated by the HCM 2000 methodology. Also, the impact of directional distribution is greater, whereas the impact of no-passing zones is less. From the beginning of the motorized transportation era, traffic engineers have searched for methods to define the traffic capacity of highways. Capacity estimation is not enough, however; traffic engineers and road users are both interested in the quality of traffic flow. After almost a century, this search is not yet over. In fact, transportation telematics has increased the need for reliable descriptions of quality traffic flow by using performance measures and concepts that are easily understood by road users. Several performance and service measures (to assign a LOS) suggested for two-lane highways are discussed. The properties of PTSF are discussed in more detail because PTSF has been the most important service measure for two-lane highways since HCM 1985. The estimation of PTSF and its adjustment for prevailing conditions in HCM 2000 are compared by the use of data from Finland. Finally, the applicability of PTSF as a service measure is evaluated against a set of qualifications.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 58 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) uses percent time-spent-following (PTSF) as the primary level-of-service (LOS) measure for two-lane highways. On Class I highways, average travel speed is used as an auxiliary measure. The new HCM provides methods for both twoway and directional estimation of PTSF, although the methods are not totally compatible. On Finnish two-lane highways, PTSF is lower than that estimated by the HCM 2000 methodology. Also, the impact of directional distribution is greater, whereas the impact of no-passing zones is less. From the beginning of the motorized transportation era, traffic engineers have searched for methods to define the traffic capacity of highways. Capacity estimation is not enough, however; traffic engineers and road users are both interested in the quality of traffic flow. After almost a century, this search is not yet over. In fact, transportation telematics has increased the need for reliable descriptions of quality traffic flow by using performance measures and concepts that are easily understood by road users. Several performance and service measures (to assign a LOS) suggested for two-lane highways are discussed. The properties of PTSF are discussed in more detail because PTSF has been the most important service measure for two-lane highways since HCM 1985. The estimation of PTSF and its adjustment for prevailing conditions in HCM 2000 are compared by the use of data from Finland. Finally, the applicability of PTSF as a service measure is evaluated against a set of qualifications.

Key concepts: Highway Capacity Manual, Transport engineering, Level of service, Measure (data warehouse), Traffic flow (computer networking), Telematics, Estimation, Service (business)

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Percent Time-Spent-Following as Performance Measure for Two-Lane Highways — Research Paper | ScholarLens