ADDIS ABABA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle

maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis
Ababa City
By

MOHAMMEDNUR SIRAJ HAGOS

A Thesis Submitted as Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Award of the
Degree of Master of Science in Civil Engineering

(Road and Transport Engineering Stream)

To

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

COLLEGEE OF ARCHITECTURE AND CIVIL ENGINEERING

JANUARY 2020
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

ii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

iii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Acknowledgment
First of all, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to Ethiopian Roads Authority
Study Program for financing my Master of Science Studies and for letting me be part
of Addis Ababa Science and Technology, Civil Engineering Department Alumni of
2019 G.C.

I would also like to thank my advisor Professor Emer T. Quezon of Ambo University
from Civil Engineering Department whose expertise has greatly helped me throughout
this research and for the continuous assistance and timely responses for my questions
throughout the study.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to experts Mr. Kejela Mekonen and Mr. Zewdu
Temesgen at Transport Program Management Office and Ethiopian mapping agency
respectively for their continuous assistance during my studies.

Finally, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to Almighty God for being there
for me and guiding me throughout my journey and also my family who have been my
support system throughout my studies. Last but not least, I would also like to thank my
friends and colleagues for supporting me and giving me valuable comments which has
significantly contributed to my studies.

iv
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Research Summary
As we all know, the transportation problem is growing in Addis Ababa, and the city
administration is trying to solve this problem by importing commercial vehicles like
large buses. These commercial vehicles need space to maneuver. Despite this
commercial vehicle needing space Addis Ababa Transport Program Management
Office (TPMO) and Addis Ababa Traffic Management Agency (TMA), which are Part
of Traffic Operation Center (TOC), was established by Addis Ababa City Transport
Authority are reducing turn radius at the intersection. This is causing difficulty for
commercial vehicle drivers to make right turn maneuvers at these intersections because
of the lack of space the drivers are forced to encroach lanes other than there's to make
right turn maneuvers. The purpose of this study to evaluate the effect of Commercial
vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City. For Addis
Ababa Transport Program Management Office (TPMO) and Addis Ababa Traffic
Management Agency (TMA), the research offers assistance to them to distinguish the
cause of congestion and prepare a master plan on how to remove this impact. In this
paper, swept path analysis and evaluation of operational characteristics of selected
intersections using AutoCAD Civil 3D and Autodesk InfraWorks software respectively
and developing a linear regression model. Geometry data, traffic Volume and the
pedestrian count is used to conduct the optimization process. Traffic volume count for
one identified peak hour from 5:00pm – 6:00pm, Thursday of the week. Encroachment
width and length and delay for most of the selected intersections is high. The level of
service most of the selected intersections is F and from the estimated linear regression
model R-sq(adj) value is 0.Among the selected intersections analyzed, the results of
swept path analysis indicate that lane encroachment occurs for most intersections and
the level of service of most intersection is bad and the regression model developed
shows there is insignificant relationship between turn radius and speed and flow
density. Although the relationship is insignificant it shows there is a direct relationship
between turn radius and speed and flow and inverse relationship with density.
Keywords: Commercial vehicles, Encroachment, Level of service, Turn radius, Speed
Density, Flow, Model.

v
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Table of Contents
Declaration ................................................................................................................ ii

Certificate Page ........................................................................................................ iii

Acknowledgment ...................................................................................................... iv

Research Summary .................................................................................................... v

List of Tables............................................................................................................ xi

List of Figures ......................................................................................................... xii

Acronyms ............................................................................................................... xiii

CHAPTER ONE........................................................................................................ 1

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Background of the Study .................................................................................. 1

1.2 Statement of the Problem ................................................................................. 3

1.3. Objective of the study...................................................................................... 3

1.3.1 General objective ....................................................................................... 3

1.3.2 Specific objective....................................................................................... 3

1.4 Research Questions .......................................................................................... 4

1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Research ............................................................... 4

1.6 Significance of the Research............................................................................. 4

CHAPTER TWO ....................................................................................................... 6

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .................................................................. 6

2.1 Introduction...................................................................................................... 6

2.2 Design vehicle .................................................................................................. 6

2.3 Intersection Design Speed ................................................................................ 7

2.4 Turning speeds ................................................................................................. 7

2.5 Corner radii ...................................................................................................... 8

2.6 Turning Radius Effects. .................................................................................... 8

2.7 Swept path ....................................................................................................... 9

vi
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
2.7.1 Ackermann steering geometry.................................................................. 10

2.7.1.1 Simple Ackermann condition ............................................................ 10

2.7.1.2 Extended Ackermann condition ......................................................... 11

2.8 Minimize effective turning radius ................................................................... 12

2.9 Intersection performance measures ................................................................. 12

2.9.1 Capacity and degree of saturation............................................................. 12

2.9.2 Queue length............................................................................................ 14

2.9.3 Level of service ....................................................................................... 14

2.9.3.1 Vehicles level of service .................................................................... 14

2.9.3.2 Pedestrian level of service ................................................................. 16

2.9.4 Delay ....................................................................................................... 17

2.9.4.1 Delay at signalized intersection ......................................................... 18

2.9.4.1.1 Webster’s delay model ................................................................ 18

2.9.4.1.3 HCM 2000 delay model .............................................................. 19

2.9.4.2 Delay models for unsignalized intersections ...................................... 20

2.9.4.2.1 HCM 2000 delay model .............................................................. 20

2.10 Effects of traffic congestion .......................................................................... 21

2.11 Relationship between vehicle characteristics and speed ................................ 21

2.12 Key findings and identified gaps .................................................................. 22

CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................. 23

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................................. 23

3.1 Introduction.................................................................................................... 23

3.2 Study area ...................................................................................................... 23

3.3. Study Design ................................................................................................. 24

3.3.1 For swept path analysis ............................................................................ 24

3.3.2 Evaluation of operational characteristics of the selected intersections ....... 24

3.4 Sampling Technique and Sample Size ............................................................ 25

vii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
3.5 Data Collection Process .................................................................................. 25

3.5.1 Primary data ............................................................................................ 25

3.5.1.1 Geometric Data ................................................................................. 25

3.5.1.2 Traffic Volume Count Survey............................................................ 25

3.5.2 Secondary data. ........................................................................................ 26

3.6 Study Variables .............................................................................................. 26

3.7 Data Processing and Analysis ......................................................................... 26

3.7.1 Swept path analysis .................................................................................. 26

3.7.1.1 Swept path analysis modeling steps ................................................... 28

3.7.2 Best fit model .......................................................................................... 29

3.7.2.1 Autodesk InfraWork modeling steps .................................................. 30

3.7.2.2 Linear regression ............................................................................... 31

3.7.2.2 Models, criteria’s or values used for analysis ..................................... 31

3.7.2.2.1 Saturation flow ............................................................................ 31

3.7.2.2.2 Capacity ...................................................................................... 31

3.7.2.2.3 Delay .......................................................................................... 31

3.7.2.2.4 Queue length ............................................................................... 32

3.7.2.2.5 Vehicles level of service.............................................................. 32

3.7.3 Level of Service of the selected intersections ........................................... 33

CHAPTER FOUR ................................................................................................... 34

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION ............................................................................ 34

4.1 Swept path analysis ........................................................................................ 34

4.1.1 Results of swept path analysis .................................................................. 34

4.1.1.1 Results of swept path analysis of Amestegna Intersection .................. 34

4.1.1.2 Results of swept path analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ............... 38

4.1.1.3 Results of swept path analysis of British Embassy Intersection .......... 40

4.1.1.4 Results of swept path analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ...................... 42

viii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
4.1.1.5 Results of swept path analysis of Kokeb Intersection ......................... 43

4.1.1.6 Results of swept path analysis of Mekenisa Intersection .................... 45

4.1.1.7 Results of swept path analysis of Saris Abo Intersection .................... 47

4.1.1.8 Results of swept path analysis of Shola Intersection .......................... 48

4.2 Level of Service of the selected intersections .................................................. 51

4.2.1 Results of Performance analysis ............................................................... 51

4.2.1.1 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection ............... 51

4.2.1.2 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ............ 53

4.2.1.3 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection ....... 55

4.2.1.4 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ................... 57

4.2.1.5 Results of Performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection ...................... 59

4.2.1.6 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection ................. 61

4.2.1.7 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection ................. 63

4.2.1.8 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection ....................... 65

4.3 Linear regression model .............................................................................. 67

4.3.1 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection .................. 67

4.3.2 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ............... 68

4.3.3 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection .......... 68

4.3.4 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ...................... 69

4.3.5 Results of Performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection ......................... 70

4.3.6 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection .................... 71

4.3.7 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection .................... 72

4.3.8 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection .......................... 72

CHAPTER FIVE ..................................................................................................... 75

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION ...................................................... 75

5.1 Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 75

5.1.1 Geometric & vehicle characteristics of the study ...................................... 75

ix
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
5.1.2 Performance analysis ............................................................................... 76

5.1.3 Linear regression model ........................................................................... 76

5.2.1 Recommendations for geometric & vehicle characteristics study ............. 76

5.2.2 Recommendations for Performance analysis study ............................. 76

5.2.3 Recommendations for of linear regression model ..................................... 77

Reference ................................................................................................................ 78

Appendix ................................................................................................................. 81

Appendix 1: Vehicle and Pedestrian flow data on each leg at peak hour ............... 81

Appendix 2: Autodesk InfraWorks output data ................................................... 102

Appendix 3: Minitab 17 output data ................................................................... 134

x
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Design Vehicles Characteristics (ERA, 2013) ............................................ 7
Table 2-2 Delay (HCM 2000) method...................................................................... 15
Table 2-3 Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method ............................................................ 16
Table 2-4 Delay & Degree of Saturation method ..................................................... 16
Table 2-5 Level of Service method for pedestrians................................................... 17
Table 4.1 Results of swept path analysis of Amestegna Intersection......................... 36
Table 4.2 Results of swept path analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ...................... 39
Table 4.3 Results of swept path analysis of British Embassy Intersection................. 41
Table 4.4 Results of swept path analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ............................. 43
Table 4.5 Results of swept path analysis of Kokeb Intersection ................................ 44
Table 4.6 Results of swept path analysis of Mekenisa Intersection ........................... 46
Table 4.7 Results of swept path analysis of Saris Abo Intersection ........................... 47
Table 4.8 Results of swept path analysis of Shola Intersection ................................. 50
Table 4.9 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection ..................... 51
Table 4.10 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ................. 53
Table 4.11 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection............ 55
Table 4.12 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ........................ 57
Table 4.13 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ........................ 59
Table 4.14 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection ...................... 61
Table 4.15 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection...................... 63
Table 4.16 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection ............................ 65
Table 4.17 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection.................... 67
Table 4.18 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection ................. 68
Table 4.19 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection............ 69
Table 4.20 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ........................ 70
Table 4.21 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection ........................ 70
Table 4.22 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection ...................... 71
Table 4.23 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection...................... 72
Table 4.24 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection ............................ 73

xi
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 Ackermann steering linkage .................................................................... 11
Figure 2.2 Extended Ackermann condition .............................................................. 11
Figure 2.3 Capacity and degree of saturation ........................................................... 13
Figure 2.4 Control delay, geometric delay, stop-line delay, and stopped delay ......... 18
Figure 3.1 Location Map ......................................................................................... 23
Figure 3.2 Work Flow.............................................................................................. 24
Figure 3.3 Design Single-Unit Truck/Bus ................................................................ 28
Figure 4.1 Amestegna Intersection geometry ........................................................... 52
Figure 4.2 Amestegna Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ....................................... 52
Figure 4.3 Amestegna Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ..................... 53
Figure 4.4 Berbere Tera Intersection geometry ........................................................ 54
Figure 4.5 Berbere Tera Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay .................................... 54
Figure 4.6 Berbere Tera Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ................... 55
Figure 4.7 British Embassy Intersection geometry ................................................... 56
Figure 4.8 British Embassy Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ............................... 56
Figure 4.9 British Embassy Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ............. 57
Figure 4.10 Bulgaria Intersection geometry ............................................................. 58
Figure 4.11 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ......................................... 58
Figure 4.12 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ........................ 59
Figure 4.13 Bulgaria Intersection geometry ............................................................. 60
Figure 4.14 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ......................................... 60
Figure 4.15 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ........................ 61
Figure 4.16 Mekenisa Intersection geometry ............................................................ 62
Figure 4.17 Mekenisa Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ........................................ 62
Figure 4.18 Mekenisa Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ...................... 63
Figure 4.19 Saris Abo Intersection geometry ........................................................... 64
Figure 4.20 Saris Abo Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay ....................................... 64
Figure 4.21 Saris Abo Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue...................... 65
Figure 4.22 Shola Intersection geometry .................................................................. 66
Figure 4.23 Shola Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay .............................................. 66
Figure 4.24 Shola Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue ............................ 67

xii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Acronyms
AACRA Addis Ababa City Roads Authority

LOS Level of Service

V Speed (km/hr)

q Traffic Flow (Veh/hour)

AD Average delay (seconds)

K Density (Veh/Km)

QM Maximum Queue Length (meter)

TPMO Transport Program Management Office

TMA Traffic Management Agency

TOC Traffic Operation Center

xiii
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study

Transportation is essential for any nation's development and growth. Transportation has
played a significant role by facilitating trade, commerce, and social interaction while
consuming a considerable portion of time and resources. Many organizations and
agencies exist to plan, design, build, operate, and maintain transportation systems
(Akhelik et.al. 2013).The traffic system is an intricate framework with irregular and
dynamic in nature, which makes it hard to examine, control, and enhance under nearby
traffic conditions (Akhelik et.al. 2013).

Assessing bus service execution is critical to improve the quality, dependability,

productivity, and adequacy of the framework. Service quality is not only can be
measured from the aspect of operation and management but also through the perception
and expectation of the passengers. The level of service (LOS) evaluation is an
instrument to tool to measure the quality of service dependent on explicit attributes.
The passengers' satisfaction assessment can assist with improving the level of service,
quality, and execution (Cullinane, 1992). A significant trait of current society is its
preoccupation with advancing economical methods of transport to replace the excessive
utilization of the private vehicle in most metropolitan regions (Dell'Olio et. al., 2010).

In spite of the crucial job that transports play in any metropolitan zones, their services
are oftentimes deficient to satisfy need, and the services that are given generally
experience the ill effects of the low output (Ali, 2010). In numerous parts of the world,
people will in general utilize their private vehicles because of the absence of satisfaction
they get from the services of public vehicle. For example, the discoveries of (Cullinane,
1992) in an attitudinal overview in the UK demonstrated that 41% of private vehicle
users would decrease their vehicle utilization if public vehicle turned out to be often
accessible and dependable.

Truck dimensions and operating characteristics influenced the actual street framework,
and their effects ought to be properly considered in the geometric design and traffic
operations of streets and roads. The actual measurements that most influence the
minimum turning paths of design vehicles are the minimum turning radius, the
wheelbase, and the inner path of the rear tire. Trucks are wider and have greater turning
1
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
radii than do buses and passenger cars. Trucks are more extensive and have more
prominent turning radii than do buses and passenger vehicles. Consequently, the
geometric design prerequisites for trucks are more serious than for other design
vehicles, particularly at crossing points. Larger turning vehicles display off following
attributes. Off tracking is a function of a truck's spacing between tire axles. The
maximum distance between a truck's front (lead) axle and its rear (trailer) axle
determines off tracking. It is estimated from the center of the rear trailer axle with
respect to the center of the lead axle. Off tracking can happen in low-speed working
conditions (convergences), or in fast working conditions (even expressway bends). Of
interest in the low-speed climate are convergence check bring radii back (Donnell et al,
2018).

Drivers of long vehicles, for example, expressed Lorries and other blend vehicles with
more articulation points, as often as possible need to perform complex moves to comply
with geometrical limitations imposed by intersection design plans. This issue is
generally apparent at smaller roundabouts (Pecchini et al, 2017) and four-leg at-grade
crossing points with intense meeting points (Rubio-Martin et al, 2015). Demonstrated
that controls set along the correct edges at-grade crossing points are regularly damaged
by vehicles performing right turns (Dragcˇevic et al, 2005).

Addis Ababa City Transport Authority has realized the problem of traffic congestion
and planned to launch an advanced traffic management system and is working on the
establishment of the Traffic Operation Center (TOC). According to the unpublished
draft project profile prepared by the Ministry of Transport and Communication, the
planned TOC will serve to improve safety, improve mobility and relief congestion, and
provide traveler information service (Ministry of Transport and Communication, 2010).

In order to improve vehicle maneuverability and traffic flow performance, first, this
paper addressed the cause of difficulty for vehicle maneuverability then the effect it has
on traffic flow performance. Therefore, this paper took a step back and looked to outline
a number of important factors that must be considered when seeking to address vehicle
maneuverability and traffic flow performance in selected intersections

Therefore this paper evaluated the performance of intersections whose turn radius has
been reduced during pick hour time by developing a model relating the commercial
vehicle turning radius and the travel speed, density, and flow of the traffic stream.

2
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
1.2 Statement of the Problem
According to (Sharma, Jain & Subramanian, 2012), highway traffic jams will continue
to remain a major problem in most cities around the world, especially in developing
countries resulting in time delays, increased fuel consumption, and monetary losses.
Due to the poorly planned road networks, a common outcome in many developing
countries is the presence of small critical sections, which are common hot-spots for
congestion; poor traffic management around these hotspots potentially results in
elongated traffic jams.

Addis Ababa increasingly faces traffic congestion problems. Part of these problems is
a result of a greater number of commercial vehicles in the cities. These commercial
vehicles need more space to turn.

Addis Ababa Transport Program Management Office (TPMO) and Addis Ababa
Traffic Management Agency (TMA) which are part of the Traffic Operation Center
(TOC) program are currently working on reducing turn radius for speed reduction
purpose. This is affecting commercial vehicle drivers and traffic flow efficiency. The
relationship between the size of the curb radius and the speed of turning motor vehicles
should be studied further in how it really affects the traffic flow performance.
Therefore, this research tends to identify how much space commercial vehicles actually
need when turning and which turn radius satisfies traffic flow efficiency.

1.3. Objective of the study

1.3.1 General objective

 The general objective of this study is to evaluate the effect of Commercial

vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City.

1.3.2 Specific objective

The specific objectives are:

 To check the different turn radius that satisfy the commercial vehicle
maneuverability

 To assess the Level of Service of the selected intersections

3
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
 To develop a model relating the commercial vehicle turning radius and the
travel speed, density, and flow of the traffic stream

1.4 Research Questions

1. What are the different turn radius that satisfy the commercial vehicle
maneuverability?

2. What is the Level of Service of the selected intersections?

3. Which model is that best fit relating the commercial vehicle turning radius and
the travel speed, density, and flow of the traffic stream?

1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Research

As the topic of the effect of commercial vehicle maneuverability in relation to the

selected intersection in Addis Ababa touches lots of areas and wide, it is necessary to
define the scope of the study so that the untreated topics could be left for other
researchers. Accordingly, the scope of this study will be limited to the selected
intersection in Addis Ababa.

The Limitation of this study is that the COVID- 19 epidemic that affects the movement
partially and Lack of organized data management in government office makes it
difficult to find different data sets. Additionally, other road sections and intersections
were not included in this study. Furthermore, the analysis is to be segmented study
rather than an area-wide or regional study. Hence, it will focus mainly on the road
segments at the entry of selected intersections, and the relative effect of the consecutive
intersection was not discussed.

1.6 Significance of the Research

Nowadays, traffic congestion has a serious effect on once country development, so,
without a doubt, the research on the effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability with
regards to traffic congestion evaluation has a wide range of significance.

Reducing congestion problem by increasing capacity and level of service of the

intersections and reduce travel time required (delay) to pass through those intersections
due to the use of different turn radius conditions. This researches will help decision
makers like Addis Ababa City Roads Authority (AACRA), Addis Ababa Transport

4
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Program Management Office (TPMO) and Addis Ababa Traffic Management Agency
(TMA) make decision about reducing turn radius better and also help commercial
vehicle drivers to make right turn maneuvers easily.

5
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction

At the point when larger corner radii are utilized at the right turn, vehicles can turn at
higher velocities (consequently limiting the speed differential among turning and
through vehicles) and can all the more effectively converge with the go across road
traffic. A concern with the higher operating speed is the test it gives people on foot
endeavoring to go across the road (Kay & William h, 2005).

The connection between curb radius and injuries at intersections is a subject of more
prominent interest as offices try to give safe facilities to people on foot and bicyclists
while likewise obliging huge vehicle traffic, including trucks and transport vehicles.
Variables to consider incorporate the geometry and design of right turn facilities,
vehicle developments through crossing points, and walker wellbeing (Kendra, 2010).

2.2 Design vehicle

The size of the biggest vehicle is relied upon to utilize the street directs numerous parts
of the geometric design. Such vehicles must have the option to pass each other securely
and to negotiate all aspects of horizontal and vertical arrangement. Thus the vehicle
characteristics and dimensions affecting design include the power to weight ratio,
minimum turning radius, and travel path during a turn and vehicle height and width.
Both the actual qualities, including the turning abilities of vehicles and the extents of
differently measured vehicles utilizing the street, are positive controls in a geometric
design Accordingly, it is important to look at all vehicle types, select general class
groupings, and set up representatively estimated vehicles inside each class for
configuration use. Ethiopia, four different design vehicles have been used. The
maximum turning path for a single unit truck, a single unit bus, and a semi-trailer are
shown in the table below (ERA, 2013).

6
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Table 2.1 Design Vehicles Characteristics (ERA, 2013)

Front Rear Minimum

Design Code Hieght Width Length Overhang Overhang Wheelbase Turning
vehicle (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) radius (m)
4x4 Utility DV1 1.3 2.1 5.8 0.9 1.5 3.4 7.3
Single unit
truck DV2 4.1 2.6 11.0 1.5 3.0 6.5 12.8
Single unit
bus DV3 4.1 2.6 12.1 2.1 2.4 7.6 12.8
Truck + 4.8+8.4
semi-trailer DV4 4.1 2.6 15.2 1.2 1.8 =13.2 13.7

2.3 Intersection Design Speed

The Intersection Design Speed, which is the principal design parameter upon which the
geometrical layout and capacity of an intersection is based, is the design speed of the
major road in the region of the crossing point. This design speed won't really be
equivalent to the normal major road design speed however might be sequential.
Subsequently, the designer must give cautious thought to the choice of the suitable
Intersection Design Speed as this will extraordinarily influence both the security and
productivity of the crossing point and the development cost. For reasons of economy,
the Intersection Design Speed will not be in excess of 20 km/hr higher than the normal
design speed of the major road. For security reasons, the Intersection Design Speed
ought to never be under 20 km/h more slow than the normal design speed for the major
road. To oblige truck traffic, turning radii will be in any event 15 meters (Road
Geometric Design Manual Tanzania, 2011).

2.4 Turning speeds

An issue with the utilization of right-turn paths, particularly when an enormous range
is utilized, is the speed of the turning vehicle. Higher turning speeds could improve
tasks; notwithstanding, people on foot may have more prominent challenges in going
across the street. Drivers, particularly more seasoned drivers, may not be alright with
the higher speed of the turn when attempting to turn their heads to look upstream while
making the merging decision. The driver may like to slow or stop toward the finish of
the path. This conduct could bring about backside crashes as more recognizable drivers
or drivers more alright with the higher speed don't foresee the halted vehicle. The

7
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
capacity to foresee the free-flow turning speed at a right-turn path should allow for
better-educated choices on the compromises between improved operations and
pedestrian comfort and safety (ERA, 2013).

Turning speeds ought to be restricted to 15 mph (24 km/hr), or less. Minimizing turning
speeds is vital to pedestrian safety, as corners are where drivers are most likely to come
across pedestrians crossing in the crosswalk (NACTO, 2013).

2.5 Corner radii

The design of the corner radius influences how drivers cross the convergence, including
the velocities picked just as the way the driver follows. The corner radius esteem
likewise influences walkers both as for managing the speed of the turning vehicle and
their way and intersection experience. The corner radius esteem is related with different
features, for example, the arrangement of islands. Turning layouts (hardcopy or
computer-aided-design cells) or turning path software can be utilized to anticipate the
ways of paths of vehicles in curves. The connection between lane width, radius, and
intersection angle affects the path vehicles take when turning at an intersection. The
selection of the radius at an intersection affects turning-vehicle speeds and lane
positioning. Consideration of the type of vehicle used in the design and acceptable lane
positioning is made based on the types of main and cross roadways. Curb radii are
selected to accommodate desired design vehicles (but not necessarily to turn into the
first lane on a multilane roadway). For intersections with minor roadways, it is
frequently judged acceptable for infrequent large trucks to occupy both lanes on the
minor roadway in the course of completing the turning maneuver. This type of design
would be inappropriate for a major crossroad, of course, or where trucks are frequent
users of the minor roadway (NACTO, 2013).

2.6 Turning Radius Effects.

Some of the effects the corner radii selection has on the operation of an intersection

Benefits of Larger Radii

Accommodates larger vehicles without encroachment, permits higher turning-vehicle

speeds in free-flow situations which can produce smaller-speed differentials with
following vehicles and thus less severe rear-end conflicts and may allow the presence

8
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
of islands for traffic control devices and pedestrian refuge areas (Kay & William h,
2005).
Benefits of Smaller Radii

Reduced vehicle crossing time, reduced pedestrian crossing time which leads to
reduced vehicular delay at signalized intersections, reduced turning speeds can benefit
pedestrians and reduced pavement area (Kay & William h, 2005).
Corner radii directly impact vehicle turning speeds and pedestrian crossing distances.
Minimizing the size of a corner radius is critical to creating compact intersections with
safe turning speeds (NACTO, 2013).

2.7 Swept path

Swept path analysis studies focus on studying the way in which different components
of a vehicle, including wheels, respond while maneuvering a turn. Researchers typically
stress on calculating and analyzing the movement and path of different parts, as the
vehicle negotiates a turning manoeuver, and also ascertains the space occupied by the
vehicle body. Early swept path analysis was done manually, and researchers prepared
complex swept path analysis diagrams without the aid of any software. With time,
however, intelligent CAD software has replaced the need for manual intervention. The
tool animate vehicle paths and use multiple camera angles to produce 2D and 3D
imagery. This software has vehicle libraries extensively to ensure that the appropriate
vehicle is adopted for the design purpose (Admin, 2017).

Swept path analysis for vehicle access and exit at junctions and accesses is often needed
for different kinds of developments. Swept path analysis is utilized to exhibit that the
intersection geometry is adequate for the vehicle being assessed. On the off chance that
the Swept path analysis shows that the intersection can't oblige the vehicle movement,
it permits the designer to see the degree of the cleared way to revise the intersection
design. Junctions and roundabouts are designed in accordance with design standards or
manuals. Nonetheless, these don't generally think about the size of the vehicle that
utilizes the intersection. To adjust to the design is suitable for the vehicle use, Swept
path analysis is embraced. The design can, therefore, be modified where necessary
(Admin, 2011).

9
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
2.7.1 Ackermann steering geometry

Ackermann steering geometry is a geometric arrangement of linkages in the steering of

a car or other vehicle designed to solve the problem of wheels on the inside and outside
of a turn needing to trace out circles of different radii.

The Ackermann steering is used in car-like vehicles. The basic idea consists of rotating
the inner wheel slightly sharper than the outer wheel to reduce tire slippage.

2.7.1.1 Simple Ackermann condition

A simple approximation to perfect Ackermann steering geometry may be generated by

moving the steering pivot points inward so as to lie on a line drawn between the steering
kingpins and the center of the rear axle. The steering pivot points are joined by a rigid
bar called the tie rod which can also be part of the steering mechanism, in the form of
a rack and pinion for instance. With perfect Ackermann, at any angle of steering, the
center point of all of the circles traced by all wheels will lie at a common point. Note
that this may be difficult to arrange in practice with simple linkages, and designers are
advised to draw or analyze their steering systems over the full range of steering angles.

Modern cars do not use pure Ackermann steering, partly because it ignores important
dynamic and compliant effects, but the principle is sound for low-speed maneuvers.
Some racing cars use reverse Ackermann geometry to compensate for the large
difference in slip angle between the inner and outer front tyres while cornering at high
speed. The use of such geometry helps reduce tyre temperatures during high-speed
cornering but compromises performance in low-speed maneuvers. The Ackermann
steering linkage and Extended Ackermann condition are given in Figure 2.1 and Figure
2.2.

Tanϕ=l/r_______________________________________________________(1)

Tan ϕi= l/(r-w/2) ________________________________________________(2)

Tan ϕo = l/(r+w/2) ______________________________________________ (3)

10
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Figure 2.1 Ackermann steering linkage

2.7.1.2 Extended Ackermann condition

The Ackermann condition of vehicle train is fulfilled when not only the pulling vehicle
wheel axes, but also the trailer wheel axes are pointing in the theoretical turning center
(momentan centrum). In contrary to single vehicles, vehicle combinations has to travel
a certain distance to have this condition fulfilled after having the steering wheels turned.

Figure 2.2 Extended Ackermann condition

11
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
2.8 Minimize effective turning radius
 Select the smallest possible design vehicle.
 Accommodate trucks and buses on designated truck and bus routes.
 Restrict right-turns-on-red, so there is no expectation of turning into the nearest
receiving lane.
 Require larger vehicles to employ on-roadway personnel to “spot” vehicles
through difficult turns.
 Design so that emergency vehicles may utilize the full area of the intersection
for making turns (NACTO 2013).

2.9 Intersection performance measures

Capacity and degree of saturation, delay, queue length, and level of service are the main
performance measures of intersections (V. Mathew et al, 2006).

2.9.1 Capacity and degree of saturation

Capacity is characterized as the most extreme rate of flow for the subject lane group
that can go through the intersection under prevailing traffic, roadway, and signalized
conditions. Capacity is given in vehicles per hour (veh/h) but is based on the flow amid
a top 15-minute period. The capacity examination includes the quantitative assessment
of the capability of a road area to carry traffic, and it uses a set of strategies to decide
the most extreme flow of traffic that a given section of highway will carry under
prevailing roadway traffic and control conditions (V. Mathew et al, 2006).

Capacity is the most extreme sustainable flow rate that can be accomplished amid a
indicated time period beneath given (prevailing) road, traffic, and control conditions
(Garber 2010). The capacity of a facility is the maximum hourly rate at which people
or vehicles sensibly can be anticipated to navigate a point or a uniform section of a lane
or roadway amid a given time period under the prevailing roadway, traffic, and control
conditions (Jacquemart, 1998).

Q=su ____________________________________________________________(4)

Where Q capacity (veh/h), u percentage of time when the vehicles can leave from the
queue (signals are green or gaps are accessible in the opposing stream) and s saturation
(queue discharge) flow rate (veh/h) (Sidra Intersection 7 Guidelines, 2017).

12
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
For signalized crossing points, u is the green time proportion, u = g / c, where g
effective green time (s) and c cycle time (s).For gap-acceptance forms at roundabouts
and sign-controlled crossing points, u is the unblocked time ratio related to average
lengths of block and unblock periods within the restricting stream (Sidra Crossing point
7 Rules, 2017).

Saturation flow rate is the most extreme flow rate that can be maintained when there's
a queue and the vehicles can leave from the queue, i.e. signals are not red or the gaps
within the contradicting stream are not too short. Saturation flow rate corresponds to a
queue discharge headway which represents the minimum headway between vehicles
that is achieved while they are departing from the queue:

hs =3600/s_________________________________________________________(5)

hs queue release (saturation) headway (seconds) and s saturation flow rate (veh/h). For
example, a saturation flow rate of s = 1800 veh/h corresponds to a saturation headway
of = 2.0 seconds. The gap-acceptance system uses the follow-up headway (tf) as the
queue release (saturation) headway (tf = hs). The follow-up headway matches to a
saturation flow rate which is the maximum gap-acceptance capacity that can be
achieved when the opposing flow is close to zero.

s=3600/tf __________________________________________________________ (6)

Where s saturation flow rate veh/h and tf follow-up headway as a queue discharge
(saturation) headway (seconds) (Sidra Intersection 7 Guidelines, 2017).

Figure 2.3 Capacity and degree of saturation

13
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
2.9.2 Queue length

Definition of Queue Concurring to the Highway Capacity Manual 2000, queue is

characterized as " a line of vehicles, bikes, or people waiting to be served by the system
in which the flow rate from the front of the queue chooses the normal speed within the
queue. Slowly moving cars or people joining the rear of the queue are usually
considered part of the queue." such a sentence implies that not only the car halted stop
line behind the signal control and incorporates all the cars that are influenced by the
traveling speed by the vehicle queues approaching the intersection.

Henry X. Liu (2009) has defined the length of the queue of the actual sum of both parts.
"Standing Queue" is that the vehicle was stopped by a signal control, and "Moving
Queue” is that the vehicle speed of the vehicle is reduced to a certain level below. There
are two kinds of the queue. First, "Maximum queue," refers to the length of queues
formed to the rear of the stop line when the traffic light turns green equalization.
Second, "Maximum back of the queue," the maximum length of the stop line to the rear
end of the queue has been created within the same cycle (Akhelik et.al. 1998).

2.9.3 Level of service

The level of service is a measure of how well the facility is working. It is both a
qualitative measure of motorists’ perceptions of the operational conditions existing on
the office, as well as a measure of the density of vehicular travel (Akhelik et.al. 2017).

A qualitative classification of traffic is often done in the form of a six-letter A-F level
of service (LOS) scale defined in the Highway Capacity Manual. A qualitative measure,
extending from A to F that characterizes both operational conditions within a traffic
stream and highway users' perception. The level of service (LOS) is the measure of the
quality of stream (Sidra Crossing point 7 Rules, 2017).

2.9.3.1 Vehicles level of service

There are different methods for the level of service definitions for vehicles such as delay
(HCM 2000), Delay & v/c (HCM 2010), and delay & degree of Saturation method.

1) Delay (HCM 2000) method

This method is based on HCM 2000 (TRB 2000) and uses delay only for LOS
determination for vehicles. The LOS thresholds are given in Table 2-2. The strategy is

14
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
utilized as the default for the Standard Left, Standard Right and New Zealand models
in SIDRA Intersection. For these models, the Roundabout LOS Method is "Same as
Signalized Intersections" (applying the delay thresholds given under "Signals." Thus,
the roundabout LOS method is unchanged for these models in Version 8.1 compared
with previous versions (Sidra Intersection 7 Guidelines, 2017).

Table 2-2 Delay (HCM 2000) method

control delay per vehicle in seconds (d)

level of
signals (sidra standard default for "sidra roundabout LOS" sign
service
roundabouts) option control
A d ≤10 d ≤10 d ≤10
B 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 15
C 20 < d ≤ 35 20 < d ≤ 35 15 < d ≤ 25
D 35 < d ≤ 55 35 < d ≤ 50 25 < d ≤ 35
E 55 < d ≤ 80 55 < d ≤ 70 35 < d ≤ 50
F 80 < d 70 < d 50 < d

2) Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method

Typically the LOS method for vehicles presented in HCM 2010 (TRB 2010a).It offers
an important variation on the Delay (HCM 2000) method in using both the average
control delay and the v/c (demand volume/capacity) ratio, or degree of saturation for
LOS determination. It uses delay thresholds, which are the same as in the Delay (HCM
2000) method, but assigns LOS F when v/c > 1.0 (oversaturated conditions) irrespective
of delay, as seen in Table 2-3. This method replaces the Delay (HCM) & Degree of
Saturation method, which was available in earlier versions of SIDRA
INTERSECTION. The earlier method used the LOS criteria and thresholds for vehicles
given in Table 2-4. As Berry (1987) proposal. The Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method
could be considered to be a simplified version of the earlier method used in SIDRA
INTERSECTION. Both methods give LOS F for oversaturated conditions (v/c > 1.0),
but the Delay (HCM) & Degree of Saturation had more subtle conditions that could
lead to LOS D or E for degrees of saturation (v/c ratios) close to 1.0 (Sidra Intersection
7 Guidelines, 2017).

15
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Table 2-3 Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method

control delay per vehicle in seconds (d) level of

service v/c ≤
level of service sign control 1
"sidra roundabout LOS"
v/c ≤ 1 signals (HCM defualt for all
option
roundabouts) intersection
types
A d ≤10 d ≤10 d ≤10 F
B 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 15 F
C 20 < d ≤ 35 20 < d ≤ 35 15 < d ≤ 25 F
D 35 < d ≤ 55 35 < d ≤ 50 25 < d ≤ 35 F
E 55 < d ≤ 80 55 < d ≤ 70 35 < d ≤ 50 F
F 80 < d 70 < d 50 < d F

Table 2-4 Delay & Degree of Saturation method

control delay per vehicle in seconds (d)

signals (sidra "sidra degree of

level of service
standard default roundabout sign control satuartion (v/c ) x
for roundabouts) LOS" option

A d ≤10 d ≤10 d ≤10 0 < x ≤ 0.85

B 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 20 10 < d ≤ 15 0 < x ≤ 0.85
C 20 < d ≤ 35 20 < d ≤ 35 15 < d ≤ 25 0 < x ≤ 0.85
D 35 < d ≤ 55 35 < d ≤ 50 25 < d ≤ 35 0 < x ≤ 0.85
0 < d ≤ 55 0 < d ≤ 50 0 < d ≤ 35 0.85 < x ≤ 0.95
E 55 < d ≤ 80 55 < d ≤ 70 35 < d ≤ 50 0 < x ≤ 0.95
0 < d ≤ 80 0 < d ≤ 70 0 < d ≤ 50 0.95 < x ≤ 1
F 80 < d 70 < d 50 < d 1<x

2.9.3.2 Pedestrian level of service

The criteria used for the pedestrian level of service as well as the guide for the risk-
taking behavior of pedestrians given in Table 2-5 are based on HCM 2000 (TRB 2000)
Chapter 18, Exhibit 18-9 for signalized intersections and Exhibit 18-13 for unsignalized
intersections in HCM 2000 Chapter 18 (Pedestrians). The LOS criteria and thresholds
given in Table 2-4 apply for all SIDRA INTERSECTION models irrespective of the
LOS Method selected for vehicles (Sidra Intersection 7 Guidelines, 2017)..

16
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Table 2-5 Level of Service method for pedestrians

Average delay per pedestrain in seconds (d)

level of likelyhood of risk
Unsignalised
service signals taking behaviour
intersections
A d ≤10 d≤5 Low
B 10 < d ≤ 20 5 < d ≤ 10 -
C 20 < d ≤ 30 10 < d ≤ 20 Moderate
D 30 < d ≤ 40 20 < d ≤ 30 -
E 40 < d ≤ 60 30 < d ≤ 45 High
F 60 < d 45 < d Very High

2.9.4 Delay

Delay is the additional travel time experienced by a vehicle or pedestrian with reference
to a base travel time (e.g., free-flow travel time). The delay to a vehicle which slows
from the approach cruise speed to a full stop (due to a reason such as a red signal, a
queue ahead, or lack of an acceptable gap), pauses and then speed up to the exit cruise
speed is considered to include the delay due to a deceleration from the approach cruise
speed down to an approach negotiation speed and then to zero speed, idling time,
acceleration to an exit negotiation speed along the negotiation distance, traveling the
rest of the negotiation distance ( if any) at the constant exit negotiation speed, and then
acceleration to the exit cruise speed. This delay is the intersection control delay (overall
delay with geometric delay) (Sidra Intersection 7 Guidelines, 2017), and it is shown in
Figure 2-4. In the figure definition of control delay, geometric delay, stop-line delay,
and stopped delay experienced by a turning vehicle at an intersection is shown.

17
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Figure 2.4 Control delay, geometric delay, stop-line delay, and stopped delay

2.9.4.1 Delay at signalized intersection

2.9.4.1.1 Webster’s delay model

UD=C/2[(1 – g/C) 2/ (1 – (g/C) X)] ________________________________ (7)

Where:

C = cycle length, s

X=v/c ratio

g=effective green time, sec

b) Random delay model

RD = X2/ (2v (1 - X)) ___________________________________________ (8)

The equation was found to fairly overestimate delay. As Webster proposed total delay
is the amount of uniform delay and random delay, and it very well may be assessed as,

D = 0.90(UD + RD) _______________________________________________ (9)

c) Overflow delay model

18
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
OD = (T/2)/(X - 1) _______________________________________________ (10)

Where,

T= analysis period, h Inconsistencies among Random and Overflow delay happens

when the X is in the region of 1.0. Most investigations show that uniform postpone
model holds well in the reach X less than 0.85.In this range true value of random delay
is least and there is no overflow delay; Likewise overflow delay model holds well in
the reach X greater than 1.15. The irregularity occurs in the rang 0.85 <X <1.15; here
both the models are not precise and significant part of the later work in delay modeling
includes endeavors to overcome this issue, making a model that closely follows the
uniform delay model at low X proportions, and approaches the hypothetical overflow
delay model at high X proportions, creating sensible delay appraises in the middle. The
most commonly utilized model for overcoming this issue was created by Akcelik for
the Australian Road Research Board's signalized crossing point [V. P Sisaopiku, 2001].
2.9.4.1.2 Akcelik delay Model

Akcelik proposed a delay model to address the above said problem. In his delay model,
overflow factors is given by,

OD = (cT/4) [(X - 1) + ((X - 1)2 + 12(X - X0)/cT) 1/2)] ___________________ (11)

For x > X0, OD = 0________________________________________________ (12)

For X ≤ X0, X0 = 0.67 + sg/600_____________________________________ (13)

Where,
T is analysis period, h

X is v/c ratio

C is capacity, veh/hour

S is saturation flow rate, veh/sg (vehicles per second of green)

g is effective green time, sec

2.9.4.1.3 HCM 2000 delay model

HCM 2000 delay model incorporates the uniform delay show, a kind of Akcelik’s
overflow delay show, and the delay from the remaining or a current queue at the start
of the analysis period. The delay is evaluated as,

19
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
d = d1PF + d2 + d3_____________________________________________ (14)

d1 = c/2[(1 – g/c) 2/ (1 – (min (1, X) (g/c))] ___________________________ (15)

d2 = 900T [(X - 1) + ((X - 1)2 + 8klX/cT) 1/2] _________________________ (16)

Where, d is control delay, s/veh,

d1 is uniform delay component, s/veh

PF is progression adjustment factor

d2 is overflow delay component, s/veh

d3 is delay as a result of pre-existing queue, s/veh

T is analysis period, h

X is v/c ratio

C is cycle length, s

k is incremental delay factor for activated controller settings; 0.50 for entire pre-timed
controllers

l is upstream filtering change factor; 1.0 for all separate intersection analyses

2.9.4.2 Delay models for unsignalized intersections

2.9.4.2.1 HCM 2000 delay model

For roundabouts delays can be predicted in a manner similar to that used for stop-
controlled and signal-controlled intersections. Equation 17 shows the model that should
be used to estimate control delay for each lane of an approach of a roundabout.

d=3600/c +900 T[X-1+ ((X-1)2+ ((3600/c) X)/450T) 1/2] ______________ (17)

Where:
d is control delay, sec/veh;

c is capacity of subject lane, veh/h; and

T is time period, h (T=1 for 1-hr analysis, T=0.25 for 15-min analysis).

Equation 17 is the same as that for stop-controlled intersections but that it does not
incorporate the “+ 5s” term and this adjustment is essential to account for the yield

20
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
control on the subject entry, which does not require drivers to come to a total halt in the
event that there's no clashing activity.

The HCM delay models (TRB 2000, 2010a) don't incorporate geometric delays in spite
of the fact that HCM qualifies delay equations as assessing control delay. SIDRA
Intersection standard delay models incorporate geometric delay as an unequivocal extra
term. SIDRA Intersection output contains geometric delays calculated utilizing the
SIDRA standard methods for all sorts of intersection indeed when the HCM Delay
Equation choice is chosen. These geometric delays are not included to delay values
gotten utilizing the HCM delay conditions when the HCM Delay equation alternative
is utilized (Sidra Crossing point 7 Rules, 2017).

2.10 Effects of traffic congestion

Gridlock on metropolitan streets will brings about colossal financial misfortune, extra
postponement, and client cost. Intersections takes a significant part in the street
organization, where traffic streams in various ways merge. Because of disturbance of
pedestrians, merged traffic and lost green time for starting and clearance, and so on
capacity or the maximum rate of flow at which people or vehicles can sensibly hope to
navigate a convergence is a lot of lower than their approach links. Accordingly,
convergences are normally the bottleneck of the network and are the greatest and
immediate source of traffic accidents. Henceforth, the level of service at the intersection
fundamentally influences the general level of service of the road. The basic part of
increasing the capacity of any road lies in the increasing capacity of the intersection.
Traffic signals, roundabouts, stop, and yield controls are generally utilized in a few at
grade intersections in metropolitan regions to expand traffic proficiency and security
by isolating clashing traffic developments as expected (Kay & William h, 2005).

2.11 Relationship between vehicle characteristics and speed

There is an immediate connection between the dimension of the curb radius and the
speed of turning motor vehicles. A large radius may easily oblige large trucks and
school busses, yet it likewise other drivers to make maneuver high speed turns, and it
expands the intersection separation for pedestrians. Drivers who drive quicker are more
averse to stop for pedestrians. A bigger span will likewise bring about a more extended
intersection separation for the person on foot. The arrangement is to reduce the curb

21
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
radius. When designing curb radii, consider what motor vehicles really need when
turning. Rather than expecting that each corner should be reduced, take a look at
different factors, for example, on-road leaving and bike paths to decide how much space
a turning motor vehicle will require. The effective radius that exists ought to incorporate
the width of stopping paths and bike paths on the two roads. Huge trucks don't have to
remain on their half of the road when turning on nearby roads. There isn't a need to plan
for the biggest vehicle that may utilize a road, particularly for roads inside areas
(Cullinane, 1992).

2.12 Key findings and identified gaps

After reviewing this literature, it is being noticed a gap from previously done researches
that before and after the evaluation of the level of service and capacity or providing
some alternative solutions this alternative didn't consider the effect of turn radius and
vehicle maneuverability. This research will fill this gap because of some focuses on
maneuverability and intersection speed and some on traffic flow. Therefore on this
paper I considered the effect of turn radius on vehicle maneuverability and traffic flow
at selected intersection.

22
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

CHAPTER THREE
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This thesis has been incorporated by concentrated review of literatures related with the
title of the research and by partner it with the genuine ground conditions. After thorough
study of literatures on the topic, field observation have been made. In order to meet the
objectives of this research geometric elements of the selected intersections, traffic
counts, pedestrians, cyclists, and motorized vehicles have been conducted. AutoCAD
Civil 3D is used for swept path analysis, Autodesk infraworks used for traffic
simulation and evaluation of intersection performance and Minitab 17 was used to
developed linear regression model.

3.2 Study area

Addis Ababa is the capital City of Ethiopia, which is located within the horn of Africa
with geographical coordinates of and 38o44’24’’ East and 9o1’48’’ North and with an
average elevation of 2355m above sea level. The City has a total area of about 530.14
km2. The City is divided into 10 administrative sub-cities and 99 Kebeles and it is the
most important business and commercial center of the country. The rapid increase of
the Addis Ababa population is the main cause of the increasing demand for
transportation and mobility. This may create major operational problems, especially
during the peak periods (Quezon et.al. 2017).

Figure 3.1 Location Map

23
 Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
3.3. Study Design

3.3.1 For swept path analysis

In order to identify the different turn radius that satisfy the commercial vehicle
maneuverability, it is to be required to determine the design vehicle, including its size,
geometric data, and other relevant data are collected. Then by using the selected
methods of analysis, the data are to be reduced and analyzed. Based on the output of
the analysis discussing the contributory factors which affect the swept path analysis of
the intersections and accordingly discussing the remedial measures.

3.3.2 Evaluation of operational characteristics of the selected intersections

In order to evaluate the operational characteristics of the selected intersections, it is to

be required to determine the level of service of the junction through field observations,
including traffic volume data, geometric data, and other relevant data are collected.
Then by using the selected methods of analysis, the data are to be reduced and analyzed.
Based on the output of the analysis discussing the contributory factors which affect the
operational characteristics of the intersections and accordingly discussing the remedial
measures.
Site Selection

Data
collection

Geometric Traffic Pedestrian

Data Volume Data count data

Analysis

Swept path Conclusion and Performance

analysis recommendation analysis
for application:

Figure 3.2 Work Flow

24
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
3.4 Sampling Technique and Sample Size
Based on the objective of the study, the researcher applied a purposive sampling method
to determine the sample area of the proposed study. The method used to select the
samples is finding intersections which there turn radius has been reduced. There are
eight intersections that there turn radius have been reduced. This are Amestegna
Intersection, Berbere Tera Intersection, British Embassy Intersection, Bulgaria
Intersection, Kokeb Intersection, Mekenisa Intersection, Saris Abo Intersection, and
Shola Intersection.

3.5 Data Collection Process

To achieve the aim of the study and to answer the formulated research questions,
different data are to be required, and these data are categorized into two:

(1)Primary data, and (2) Secondary data.

3.5.1 Primary data

3.5.1.1 Geometric Data

Software as per the requirement of the Autodesk InfraWorks, different geometric data
are to be needed, such as turn radius, median width, sidewalk width, entry number of
lanes, and average lane width. These data was measured using tape meter and hand
GPS.

3.5.1.2 Traffic Volume Count Survey

Traffic volume studies was conducted to determine the number, movements, and
classification of vehicles at the selected intersections. For this research, traffic data was
collected by using a video camera and a standard record sheet for the traffic volume
count. A wide scope vehicle classes was considered for the traffic count for giving
adaptability in traffic analysis and intersection capacity assessment scenarios and in
accordance with AACRA classifications and observations of vehicle types using the
intersection. Which are Car, Minibus, Mid Bus, Standard Bus, Truck, and Trailer Truck,
Three wheeler, Motor cycle, and Bicycle. Information from the Traffic Management
office together with field observation made during the study period was used to identify
peak hours. Traffic volume count for one identified peak hour from 5:00pm – 6:00pm,
Thursday of the week. The high pedestrian volume also has a substantial effect on

25
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
capacity. For this purpose numbers of pedestrian were carried out by using the same
technique along the direction of their movements.

3.5.2 Secondary data.

The secondary data which are required for this research study was collected from
different references, books, standards, different researches, Ethiopian mapping agency
and from the Addis Ababa City Administration Authority.

3.6 Study Variables

The study variables are categorized into two. These are the dependent variable and
independent variables.

Dependent variable

• Level of service (LOS)

Independent Variables

• Vehicle type and volume

• Lane width

• Lane number

• Capacity

• Delay

• Saturation flow rate

• Speed

• Turn radius

Note: A few independent variables may not have significance and they maybe be left
out.

3.7 Data Processing and Analysis

3.7.1 Swept path analysis

Vehicle swept path analysis presents a vital step while analyzing on at-grade
intersection and roundabout designs. Following the exhaustive development of

26
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
computer-aided design (CAD) software, numerous CAD-based computer programs for
vehicle movement simulation have been industrialized and commercially dispersed, of
which this study will be considered of its application.

After geometric data of the intersection was collected, Swept path analysis was done
using AutoCAD civil 3D. This checked at what speed and turn radius the commercial
vehicles make a right turn.

AutoCAD Civil 3D software is preferred for swept path analysis in this research for the
following reasons:

 It is a very complete transportation analysis, and design solution for vehicle

swept path analysis. It empowers engineers, designers, and planners to assess
vehicle movements on transportation or site design projects

 It can be standardized for local conditions, and it is highly flexible

Vehicle Tracking swept path simulations utilize various methodologies. Ackerman

steering geometry essentially allows the steered wheels to track the turning alignment
of a vehicle without scrubbing. Without Ackerman geometry wheels on steering axles
would turn at the same angle on both sides, instead of the inner wheel turning at a
greater angle, and would be much less efficient. The non-Ackerman geometry would
create tire scrubbing, limited grip, and so probably a larger turning circle, and the 2-
wheels would eventually try to cross each other's path. Therefore, for this research,
Ackerman Method is to be used. The detail equations for the Ackerman Method from
Equation 1 to Equation 3.

The design vehicle for this research is selected Addis Ababa City Roads Authority
(AACRA, 2003) GEOMETRIC DESIGN MANUAL and Ethiopian Roads Authority
(ERA, 2013) which is Design Single-Unit Truck/Bus.

27
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Figure 3.3 Design Single-Unit Truck/Bus

The turning radius reduced at the selected intersection is minimum 5 meter and
maximum 15 meter, there for this research swept path analysis was done starting from
5 meter radius at an increment of 1 meter until 15 meter turning radius.

Corner radii straightforwardly sway vehicle turning speeds and person on foot crossing
separations. Limiting the size of a corner range is basic to making smaller crossing
points with safe turning speeds (NACTO, 2013). Turning speed ought to be restricted
to 15 mph (24 km/hr), or less Minimizing turning speeds is pivotal to passerby
wellbeing, as corners are the place drivers are destined to experience people on foot
crossing in the crosswalk (NACTO, 2013).Turning velocities ought to be restricted to
15 mph (24 km/hr), or less Minimizing turning speeds is pivotal to passerby wellbeing,
as corners are the place drivers are destined to experience people on foot crossing in the
crosswalk (NACTO, 2013). There for research speed less than or equal to 15 mph (24
km/hr) is used.

3.7.1.1 Swept path analysis modeling steps

1. Importing hand GPS data in to global mapper and exporting it to AutoCAD

format

28
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
2. Measure each lanes dimension, sidewalk width, median width and turn radius
dimension.
3. Import the mosaic of each intersection to global mapper and draw the outer edge
of the intersections and export it to AutoCAD format
4. Use the dimension obtained from step to draw the final intersection layout
5. Calibrate the dimensions of the design vehicle into AutoCAD Civil 3D
6. Vehicle turning path template should be applied to accommodate the swept path
of the design vehicle, plus a minimum offset of 0.6 meter from extremities of
the vehicle path to a curb or pavement edge.
7. Run the swept path analysis for different turn radius, speed, intersection angle
and different lane combination until you find a scenario where there is no off
tracking from ones lane and running over the median.
8. To find a delay caused by off tracking from ones lane repeat step 6 and place
the two vehicles side by side then find the delay caused by the off tracking by
trial and error method where the two vehicles pass each other without colliding.

3.7.2 Best fit model

Evaluation of operational characteristics of intersections will be classified into two

types: empirical and analytical models. The Empirical models is to be used from
observations at selected intersections under all types of conditions to develop regression
equations that match intersection characteristics with intersection capacity. Analytical
models estimate capacity is to be based on gap-acceptance relationships which does not
require observations under traffic congested conditions. Since, the Empirical Method
will depend on geometric elements of the intersection, it could be difficult to find the
necessary geometric features (elements) at the Addis Ababa intersections. In this study,
the analytical method is known to be more realistic than the empirical method since it
considers the traffic environment. Therefore, for this research, Analytical Method is to
be applied.

Using data collected for the selected intersection was analyzed using Autodesk
InfraWorks. Autodesk InfraWorks is created by the American enterprise Autodesk, Inc.
A model made in the product can comprise of a few information sources and document
configurations, for example, raster and vector information (Autodesk Inc., 2017a). A
traffic simulation tool (also known as Traffic analyst panel) was as of late added to the

29
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
product once a road network model is created the traffic simulation tool (also known as
Traffic analyst panel, TAP can be used to analyze traffic flow and to generate a
simulation animation. The tool allows the user to set multiple parameters in order to
calibrate the model. It is possible to simulate pedestrians, bicyclists and public transport
in InfraWorks.

Autodesk InfraWork software is preferred for Performance analysis in this research for
the following reasons:

 With its cloud capabilities InfraWorks allows the user to share designs and
models with other users and computers online.

 Generates a simulation animation

 InfraWorks is also compatible with AutoCAD Civil 3D, a software in civil

engineering design, which enables an exchange of data between the two
programs.

 It is a commercially available tool to offer geometric and gap acceptance

capability within a single product.

 It will employ a combination of geometric and gap acceptance modeling

approach in order to take into account the effect of intersection geometry on
driver directly through gap-acceptance modeling; and

 It can be standardized for local conditions, and it is highly flexible

3.7.2.1 Autodesk InfraWork modeling steps

1. Creating new model

2. Creating surface secondary data points which are collected
3. Import the mosaic of each intersection and surfaces of each intersection
4. Creating subassembly with the dimensions of each lane, median and sidewalk
5. Creating planning road using the subassembly created in step 4
6. Converting the planning road to component road using Traffic analyst panel
7. Creating different proposals with different turn radius
8. Inputting total traffic volume, pedestrian volume and percentage of the heavy
vehicle from each approach
9. Route decision( assigning the direction of traffic flow)

30
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
10. Running the simulation
11. Output

3.7.2.2 Linear regression

In statistics, linear regression is a linear approach to modelling the relationship

between a dependent variable and one or more independent variables. The case of
one independent variable is called simple linear regression. For more than one
independent variables, the process is called multiple linear regression.

For this research linear regression model using Minitab 17 was developed relating
the commercial vehicle turning radius and the travel speed, density, and flow of the
traffic stream.

3.7.2.2 Models, criteria’s or values used for analysis

In addition to traffic and geometric data’s for performance evaluation of intersections

model, criteria or value used for analysis of each performance measures (saturation
flow, capacity, delay, queue length, and level of service) should be specified. Model,
criteria or value used for:

3.7.2.2.1 Saturation flow

Saturation flow rate which is the extreme flow rate that can be sustained when there is
a queue and the automobiles can leave from the queue, i.e. signals are not red or the
gaps in the opposing stream are not too short will be calculated by determining the least
headway between vehicles. But for this research saturation flow is taken by considering
HCM 2000 recommendation for intersections environmental conditions.

3.7.2.2.2 Capacity
Capacity which is the extreme maintainable flow rate that can be achieved during a
specified time period under given (prevailing) road, traffic and control conditions will
be calculated for both signalized and unsignalized intersections by the basic equation,
section 2.9.1 from Equation 4 to Equation 6.

3.7.2.2.3 Delay
Webster’s, Akcelik and HCM 2000 delay model are some of the models that used for
the determination of delay in signalized intersections. Webster’s proposed models for
uniform, random, and over flow delays separately and most studies shows uniform
delay model holds well in the range X(v/c) < 0.85 and overflow delay model holds well

31
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
in the range X>1.15 but inconsistency occurs in the range 0.85 <X <1.15; here both
random, and over flow delay models are not accurate. To address the above said
problem Akcelik proposed an overflow delay model. And HCM 2000 delay model
includes the uniform delay model, a version of Akcelik’s overflow delay model, and a
term covering delay from an existing or residual queue at the beginning of the analysis
period and that is why HCM 2000 delay model is will be used for determination of
delay for signalized intersection in this research. HCM 2000 delay model is also
adopted for unsignalised intersections in this paper SIDRA delay models are also used
to calculate delay for this intersection. Generally HCM 2000 delay model give accurate
result than other models of delay and it selected for analysis of intersections in this
research. The detail equations for all models are shown in section 2.9.4 from Equation
7- Equation 17.

3.7.2.2.4 Queue length

A percentile queue length may be value underneath which the desired rate of the normal
queue length values observed for individual cycles fall. The 70th, 85th, 90th, 98th and
98th percentile queue lengths are valuable for the design of queue spaces (turn bays and
parking bans). Utilize of the 95th percentile esteem of the back of queue is for the most
part considered to be a great choice for design purposes. And 95th percentile value is
utilized in this paper.

3.7.2.2.5 Vehicles level of service

There are different methods for level of service definitions to vehicles such as delay
(HCM 2000), Delay & v/c (HCM 2010), and delay & degree of Saturation method.
Delay (HCM 2000) method is based on HCM 2000 (TRB 2000) and uses delay only
for LOS determination for vehicles. Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) uses delay thresholds
which are the same as in the Delay (HCM 2000) method, but assigns LOS F when v/c
> 1.0 (oversaturated conditions) irrespective of delay. Delay (HCM) & Degree of
Saturation had more indirect conditions that could lead to LOS D or E for degrees of
saturation (v/c ratios) close to 1.0. The Delay & v/c (HCM 2010) method is considered
as a simplified method and in this paper this method is used for determination of level
of services. Details of all the methods and criteria are shown in section 2.9.3 of this
research.

32
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
After the intersection analysis is done linear regression model using Minitab 17 will be
developed relating the commercial vehicle turning radius and the travel speed, density,
and flow of the traffic stream.

3.7.3 Level of Service of the selected intersections

Using the developed model capacity, level of service, travel time, and delay will be
computed.

33
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

CHAPTER FOUR

ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

The analysis of the study was done on the selected intersections using the collected data
and following procedure mentioned on the research methodology with the aid of
AutoCAD Civil 3D and Autodesk InfraWorks software, the results are presented clearly
in the following sections.

4.1 Swept path analysis

Researchers typically stress on calculating and analyzing the movement and path of
different parts, as the vehicle negotiates a turning manoeuver, and also ascertains the
space occupied by the vehicle body.

The Design Vehicle is a hypothetical vehicle whose dimensions and operating

characteristics are used to establish certain aspects of road and intersection layout and
geometry. The design vehicle is not necessarily the largest of the vehicles but is
intended to represent an economical level of design catering for at least 85% of vehicles
operating in accordance with the relevant regulations. Larger vehicles are not be
precluded from the road but they need to encroach on adjacent lanes in some
circumstances. While this may inconvenience some other road users, the low frequency
of the occurrence of these vehicles makes this acceptable. The design vehicle used in
various circumstances is identified as appropriate throughout the text. In some cases,
the design is undertaken in accordance with the design vehicle characteristics but is
checked with a larger vehicle to ensure that it can navigate the intersection. The larger
vehicle is chosen according to the potential for such vehicles to use the facility and are
at least the next larger vehicle to the design vehicle.

4.1.1 Results of swept path analysis

4.1.1.1 Results of swept path analysis of Amestegna Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Amestegna Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input
and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where there is no off tracking
from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of
inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width, encroachment width, and length and

34
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement
of intersections.

Analysis result of Amestegna Intersection shows no encroachment and delay occurs for
speed 5km/hr and10km/hr for turn radius 5 meter, 85 degree intersection angle traveling
from one outside lane with width of 3 meter to three lanes with two inside lane with
width of 3.6 meter and one outside lane with width of 3.6 meter, and high value of
encroachment width and length and delay for speed 15km/hr, 20km/hr, and 24km/hr
for turn radius 5 meter to 15 meter.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meter,
95 degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with width of 3.6 meter to
three lanes with two inside lane with width of 3.6 meter and one outside lane with width
of 3 meter.

35
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Table 4.1 Results of swept path analysis of Amestegna Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
10 5 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
15 5 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.74 26.35 13
20 5 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.82 26.73 13
24 5 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.88 26.92 13
15 6 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.68 26.23 13
20 6 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.76 26.58 13
24 6 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.81 26.86 13
15 7 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.65 26.14 13
20 7 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.74 26.46 13
24 7 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.78 26.69 13
15 8 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.55 26.1 13
20 8 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.66 26.42 13
24 8 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.75 26.65 13
15 9 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.55 26.1 13
20 9 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.66 26.42 13
24 9 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.75 26.65 13

36
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

15 10 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.49 25.8 13

20 10 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.58 26.22 13
24 10 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.7 26.42 13
15 11 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.46 25.8 13
20 11 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.55 26.22 13
24 11 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.68 26.37 13
15 12 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.44 25.8 13
20 12 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.51 26.22 13
24 12 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.66 26.35 13
15 13 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.41 25.2 13
20 13 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.49 26.02 13
24 13 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.64 26.28 13
15 14 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.36 25 13
20 14 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.41 25.96 13
24 14 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.58 26.22 13
15 15 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.31 24.93 13
20 15 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.35 25.88 13
24 15 85 1 1 2 2 3 3.6 3.6 3.6 0.52 26.07 13
5 5 95 1 1 2 2 3.6 3 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
10 5 95 1 1 2 2 3.6 3 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
15 5 95 1 1 2 2 3.6 3 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
20 5 95 1 1 2 2 3.6 3 3.6 3.6 0 0 0
24 5 95 1 1 2 2 3.6 3 3.6 3.6 0 0 0

37
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

4.1.1.2 Results of swept path analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario
where there is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Berbere Tera Intersection shows no encroachment occurs and delay for speed 5km/hr, 10km/hr and 15km/hr for turn radius 5
meters, 75-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of
3.2 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.2 meters, and medium value of encroachment width and length and high value of delay for speed
20km/hr for turn radius 5 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 20km/hr for turn radius 6 meters, 75-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with
a width of 3 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.2 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.2 meters.

Medium value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 6 meters to 9 meters, 75-degree intersection angle
traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.2 meters and one outside lane with a
width of 3.2 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 10 meters, 75-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with
a width of 3 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.2 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.2 meters.

38
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

No encroachment occurs and delay for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 105-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with a width of 3.2 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.3 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3 meters.

Table 4.2 Results of swept path analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 0 0 0
10 5 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 0 0 0
15 5 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 0 0 0
20 5 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.37 6.81 13
24 5 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.58 7.18 13
20 6 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 0 0 0
24 6 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.51 7.11 13
24 7 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.48 7.02 13
24 8 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.42 6.98 13
24 9 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.38 6.91 13
24 10 75 1 1 2 2 3 3.2 3.3 3.2 0 0 0
5 5 105 1 1 2 2 3.2 3 3.2 3.3 0 0 0
10 5 105 1 1 2 2 3.2 3 3.2 3.3 0 0 0
15 5 105 1 1 2 2 3.2 3 3.2 3.3 0 0 0

39
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

20 5 105 1 1 2 2 3.2 3 3.2 3.3 0 0 0

24 5 105 1 1 2 2 3.2 3 3.2 3.3 0 0 0

4.1.1.3 Results of swept path analysis of British Embassy Intersection

In the swept path analysis of British Embassy Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario
where there is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of British Embassy Intersection shows no encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters,
95-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.1 meters to four lanes with three inside lane wit h a width of 3.6
meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.6 meters.

High to a low value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 5km/hr for turn radius 6 meters to 9 meters, 85-degree intersection
angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.6 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.1 meters and one outside lane
with a width of 3.1 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 10 meters, 85-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with a width of 3.6 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.1 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.1 meters.

40
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Table 4.3 Results of swept path analysis of British Embassy Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 95 1 1 1 3 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.6 0 0 0
10 5 95 1 1 1 3 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.6 0 0 0
15 5 95 1 1 1 3 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.6 0 0 0
20 5 95 1 1 1 3 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.6 0 0 0
24 5 95 1 1 1 3 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.6 0 0 0
5 6 85 1 1 3 1 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 5.21 8.89 21
5 7 85 1 1 3 1 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 3.12 8.78 21
5 8 85 1 1 3 1 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 1.87 7.1 21
5 9 85 1 1 3 1 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0.83 5.83 21
5 10 95 1 1 3 1 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0 0 0
10 10 85 1 1 1 3 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0 0 0
15 10 85 1 1 1 3 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0 0 0
20 10 85 1 1 1 3 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0 0 0
24 10 85 1 1 1 3 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.1 0 0 0

41
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

4.1.1.4 Results of swept path analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Bulgaria Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where
there is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Bulgaria Intersection shows no encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 75-degree
intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one
outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 105-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with a width of 3.5 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

42
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Table 4.4 Results of swept path analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 75 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
10 5 75 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
15 5 75 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
20 5 75 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
24 5 75 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
5 5 105 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
10 5 105 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
15 5 105 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
20 5 105 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0
24 5 105 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0 0

4.1.1.5 Results of swept path analysis of Kokeb Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Kokeb Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where there
is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

43
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Kokeb Intersection shows no encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 90-degree
intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.2 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one
outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

A commercial vehicle cannot make any right turn maneuver for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters to turn radius 15 meters, 90-
degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to one outside lane with a width of 3.2 meters.

Table 4.5 Results of swept path analysis of Kokeb Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 90 1 1 1 2 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0
10 5 90 1 1 1 2 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0
15 5 90 1 1 1 2 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0
20 5 90 1 1 1 2 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0
24 5 90 1 1 1 2 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0
5 5 90 1 1 0 2 3.5 3.2 3.5 0 0 0 0

44
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

4.1.1.6 Results of swept path analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Mekenisa Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where
there is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Mekenisa Intersection shows no encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 85-degree
intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.6 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.3 meters and one
outside lane with a width of 3.1 meters.

A low value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 5km/hr for turn radius 6 meters to 7 meter, 95-degree intersection angle
traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.1 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.3 meters and one outside lane with
a width of 3.1 meter.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 8 meters, 95-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with a width of 3.1 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.3 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.1 meters.

45
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Table 4.6 Results of swept path analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 85 1 1 1 2 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.3 0 0 0
10 5 85 1 1 1 2 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.3 0 0 0
15 5 85 1 1 1 2 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.3 0 0 0
20 5 85 1 1 1 2 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.3 0 0 0
24 5 85 1 1 1 2 3.6 3.1 3.6 3.3 0 0 0
5 5 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 2.18 7.51 17
5 6 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 1.53 5.89 17
5 7 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0.81 3.81 17
5 8 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0
10 8 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0
15 8 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0
20 8 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0
24 8 95 1 1 2 1 3.1 3.6 3.3 3.6 0 0 0

46
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

4.1.1.7 Results of swept path analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Saris Abo Intersection using AutoCAD Civil input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where there
is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Saris Abo Intersection No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meter, 95 degree
intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with width of 3.2 meter to four lanes with three inside lane with width of 3.35 meter and one
outside lane with width of 3.35 meter.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meter, 85 degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with width of 3.35 meter to three lanes with two inside lane with width of 3.35 meter and one outside lane with width of 3.2 meter.

Table 4.7 Results of swept path analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 95 1 1 2 3 3.2 3.35 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
10 5 95 1 1 2 3 3.2 3.35 3.35 3.35 0 0 0

47
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

15 5 95 1 1 2 3 3.2 3.35 3.35 3.35 0 0 0

20 5 95 1 1 2 3 3.2 3.35 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
24 5 95 1 1 2 3 3.2 3.35 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
5 5 85 1 1 3 2 3.35 3.2 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
10 5 85 1 1 3 2 3.35 3.2 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
15 5 85 1 1 3 2 3.35 3.2 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
20 5 85 1 1 3 2 3.35 3.2 3.35 3.35 0 0 0
24 5 85 1 1 3 2 3.35 3.2 3.35 3.35 0 0 0

4.1.1.8 Results of swept path analysis of Shola Intersection

In the swept path analysis of Shola Intersection using AutoCAD Civil 3D input and output data are shown Appendix and the scenario where there
is no off tracking from one's lane and no running over the median.

Generally, Speed, Turn radius, intersection angle, Number of outside lanes, Number of inside lanes, outside lane width, inside lane width,
encroachment width, and length and delay due to encroachment(s) and Median present are swept path analysis measurement of intersections.

Analysis result of Shola Intersection shows No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 20km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 80-degree
intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one
outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

Medium value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters to 6 meters, 80-degree intersection angle
traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters.

48
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 7 meters, 80-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters to three lanes with two inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 5km/hr to 10km/hr for turn radius 5 meters, 100-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside
lane with a width of 3.5 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

A low value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 20km/hr for turn radius 5 meters to 6 meters, 100-degree intersection angle
traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 20km/hr for turn radius 7 meters, 100-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

A low value of encroachment width and length and delay for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 5 meters to 7 meters, 100-degree intersection angle
traveling from one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters.

No encroachment and delay occurs for speed 24km/hr for turn radius 8 meters, 100-degree intersection angle traveling from one outside lane with
a width of 3.5 meters to two lanes with one inside lane with a width of 3.5 meters and one outside lane with a width of 3.5 meters.

49
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Table 4.8 Results of swept path analysis of Shola Intersection

Number of
Number of Lane width Lane width
Lanes Encroachment
Lanes inside outside inside
Turn outside Delay due to
Speed(km/hr
Radius(m Angle Maximu encroachment(s
) Maximu
) m )
From To From To From To From To m
Length(m
Width(m)
)
5 5 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
10 5 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
15 5 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
20 5 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
24 5 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.92 8.21
24 6 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.86 7.91 13
24 7 80 1 1 1 2 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
5 5 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
10 5 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
15 5 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.29 2.63 13
20 5 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.27 3.67 13
24 5 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.84 6.63 13
20 6 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.77 6.49 13
24 6 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0.81 6.61 13
20 7 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0
24 8 100 1 1 2 1 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 0 0

50
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
4.2 Level of Service of the selected intersections
The intersection analysis gives the delay, maximum queue and the level of service (LOS)
which are described for each approaching lane.

4.2.1 Results of Performance analysis

4.2.1.1 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection

In the performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data are shown in the Appendix. The level of service for Approach W2(Berbere Tera
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.9.

The level of service of Approach W2 (Berbere Tera) from turn radius 5 meters up to 15 meters
for every approach is F but the delay and maximum queue value for every turn radius is
decreasing slightly as shown in the table 4.9.

Table 4.9 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection

Turn Entry W2(Berbere Tera Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 103.15 217.46
6 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 95.54 201.38
7 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.96 200.31
8 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.78 199.17
9 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.44 197
10 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.16 189.73
11 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 93.85 189.46
12 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 93.79 188.62
13 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 92.26 187.65
14 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 91.92 187.13
15 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 90.94 186.42

51
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.1 Amestegna Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

140
120
100 Entry W2(Berbere Tera
Approach)
Delay

80
Entry N2(Geja Sefer
60 Approach)
40 Entry S1(Mexico
Approach)
20
Entry E1(Goma Kuteba
0 Approach)
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.2 Amestegna Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

52
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

300

250
Maximum Queue

Entry W2(Berbere Tera

200 Approach)

150 Entry N2(Geja Sefer

Approach)
100 Entry S1(Mexico
Approach)
50
Entry E1(Goma Kuteba
0 Approach)
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.3 Amestegna Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.2 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

In the performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1 (Mola Maru
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.10

Level of service of Approach E1(Mola Maru Approach) from turn radius 5 meters up to 15
meters for every approach is F but the delay for every turn radius decreases slightly and the
maximum queue value is equal for turn radius 5 meters up to 9 meters and starts decreasing
slightly from turn radius 10 meters up to 15 meters

Table 4.10 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry (Mola Maru Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 77.4 88.08
6 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 77 88.08
7 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 76.18 88.08
8 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.74 88.08
9 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.41 88.08
10 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.04 87.83
11 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.8 87.58
12 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.67 87.36
13 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.44 87.15
14 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.31 86.96
15 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.17 86.75

53
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.4 Berbere Tera Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

120

100

Entry (Mola Maru

80
Approach)
Delay

60 Entry N2(Amestegna
Approach)
40 Entry S1(Bomb tera
Approach)
20 Entry W2(T.Haymanot
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.5 Berbere Tera Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

54
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

100
90
80
Maximum Queue

70 Entry (Mola Maru

60 Approach)

50 Entry N2(Amestegna
Approach)
40
30 Entry S1(Bomb tera
Approach)
20
Entry W2(T.Haymanot
10
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.6 Berbere Tera Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.3 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection

In the performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input
and output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1(4-kilo
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.11

Level of service of Approach E1 (4-kilo Approach) for turn radius 5 meter is C and for turn
radius 6 meter for up to 15 meters for every approach is E but the delay for every turn radius
decreases slightly and maximum queue value is equal for turn radius 5 meters up to 15 meters.

Table 4.11 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry E1(4 kilo Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(4 kilo Approach) C 15.17 0
6 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.96 0
7 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.72 0
8 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.49 0
9 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.26 0
10 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.04 0
11 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.8 0
12 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.58 0
13 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.38 0
14 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.15 0
15 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 12.95 0

55
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.7 British Embassy Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

45
40
35
30
Entry E1(4 kilo Approach)
Delay

25
20 Entry N1(Balderas
15 Approach)
10 Entry W2(Shola
Approach)
5
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.8 British Embassy Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

56
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

140

120
Maximum Queue

100
Entry E1(4 kilo Approach)
80

60 Entry N1(Balderas
Approach)
40
Entry W2(Shola
20 Approach)

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.9 British Embassy Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.4 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

In the performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1(AU
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.12.

Level of service of Approach E1 (Kirkos Approach) for turn radius 5 meters for up to 15 meters
for every approach is F but the delay for every turn radius decreases slightly and maximum
queue value is equal for turn radius 5 meters up to 6 meters, for turn radius 7 meters up to 9
meters, for turn radius 10 meters up to 13 meters and slightly decrease for turn radius 14 meters
and 15 meters.

Table 4.12 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry E1(AU Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(AU Approach) F 126 369.21
6 E1(AU Approach) F 125.13 369.21
7 E1(AU Approach) F 124.85 369.2
8 E1(AU Approach) F 124.7 369.2
9 E1(AU Approach) F 124.57 369.2
10 E1(AU Approach) F 124.44 369.19
11 E1(AU Approach) F 124.28 369.18
12 E1(AU Approach) F 123.73 369.18
13 E1(AU Approach) F 123.14 369.18

57
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
14 E1(AU Approach) F 122.44 369.13
15 E1(AU Approach) F 121.01 369.12

Figure 4.10 Bulgaria Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

160

140

120
Entry E1(AU Approach)
100
Delay

80 Entry N2(Kera Approach)

60
Entry S1(Mexico
40 Approach)
20 Entry W2(Kirkos
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.11 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

58
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

400

350
Maximum Queue

300
Entry E1(AU Approach)
250

200 Entry N2(Kera Approach)

150
Entry S1(Mexico
100 Approach)
50 Entry W2(Kirkos
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.12 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.5 Results of Performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection

In the performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks information

and output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach N1(Lem
Hotel Approach) is shown below in Table 4.13

The level of service of Approach N1(Lem Hotel Approach) for turn radius 5 meters for up to
15 meters for every approach is F but the delay and maximum queue for every turn radius
decreases slightly.

Table 4.13 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

Turn Entry(Lem Hotel Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.79 81.04
6 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.63 80.75
7 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.59 80.52
8 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.55 80.32
9 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.88 79.72
10 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.69 79.64
11 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.6 79.33
12 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.34 79.09
13 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.65 78.76
14 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.46 78.46
15 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.15 77.93

59
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.13 Bulgaria Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

120

100

Entry(24 Approach)
80
Delay

60 Entry(Lem Hotel
Approach)
40 Entry(Megenagna
Approach)
20
Entry(Stadium Approach)

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.14 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

60
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

90
80
70
Maximum Queue

Entry(24 Approach)
60
50
Entry(Lem Hotel
40 Approach)
30 Entry(Megenagna
Approach)
20
10 Entry(Stadium Approach)

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.15 Bulgaria Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.6 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

In the performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1(Sarbet
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.14

The level of service of Approach E1 (Sarbet Approach) for turn radius 5 meters for up to 15
meters for every approach is C but the delay and maximum queue for every turn radius
decreases slightly.

Table 4.14 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

Turn Entry(Sarbet Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.82 10.7
6 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.57 10.29
7 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.22 10.21
8 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.18 9.82
9 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.08 9.79
10 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.81 9.78
11 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.54 9.76
12 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.49 9.72
13 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.42 9.71
14 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 20.97 9.7
15 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 20.74 9.68

61
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.16 Mekenisa Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

25

20

15
Delay

Entry(Sarbet Approach)
10 Entry(Kore Approach)
Entry(German Approach)
5

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.17 Mekenisa Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

62
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

12

10
Maximum Queue

6 Entry(Sarbet Approach)
Entry(Kore Approach)
4
Entry(German Approach)
2

0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.18 Mekenisa Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.7 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

In the performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1 (Bulbula
Approach) is shown below in Table 4.15

The level of service of Approach E1(Bulbula Approach) for turn radius 5 meters for up to 15
meters for every approach is C but the delay and maximum queue for every turn radius
decreases slightly.

Table 4.15 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Bulbula Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 80.7 119.24
6 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 79.04 118.75
7 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.77 118.74
8 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.73 118.51
9 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.5 118.44
10 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.47 118.43
11 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.18 118.41
12 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.9 118.36
13 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.68 114.72
14 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.65 113.64
15 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.42 113.28

63
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.19 Saris Abo Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

120

100

Entry(Bulbula Approach)
80
Delay

60 Entry(Maseltegna
Approach)
40 Entry(Saris Abo
Intersection)
20
Entry(Gumuruk
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.20 Saris Abo Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

64
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

400

350
Maximum Queue

300
Entry(Bulbula Approach)
250

200 Entry(Maseltegna
Approach)
150
Entry(Saris Abo
100 Intersection)
50 Entry(Gumuruk
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.21 Saris Abo Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.2.1.8 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection

In the performance analysis of Shola Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and output
data are shown in the Appendix and the level of service for Approach E1(Bulbula Approach)
is shown below in Table 4.16.

The level of service of Approach E1(Shola Approach)for turn radius 5 meters for up to 15
meters for every approach is F but the delay and maximum queue for every turn radius
decreases slightly.

Table 4.16 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Shola Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Shola Approach) F 103.69 188.06
6 E1(Shola Approach) F 103.19 187.88
7 E1(Shola Approach) F 102.59 187.68
8 E1(Shola Approach) F 102.56 185.02
9 E1(Shola Approach) F 101.87 182.26
10 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.96 182.23
11 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.39 182.09
12 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.14 181.95
13 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.08 181.81
14 E1(Shola Approach) F 98.97 181.65
15 E1(Shola Approach) F 97.98 181.46

65
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Figure 4.22 Shola Intersection geometry

Turn Radius Vs Delay

140

120

100 Entry(Shola Approach)

80
Delay

Entry(Adwa Approach)
60
Entry(Megenagna
40 Approach)
20 Entry(Lem Hotel
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.23 Shola Intersection Turn Radius Vs Delay

66
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City

Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

350

300
Maximum Queue

250 Entry(Shola Approach)

200
Entry(Adwa Approach)
150
Entry(Megenagna
100 Approach)
50 Entry(Lem Hotel
Approach)
0
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Turn Radius

Figure 4.24 Shola Intersection Turn Radius Vs Maximum Queue

4.3 Linear regression model

4.3.1 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection

In the performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data are shown in the Appendix. The Mean flow, Mean Speed, and Mean Density for
Approach W2(Berbere Tera Approach) is shown below in Table 4.17

The mean flow for Approach W2 (Berbere Tera) is constant for every turn radius, the mean
speed increases slightly for turn radius 5 meters to 15-meter turn radius and the mean density
decreases slightly for turn radius 5 meters to 15 meters turn radius.

Table 4.17 Results of Performance analysis of Amestegna Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 4.9 18.1
6 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5 18.1
7 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5 18.1
8 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5 18
9 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.1 17.9
10 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.1 17.9
11 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.2 17.9
12 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.2 17.8
13 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.2 17.7
14 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.3 17.5
67
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
15 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) 605.9 5.5 16.7

4.3.2 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

In the performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for
Approach E1 (Mola Maru Approach) is shown below in Table 4.18

The mean flow for Approach E1(Mola Maru Approach) is constant for turn radius 5 meters up
to 6 meters and it is equal for turn radius 7 meters up to 15 meters, the mean speed for turn
radius 5 meter is slightly lower than the other turn radius’s and it is equal for 6-meters turn
radius and 7 meters turn radius, its equal for turn radius 8 meters up to 10 meters turn radius,
for turn radius 11 meters it is slightly higher that of turn radius 10 meters, it is equal for turn
radius 12 meters and 13-meter turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 14 meters and 15 meters
turn radius and the mean density for turn radius 5 meters up to 7 meters turn radius is equal,
its equal for turn radius 8 meters up to 14-meter turn radius, it is slightly lower than of turn
radius 14 meters turn radius.

Table 4.18 Results of Performance analysis of Berbere Tera Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 178 4.1 4.4
6 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 178 4.2 4.4
7 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.2 4.4
8 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
9 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
10 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
11 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.4 4.3
12 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.5 4.3
13 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.5 4.3
14 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.6 4.3
15 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.6 4.2

4.3.3 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection

In the performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input
and output data are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density
for Approach E1(4-kilo Approach) is shown below in Table 4.19.

68
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
The mean flow for Approach E1(4-kilo Approach) is constant for turn radius 5 meters up to
15 meters, the mean speed is equal for turn radius 5 meters up to 8-meters turn radius, it is
equal for turn radius 9 meters up to 15 meters turn radius and the mean density is equal for
turn radius 5 meter up to 9 meters turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 10 meters up to 15
meters turn radius.

Table 4.19 Results of Performance analysis of British Embassy Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Radius Approach flow Speed Density
5 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
6 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
7 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
8 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
9 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 5
10 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
11 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
12 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
13 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
14 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
15 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9

4.3.4 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

In the performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for
Approach E1(AU Approach) is shown below in Table 4.20.

The mean flow for Approach E1(4-kilo Approach) is constant for turn radius 5 meters and 7
meters and it is equal for turn radius 8 meters up to 15 meters and the mean speed is equal for
turn radius 5 meters and 6 meters turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 7 meters up to 9 meters
turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 10 meters and 11 meters turn radius, it is equal for turn
radius

12 meter up to 15 meters turn radius and the mean density for turn radius 5 meters up to 7
meters turn radius increases slightly, it's equal for turn radius 8 meters up to 10 meters turn
radius, it's equal for turn radius 11 meters and 12 meters turn radius and it's equal for turn
radius 14 meters and 15 meters turn radius.

69
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
Table 4.20 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Radius Approach flow Speed Density
5 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.5 53.5
6 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.5 53.3
7 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.6 53.2
8 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.6 53.1
9 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.6 53.1
10 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.7 53.1
11 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.7 52.9
12 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.9
13 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.9
14 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.6
15 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.6

4.3.5 Results of Performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection

In the performance analysis of Kokeb Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data’s are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for
Approach N1(Lem Hotel Approach) is shown below in Table 4.21

The mean flow for Approach N1(Lem Hotel Approach is constant for turn radius 5 meters and
6 meters, it is equal for turn radius 7 meters up to 9 meters and it is equal for turn radius 10
meters up to 15 meter and the mean speed is equal for turn radius 5 meters and 6-meter turn
radius, is equal for turn radius 7 meters and 8 meters turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 9
meters up to 11 meters turn radius, it is equal for turn radius 12 meter up to 15 meters turn
radius, and the mean density for turn radius 5 meters up to 10 meters turn radius is equal, its
equal for turn radius 11 meters up to 15 meters turn radius.

Table 4.21 Results of Performance analysis of Bulgaria Intersection

Turn Mean
Approach
Radius Mean flow Mean Speed Density
N1(Lem Hotel
5 Approach) 268 3.2 8.6
N1(Lem Hotel
6 Approach) 268 3.2 8.6
N1(Lem Hotel
7 Approach) 270 3.3 8.6
N1(Lem Hotel
8 Approach) 270 3.3 8.6

70
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
N1(Lem Hotel
9 Approach) 270 3.4 8.6
N1(Lem Hotel
10 Approach) 272 3.4 8.6
N1(Lem Hotel
11 Approach) 272 3.4 8.5
N1(Lem Hotel
12 Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
N1(Lem Hotel
13 Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
N1(Lem Hotel
14 Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
N1(Lem Hotel
15 Approach) 272 3.5 8.5

4.3.6 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

In the performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for
Approach E1(Sarbet Approach) is shown below in Table 4.22.

The mean flow for Approach E1 (Sarbet Approach) is constant for turn radius 5 meters up to
10 meters, it is equal for turn radius 11 meters up to 15 meters and the mean speed is constant
for turn radius 5 meters and 8 meters, for turn radius 9 meter it is slightly higher than that of
turn radius 8 meter, it is equal for turn radius 10 meter and 11 meters, it is equal for turn radius
12 meters and 13 meters, it is equal for turn radius 14 meters and 15 meters and the mean
density for turn radius 5 meters it is slightly higher than that of the other turn radius’s, its equal
for turn radius 6 meters up to 15 meters turn radius.

Table 4.22 Results of Performance analysis of Mekenisa Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Radius Approach flow Speed Density
5 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.2
6 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
7 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
8 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
9 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 26 1.1
10 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 26.1 1.1
11 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.1 1.1
12 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.2 1.1
13 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.2 1.1

71
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
14 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.4 1.1
15 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.4 1.1

4.3.7 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

In the performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and
output data are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for
Approach E1 (Bulbula Approach) is shown below in Table 4.23

The mean flow for Approach E1(Bulbula Approach) is constant for turn radius 5 meters and
15 meters and the mean speed is constant for turn radius 5 meters and 6 meters, it is equal for
turn radius 7 meters and 8 meters, it is equal for turn radius 9 meters and 10 meters, it is equal
for turn radius 11 meters up to 15 meters increases slightly and the mean density is constant
for turn radius 5 meters up to 15 meters turn radius.

Table 4.23 Results of Performance analysis of Saris Abo Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Radius Approach flow Speed Density
5 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.4 8.6
6 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.4 8.6
7 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.5 8.6
8 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.5 8.6
9 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.6 8.6
10 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.6 8.6
11 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.7 8.6
12 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.8 8.6
13 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.9 8.6
14 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 6 8.6
15 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 6.1 8.6

4.3.8 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection

In the performance analysis of Shola Intersection using Autodesk InfraWorks input and output
data are shown in Appendix and the Mean flow, Mean Speed and Mean Density for Approach
E1(Bulbula Approach) is shown below in Table 4.24

The mean flow for Approach E1(Shola Approach) is slightly lower for turn radius 5 meter than
the other turn radius’s, it is equal for turn radius 5 meters up to 11 meters, it is equal for turn
radius 12 meters up to 14 meters, for turn radius 15 meter it is slightly higher than of the other
turn radius’s and the mean speed is constant for turn radius 5 meter and 6 meters, it is equal
72
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
for turn radius 7 meter is, and it is equal for turn radius 8 meters up to 11 meters, it is equal for
turn radius 12 meters up to 15 meters and the mean density for turn radius 5 meter is slightly
higher than of the other turn radius’s, it's equal for turn radius 6 meters and 7 meters turn
radius, it's equal for turn radius 8 meters and 9 meters turn radius, it's equal for turn radius 10
meters and 11 meters turn radius, it's equal for turn radius 12 meters and 13 meters turn radius
and from turn radius, 14 meter to 15 meter decreases slightly.

Table 4.24 Results of Performance analysis of Shola Intersection

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Radius Approach flow Speed Density
5 E1(Shola Approach) 541.9 4.9 20.1
6 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 4.9 20
7 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5 20
8 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.9
9 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.9
10 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.7
11 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.7
12 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.6
13 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.6
14 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.5
15 E1(Shola Approach) 549.9 5.2 19.3

Regression Equation

The regression model developed using the above data and Minitab 17was used to develop the
model. Output data are shown in Appendix.

The R-sq(adj) value is 0.

Turn Radius = 9.853 + 0.000203 Mean flow + 0.0040 Mean Speed - 0.0030 Mean Density

Model
Summary
R- R-
S R-sq
sq(adj) sq(pred)
3.17087 0.08% 0.00% 0.00%

73
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
F- P-
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS
Value Value
Regression 3 4.91 1.6356 0.16 0.921
Mean flow 1 1.86 1.8594 0.18 0.667
Mean
1 0.7 0.6987 0.07 0.792
Speed
Mean
1 0.35 0.3541 0.04 0.851
Density
Error 645 6485.09 10.0544
Lack-of-Fit 442 6223.84 14.0811 10.94 0
Pure Error 203 261.25 1.2869
Total 648 6490

74
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 Conclusion

5.1.1 Geometric & vehicle characteristics of the study

The results of the swept path analysis can be categorized into three based on the cause of the
encroachment. The first category includes intersections whose outside lane width is less than
or equal to 3.2 meters and the second category includes intersections going from four lane
approach to two lanes approach the third category includes intersections with less than or equal
to an 80-degree intersection angle.

An example of the first category is amestegna intersection except for 5km/hr and 10km/hr
speed for every turn radius from 5 meters to 15 meters there where lane encroachment of
average of 26.2 meters in length with an average width of 0.6 meters which caused an average
delay of 13 seconds. This is because the outside lane width is too narrow to accommodate the
designed vehicle. According to AACRA geometric design manual, the Vehicle turning path
template should be applied to accommodate the swept path of the design vehicle, plus a
minimum offset of 0.6 meters from the extremities of the vehicle path to a curb or pavement
edge. The width of the designed vehicle is 2.6 meters.

An example of the second category is British Embassy Intersection for 5km/hr speed for every
turn radius from 5 meters to 9 meters there where lane encroachment of average of 7.65 meters
in length with a width of 0.6 meters which caused an average delay of 21 seconds. This is
because the turn radius is too small for the design vehicle to make the right turn maneuver
from a two-lane approach to four lane approach. According to the AACRA geometric design
manual, where short single-unit trucks are used as the design vehicles, check vehicles may be
permitted to run over curbs and encroach on adjacent lanes. However, the turning path should
not cross the centerline of the minor road unless the minor road is below collector road status.

An example of the third category is Berbere Tera Intersection for 20km/hr and 24km/hr speed
for 75-degree intersection angle and every turn radius from 5 meters to 9 meters there where
lane encroachment of average of 7 meters in length with a width of 3.45 meter which caused
an average delay of 13 seconds. This is because the turn radius is too small for the designed
vehicle to make the right turn maneuver with a narrow intersection angle. According to the
AACRA geometric design manual, the design vehicle is the largest vehicle likely to regularly
75
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
use a movement. The Design Vehicle is a hypothetical vehicle whose dimensions and operating
characteristics are used to establish certain aspects of road and intersection layout and
geometry. The design vehicle is not necessarily the largest of the vehicles but is intended to
represent an economical level of design catering for at least 85% of vehicles operating under
the relevant regulations.

5.1.2 Performance analysis

Almost all analysis result of selected major intersections for turn radius 5 meters to 15 meters
in Addis Ababa City shows high values of delay and queue length and low values of capacity
in the general the level of service of intersections is bad. And all these results revealed as the
intersections have poor performances as a result of congestion, tremendous economic loss,
additional delay, and user cost rises from day today.

5.1.3 Linear regression model

Even though the regression model shows there is a direct relationship between turn radius and
speed and flow and an inverse relationship with density because the R-sq(adj) value is 0 the
relationship between turn radius and speed, flow and density is insignificant.

5.2.1 Recommendations for geometric & vehicle characteristics study

1. The outside lane width should at least be 3.2 meter wide to accommodate the design
vehicle.
2. For the design vehicle to make right turn maneuver from four lane approach to two
lane approach it requires at least 10 meter turn radius.
3. For intersections with less than or equal to 80 degree intersection angle it requires at
least 10 meter turn radius.
4. Using the plan drawing of the swept path analysis marking the path of the design
vehicle on the pavement so that the vehicle can maneuver the right turn without
encroaching the other lane and causing delay.
5. Reducing the width of the median at the start of the intersection so that the design
vehicle have more space to turn.
6. Adding one outside lane with width greater than 3.2 meter.

5.2.2 Recommendations for Performance analysis study

1. Commercial vehicles should be increased to improve the performance of major

intersections in these cities
76
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
2. Intersections geometry should be designed properly in cities for the intersection to
perform well
3. Educating the public in crossing the road at right turns

5.2.3 Recommendations for of linear regression model

Further studies should be carried out to conform the relationship between turn radius and
speed, flow and density is insignificant. By increasing the intersection analyzed.

77
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
Reference
AkHelik, R. and M. Besley, “Synchro 8, User Guide,” January 2013.

Garber,N.J., and Hoel, L.A. (2010), "Traffic and Highway Engineering", Thomas
Learning, Fourth Edition.

dell’Olio, L., Ibeas, A. and Cecı´n, P. (2010). Modelling user Perception of Bus Transit
Quality. Transport Policy 17, 388-397.

Fitzpatrick, K and Schneider, W.H. (2005), Turn Speeds and Crashes Within Right-Turn
Lanes

Zakaria, Z., Hussin, Z. H., Batau, M. F. A., & Zakaria, Z. (2010). Service quality of
Malaysian public transports: a case study in Malaysia. Cross-Cultural Communication,
6(2), 84–92.

Cullinane, S.L. (1992). Attitudes towards the Car in the UK: Some Implications for
Policies on Congestion and Environment. Transportation Research Part A 26, 291-301

Ali, A.N. (2010). An Assessment of the Quality of Intra-urban Bus Services in the City
of Enugu, Enugu State, Nigeria. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban
Management 6(15), 74-91.

Truck Safety Considerations for Geometric Design and Traffic Operations Eric T.
Donnell, Michelle L. Adolini, Darren J. Torbic, John M. Mason, Jr., Ph.D., P.E., and
Lily Elefteriadou, Ph.D

Pecchini, D., and Giuliani, F. 2013. Experimental Test of an Articulated Lorry Swept
Path. ASCE Journal of Transportation Engineering, 139(12): 1174–1183

Rubio-Martin, J.L., Jurado-Piña, R., and Pardillo-Mayora, J.M. 2015. Heuristic

procedure for the optimization of speed consistency in the geometric design of single-
lane roundabouts. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, 42(1): 13–21

Dragcˇevic´, V., Korlaet, Ž., Rukavina, T., and Lakušic´, S. 2005. Three - leg
Intersection at - Grade - The Right Edge Forming Test. In Proceedings of the 3rd
International Symposium on Highway Geometric Design, Compendium of papers,
Chicago, Illinois, 29 June – 1 July 2005. Transportation Research Board (TRB),
Washington D.C., CD-ROM, 16 p.

78
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in
Addis Ababa City
Kendra K. Levine, Institute of Transportation Studies Library, UC Berkeley “Curb
Radius and Injury Severity at Intersections”

ERA’s Geometric Design Manual, 2013

Road Geometric Design Manual Tanzania 2011

National Association of City Transportation Officials Design Guide (NACTO 2013)

https://www.ebtraffic.com.au/blog/an-overview-of-swept-path-analysis-the-
procedure-and-the-uses/

https://www.sweptpathanalysis.com

Tom V. Mathew and K V Krishna Rao (2006). Introduction to Transportation

Engineering. NPTEL, May 24, 2006.

Jacquemart, G. Modern Roundabout Practice in the United States, NCHRP Synthesis

of Highway Practice 264, Washington, D.C.: Transportation Research Board, 1998

Sisaopiku V. P., Oh H., "Evaluation of Round about Performance Using sidra". Journal
of Transportation Engineering (ASCE), Vol. 127, No. 2, March/April, 2001.

Transportation Research Board (TRB), Highway Capacity Manual. National Research

Council, Washington, D.C, 2010.

Rahmi Akçelik (2011). A Review of Gap-Acceptance Capacity Models. 29th

Conference of Australian Institutes of Transport Research (CAITR 2007), University
of South Australia, Adelaide, Australia, 5-7 December 2007, Revised 14 July 2011

R. AKÇELIK, B. CHRISTENSEN and E. CHUNG (1998). A comparison of three

delay models for sign-controlled intersections. Third International Symposium on
Highway Capacity, Copenhagen, Denmark, 22-27 June 1998.

AKÇELIK, R. (2008). The relationship between capacity and driver behavior. Paper
presented at the National Roundabout Conference, Transportation Research Board,
Kansas City, MO, USA, and 18-21 May 2008.

Traffic Modelling Guidelines-Sidra Intersection 7.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Transport_and_Communications(Ethiopia)

79
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Sharma, A., Jain, V., & Subramanian, L. (2012). Road traffic congestion in the
developing world. Conference Paper, 1. doi: 10.1145/2160601.2160616

Quezon, E., Kumala, T., & Aynetaw, B. (2017). Evaluation on the Operational
Characteristics of Gerji-Imperial Roundabout: A Case Study in Addis Ababa.
International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 8(12), 2.

Ministry of Transport & Communication. (2010). Project Profile on the

Establishment of Traffic Operation Center (TOC) for the City of Addis Ababa.
Addis Ababa: (unpublished).

80
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Appendix
Appendix 1: Vehicle and Pedestrian flow data on each leg at peak hour

Mexico Approach

Vehicle type Pedestrian

Time
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 84 9 1 1 2 0 0 6 0 103
11:15-11:30 76 12 1 0 5 0 0 8 0 102
11:30-11:45 77 6 2 3 6 0 0 5 0 99 88
11:45-12:00 61 12 4 0 3 0 0 11 0 91
Total 298 39 8 4 16 0 0 30 0 395

Geja Sefer Approach

Vehicle type Pedestrian

Time
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 202 12 4 4 6 0 0 13 0 241
235
11:15-11:30 190 14 2 2 1 0 0 20 0 229

81
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:30-11:45 170 21 3 3 11 0 0 18 0 226

11:45-12:00 120 16 7 2 9 0 0 16 0 170
Total 682 63 16 11 27 0 0 67 0 866

Berbere Tera Approach

Vehicle type Pedestrian

Time
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 98 20 0 1 9 0 0 9 0 137
11:15-11:30 99 25 2 2 5 0 0 7 0 140
11:30-11:45 85 24 0 3 12 0 0 14 0 138 166
11:45-12:00 139 26 1 4 7 0 0 6 0 183
Total 421 95 3 10 33 0 0 36 0 598

Goma Kuteba Approach

Vehicle type Pedestrian

Time
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 224 19 3 0 4 0 0 21 0 271 321

82
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:15-11:30 219 28 2 3 8 0 0 33 0 293

11:30-11:45 264 20 5 4 6 0 0 32 0 331
11:45-12:00 220 31 3 4 6 0 0 19 0 283
Total 927 98 13 11 24 0 0 105 0 1178

5th Ps Intersection

Vehicle type Pedestrian

Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 608 60 8 6 21 0 0 49 0 752
11:15-11:30 584 79 7 7 19 0 0 68 0 764
11:30-11:45 596 71 10 13 35 0 0 69 0 794 810
11:45-12:00 540 85 15 10 25 0 0 52 0 727
Total 2328 295 40 36 100 0 0 238 0 3037

T.Haymanot Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 219 52 1 3 22 0 0 18 1 316 431

83
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:15-11:30 191 62 1 0 14 0 0 16 0 284

11:30-11:45 160 51 6 5 20 0 0 21 0 263
11:45-12:00 207 53 2 9 12 0 1 8 2 294
Total 777 218 10 17 68 0 1 63 3 1157

Mola Maru Approach

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 132 61 3 1 18 0 0 16 0 231
11:15-11:30 119 59 5 1 20 0 0 19 1 224
11:30-11:45 94 87 8 1 8 0 0 17 0 215 303
11:45-12:00 115 74 6 0 12 0 0 16 0 223
Total 460 281 22 3 58 0 0 68 1 893

Amestegna Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 81 17 0 0 14 0 0 10 1 123 201

84
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:15-11:30 78 15 2 0 13 0 0 14 0 122
11:30-11:45 87 27 2 2 16 0 0 9 0 143
11:45-12:00 95 31 4 0 14 0 0 8 1 153
Total 341 90 8 2 57 0 0 41 2 541

Bomb tera Approach

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 14 3 0 0 3 0 0 13 0 33
11:15-11:30 16 2 0 0 13 0 0 12 1 44
11:30-11:45 7 2 0 0 9 0 0 10 0 28 155
11:45-12:00 11 3 0 0 8 0 0 14 0 36
Total 48 10 0 0 33 0 0 49 1 141

Berebere tera Intersection

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 446 133 4 4 57 0 0 57 2 703
11:15-11:30 404 138 8 1 60 0 0 61 2 674
1090
11:30-11:45 348 167 16 8 53 0 0 57 0 649
11:45-12:00 428 161 12 9 46 0 1 46 3 706

85
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Total 1626 599 40 22 216 0 1 221 7 2732

Shola Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 171 27 8 8 0 0 0 11 0 225
11:15-11:30 152 20 7 7 2 0 0 15 0 203
11:30-11:45 111 31 4 7 7 0 0 16 0 176 226
11:45-12:00 174 32 4 2 5 0 1 6 2 226
Total 608 110 23 24 14 0 1 48 2 830

4 kilo Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 147 90 8 16 5 0 0 10 0 276 198

86
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:15-11:30 141 85 6 15 4 0 0 14 1 266

11:30-11:45 104 73 6 8 3 0 0 14 0 208
11:45-12:00 121 71 2 9 6 0 0 12 0 221
Total 513 319 22 48 18 0 0 50 1 971

Balderas Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 44 31 3 2 1 0 0 5 0 86
11:15-11:30 44 37 7 2 0 0 0 10 0 100
11:30-11:45 60 38 5 6 1 0 0 4 0 114 111
11:45-12:00 46 33 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 88
Total 194 139 21 13 2 0 0 19 0 388

British Embassy Intersection

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 362 148 19 26 6 0 0 26 0 587 535

87
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:15-11:30 337 142 20 24 6 0 0 39 1 569

11:30-11:45 275 142 15 21 11 0 0 34 0 498
11:45-12:00 341 136 12 14 11 0 1 18 2 535
Total 1315 568 66 85 34 0 1 117 3 2189

Mexico Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 155 56 0 1 3 1 0 21 0 237
11:15-11:30 114 81 2 3 5 1 0 21 0 227
11:30-11:45 142 50 4 10 2 0 1 16 1 226 248
11:45-12:00 143 72 2 6 5 0 0 13 1 242
Total 554 259 8 20 15 2 1 71 2 932

AU Approach
Time Vehicle type

88
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Trailor Three Motor Pedestrian

Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total volume
11:00-11:15 159 14 1 1 8 1 0 16 0 200
11:15-11:30 148 15 1 2 7 1 0 10 0 184
11:30-11:45 146 11 3 5 2 0 0 15 1 183 195
11:45-12:00 101 15 1 0 5 0 0 4 0 126
Total 554 55 6 8 22 2 0 45 1 693

Kirkos Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 53 6 0 0 3 0 0 6 0 68
11:15-11:30 42 2 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 48
11:30-11:45 40 6 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 49 78
11:45-12:00 35 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 46
Total 170 19 1 0 3 0 0 18 0 211

89
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Kera Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 177 81 0 6 4 0 0 26 0 294
11:15-11:30 196 61 5 4 10 0 0 19 0 295
11:30-11:45 175 67 6 2 9 0 0 22 0 281 306
11:45-12:00 189 54 3 5 6 0 1 21 0 279
Total 737 263 14 17 29 0 1 88 0 1149

Bulgaria Intersection
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 544 157 1 8 18 2 0 69 0 799
11:15-11:30 500 159 8 9 22 2 0 54 0 754
11:30-11:45 503 134 14 17 13 0 1 55 2 739 827
11:45-12:00 468 146 6 11 16 0 1 44 1 693
Total 2015 596 29 45 69 4 2 222 3 2985

90
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Stadium Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 78 8 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 88
11:15-11:30 58 3 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 66
11:30-11:45 65 5 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 75 88
11:45-12:00 56 6 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 66
Total 62 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 74

Megenagna Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 59 7 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 72
11:15-11:30 57 5 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 67
11:30-11:45 37 9 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 48 63
11:45-12:00 27 8 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 37
Total 62 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 74

91
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Lem Hotel Approach

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 235 13 0 2 8 0 0 4 0 262
11:15-11:30 265 17 1 2 5 0 0 6 2 298
11:30-11:45 254 24 4 0 2 0 0 3 2 289 322
11:45-12:00 268 17 6 3 10 0 0 3 0 307
Total 62 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 74

24 Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 219 39 7 4 6 0 0 3 2 280
11:15-11:30 211 32 5 1 9 0 0 5 1 264
11:30-11:45 183 26 2 0 7 0 0 4 0 222 231
11:45-12:00 195 18 1 1 4 1 1 2 0 223
Total 62 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 74

92
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Kokeb Intersection
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 591 67 9 9 16 0 0 8 2 702
11:15-11:30 591 57 10 3 18 0 0 13 3 695
11:30-11:45 539 64 7 1 12 0 0 9 2 634 704
11:45-12:00 546 49 7 4 17 1 1 8 0 633
Total 62 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 74

Kore Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 46 9 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 57
11:15-11:30 48 17 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 70 72
11:30-11:45 54 17 2 0 5 0 0 0 2 80

93
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:45-12:00 41 15 0 2 2 1 0 1 0 62
Total 189 58 3 2 9 1 0 2 5 269

German Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 116 70 4 2 25 2 0 0 0 219
11:15-11:30 177 70 4 2 27 1 0 0 0 281
11:30-11:45 144 84 3 5 27 2 0 1 0 266 222
11:45-12:00 223 80 3 5 32 2 0 1 0 346
Total 660 304 14 14 111 7 0 2 0 1112

Sarbet Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total

94
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11:00-11:15 239 86 4 3 14 2 0 3 0 351

11:15-11:30 217 70 3 5 18 1 0 3 0 317
11:30-11:45 294 75 8 9 29 1 0 7 0 423 313
11:45-12:00 268 85 15 5 19 1 0 1 0 394
Total 1018 316 30 22 80 5 0 14 0 1485

Mekanisa Intersection
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 401 165 8 5 41 4 0 3 0 627
11:15-11:30 442 157 8 7 45 2 0 4 3 668
11:30-11:45 492 176 13 14 61 3 0 8 2 769 385
11:45-12:00 532 180 18 12 53 4 0 3 0 802
Total 1867 678 47 38 200 13 0 18 5 2866

Maseltegna Approach
Time Vehicle type

95
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Trailor Three Motor Pedestrian

Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total volume
11:00-11:15 155 43 28 6 20 1 1 1 0 255
11:15-11:30 102 54 16 12 11 0 1 1 0 197
11:30-11:45 126 54 55 6 15 0 0 5 0 261 199
11:45-12:00 210 105 23 5 25 3 0 3 0 374
Total 593 256 122 29 71 4 2 10 0 1087

Saris Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 209 91 14 11 29 5 0 2 0 361
11:15-11:30 195 87 16 6 25 2 0 6 1 338
11:30-11:45 194 75 18 11 15 1 0 1 0 315 316
11:45-12:00 165 71 17 5 8 3 0 8 0 277
Total 763 324 65 33 77 11 0 17 1 1291

96
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Bulbula Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 48 19 3 0 8 2 1 2 0 83
11:15-11:30 46 23 3 0 8 1 0 3 1 85
11:30-11:45 68 18 3 1 12 0 0 5 0 107 113
11:45-12:00 34 14 4 2 8 0 0 2 0 64
Total 196 74 13 3 36 3 1 12 1 339

Gumuruk Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 27 14 2 5 3 0 0 2 0 53
11:15-11:30 24 17 11 3 2 1 0 0 0 58
11:30-11:45 27 7 13 4 0 0 0 1 0 52 113
11:45-12:00 15 8 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 37
Total 93 46 38 14 5 1 0 3 0 200

97
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Saris Abo Intersection

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 439 167 47 22 60 8 2 7 0 752
11:15-11:30 367 181 46 21 46 4 1 10 2 678
11:30-11:45 415 154 89 22 42 1 0 12 0 735 741
11:45-12:00 424 198 56 14 41 6 0 13 0 752
Total 1645 700 238 79 189 19 3 42 2 2917

Shola Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 130 15 3 6 2 0 0 1 2 159
11:15-11:30 154 13 4 6 10 0 0 3 0 190
11:30-11:45 79 15 5 0 2 0 0 0 1 102 106
11:45-12:00 146 17 7 1 3 1 0 0 0 175
Total 509 60 19 13 17 1 0 4 3 626

98
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Megenagna Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 110 85 1 1 2 0 0 1 2 202
11:15-11:30 87 84 2 0 3 0 0 5 1 182
11:30-11:45 121 86 1 3 2 0 0 3 0 216 219
11:45-12:00 92 77 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 173
Total 410 332 5 5 8 0 0 10 3 773

Lem Hotel Approach

Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 222 28 4 0 4 0 0 1 0 259
11:15-11:30 202 34 11 2 6 0 0 2 0 257
11:30-11:45 190 27 3 3 7 0 0 2 0 232 236
11:45-12:00 225 22 4 1 6 0 0 3 1 262
Total 196 74 13 3 36 3 1 12 1 1010

99
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Adwa Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 156 45 0 3 3 0 0 3 0 210
11:15-11:30 152 50 1 2 6 0 0 7 5 223
11:30-11:45 234 53 2 6 3 0 0 5 1 304 236
11:45-12:00 172 43 7 1 4 0 0 4 1 232
Total 714 191 10 12 16 0 0 19 7 969

Shola Intersection
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 618 173 8 10 11 0 0 6 4 830
11:15-11:30 595 181 18 10 25 0 0 17 6 852
11:30-11:45 624 181 11 12 14 0 0 10 2 854 797
11:45-12:00 635 159 19 4 14 1 0 8 2 842
Total 2472 694 56 36 64 1 0 41 14 3378

100
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Adwa Approach
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Time Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 156 45 0 3 3 0 0 3 0 210
11:15-11:30 152 50 1 2 6 0 0 7 5 223
11:30-11:45 234 53 2 6 3 0 0 5 1 304 236
11:45-12:00 172 43 7 1 4 0 0 4 1 232
Total 714 191 10 12 16 0 0 19 7 969

Shola Intersection
Vehicle type
Pedestrian
Trailor Three Motor volume
Car Minibus Mid Bus Bus Truck Truck wheeler cycle Bicycle Total
11:00-11:15 618 173 8 10 11 0 0 6 4 830
11:15-11:30 595 181 18 10 25 0 0 17 6 852
11:30-11:45 624 181 11 12 14 0 0 10 2 854 797
11:45-12:00 635 159 19 4 14 1 0 8 2 842
Total 2472 694 56 36 64 1 0 41 14 3378

101
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Appendix 2: Autodesk InfraWorks output data

Turn Entry W2(Berbere Tera Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 103.15 217.46
6 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 95.54 201.38
7 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.96 200.31
8 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.78 199.17
9 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.44 197
10 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 94.16 189.73
11 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 93.85 189.46
12 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 93.79 188.62
13 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 92.26 187.65
14 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 91.92 187.13
15 W2(Berbere Tera Approach) F 90.94 186.42

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry N2(Geja Sefer Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 128.13 242.72
6 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 124.6 242
7 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 123.39 241.65
8 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 123.23 241.49
9 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 122.03 241.2
10 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 121.78 238.86
11 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 121.33 237.01
12 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 120.24 236.81
13 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 119.36 236.38
14 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 119.32 236.24
15 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) F 118.2 231.07

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry S1(Mexico Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 S1(Mexico Approach) F 98.46 153.85
6 S1(Mexico Approach) F 93.09 150.82
7 S1(Mexico Approach) F 92.44 149.75
8 S1(Mexico Approach) F 92.34 148.58
9 S1(Mexico Approach) F 92 147.58
10 S1(Mexico Approach) F 91.69 146.54
11 S1(Mexico Approach) F 91.54 145.42
12 S1(Mexico Approach) F 91.41 143.27

102
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

13 S1(Mexico Approach) F 90.59 142.16

14 S1(Mexico Approach) F 90.41 141.09
15 S1(Mexico Approach) F 90.27 130.85

Turn Entry E1(Goma Kuteba Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 119.35 242.74
6 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 106.1 206.24
7 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 105.87 206.18
8 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 103.48 206.06
9 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 102.9 201.99
10 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 102.48 201.67
11 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 102.28 201.14
12 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 102.03 200.39
13 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 101.1 200.16
14 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 100.94 195.72
15 E1(Goma Kuteba Approach) F 100.83 194.06

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry (Mola Maru Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 77.4 88.08
6 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 77 88.08
7 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 76.18 88.08
8 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.74 88.08
9 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.41 88.08
10 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 75.04 87.83
11 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.8 87.58
12 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.67 87.36
13 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.44 87.15
14 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.31 86.96
15 E1(Mola Maru Approach) F 74.17 86.75

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry N2(Amestegna Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 85.1 61.88
6 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 84.78 61.88
7 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 84.46 61.86
8 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 84.2 61.85
9 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 83.91 61.85
10 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 83.59 61.85

103
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

11 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 83.37 61.84

12 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 83.15 61.83
13 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 82.9 61.83
14 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 82.69 61.82
15 N2(Amestegna Approach) F 82.53 61.82

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry S1(Bomb tera Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 67.56 73.51
6 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 67.28 73.25
7 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 66.94 72.96
8 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 66.64 72.72
9 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 66.34 72.42
10 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 66.04 72.14
11 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 65.76 71.89
12 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 65.47 71.64
13 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 65.16 71.41
14 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 64.89 71.13
15 S1(Bomb tera Approach) E 64.61 70.91

Turn Entry W2(T.Haymanot Maximum

Radius Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 100.75 41.46
6 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 100.45 41.47
7 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 100.14 41.5
8 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 99.87 41.52
9 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 99.57 41.5
10 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 99.28 41.68
11 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 99 41.68
12 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 98.72 41.67
13 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 98.42 41.75
14 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 98.12 41.74
15 W2(T.Haymanot Approach) F 97.83 41.77

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry E1(4 kilo Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(4 kilo Approach) C 15.17 0
6 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.96 0
7 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.72 0
8 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.49 0

104
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

9 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.26 0

10 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 14.04 0
11 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.8 0
12 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.58 0
13 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.38 0
14 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 13.15 0
15 E1(4 kilo Approach) B 12.95 0

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry N1(Balderas Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N1(Balderas Approach) C 19.5 120.62
6 N1(Balderas Approach) C 19.39 119.66
7 N1(Balderas Approach) C 19.07 119.09
8 N1(Balderas Approach) B 14.95 119.04
9 N1(Balderas Approach) B 14.62 117.18
10 N1(Balderas Approach) B 14.44 115.58
11 N1(Balderas Approach) B 14.2 115.17
12 N1(Balderas Approach) B 13.98 115.08
13 N1(Balderas Approach) B 13.84 114.01
14 N1(Balderas Approach) B 13.82 113.31
15 N1(Balderas Approach) B 13.16 111.42

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry W2(Shola Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Shola Approach) E 38.55 82.83
6 W2(Shola Approach) E 37.33 81.23
7 W2(Shola Approach) E 36.43 80.91
8 W2(Shola Approach) E 35.57 80.78
9 W2(Shola Approach) D 34.81 80.62
10 W2(Shola Approach) D 32.23 79.31
11 W2(Shola Approach) D 30.01 79.09
12 W2(Shola Approach) D 29.64 79.08
13 W2(Shola Approach) D 29.25 78.8
14 W2(Shola Approach) D 28.45 78.8
15 W2(Shola Approach) D 27.39 76.26

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry E1(AU Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(AU Approach) F 126 369.21
6 E1(AU Approach) F 125.13 369.21

105
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

7 E1(AU Approach) F 124.85 369.2

8 E1(AU Approach) F 124.7 369.2
9 E1(AU Approach) F 124.57 369.2
10 E1(AU Approach) F 124.44 369.19
11 E1(AU Approach) F 124.28 369.18
12 E1(AU Approach) F 123.73 369.18
13 E1(AU Approach) F 123.14 369.18
14 E1(AU Approach) F 122.44 369.13
15 E1(AU Approach) F 121.01 369.12

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry N2(Kera Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N2(Kera Approach) F 146.83 309.23
6 N2(Kera Approach) F 144.75 308.63
7 N2(Kera Approach) F 144.37 308.07
8 N2(Kera Approach) F 144.35 306.97
9 N2(Kera Approach) F 143.39 306.22
10 N2(Kera Approach) F 142.31 302.57
11 N2(Kera Approach) F 141.84 302.02
12 N2(Kera Approach) F 141.66 301.21
13 N2(Kera Approach) F 141 300.66
14 N2(Kera Approach) F 140.78 300.02
15 N2(Kera Approach) F 137.85 299.97

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry S1(Mexico Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 S1(Mexico Approach) F 150.61 278.78
6 S1(Mexico Approach) F 149.76 278.38
7 S1(Mexico Approach) F 148.67 274.72
8 S1(Mexico Approach) F 147.31 273.46
9 S1(Mexico Approach) F 147.2 273.19
10 S1(Mexico Approach) F 146.56 272.95
11 S1(Mexico Approach) F 145.9 271.76
12 S1(Mexico Approach) F 144.69 271.39
13 S1(Mexico Approach) F 143.84 269.74
14 S1(Mexico Approach) F 141.84 269.4
15 S1(Mexico Approach) F 141.03 269.26

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry W2(Kirkos Approach) Los Delay Queue

106
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

5 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 95.53 328.08

6 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 94.82 328.04
7 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 94.48 328.03
8 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 94.46 327.94
9 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 94.45 327.94
10 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 93.73 327.93
11 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 93.37 327.93
12 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 93.04 327.7
13 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 92.96 327.45
14 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 92.67 322.33
15 W2(Kirkos Approach) F 92.42 322.06

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(24 Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(24 Approach) E 65.09 4
6 E1(24 Approach) E 64.79 4
7 E1(24 Approach) E 64.5 4
8 E1(24 Approach) E 64.2 4
9 E1(24 Approach) E 64.09 4
10 E1(24 Approach) E 63.8 4
11 E1(24 Approach) E 63.51 4
12 E1(24 Approach) E 63.4 4
13 E1(24 Approach) E 63.1 4
14 E1(24 Approach) E 62.81 4
15 E1(24 Approach) E 62.7 4

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Lem Hotel Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.79 81.04
6 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.63 80.75
7 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.59 80.52
8 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 102.55 80.32
9 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.88 79.72
10 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.69 79.64
11 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.6 79.33
12 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 101.34 79.09
13 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.65 78.76
14 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.46 78.46
15 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) F 100.15 77.93

107
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Megenagna Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 70.24 26.39
6 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 69.97 26.36
7 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 69.73 26.18
8 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 69.46 25.98
9 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 69.23 25.96
10 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 68.98 25.79
11 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 68.87 25.79
12 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 68.6 25.77
13 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 68.34 25.67
14 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 68.11 25.57
15 S2(Megenagna Approach) E 67.92 25.55

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Stadium Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Stadium Approach) F 72.44 70.11
6 W2(Stadium Approach) E 71.9 70.11
7 W2(Stadium Approach) F 71.63 70.11
8 W2(Stadium Approach) F 71.35 70.11
9 W2(Stadium Approach) F 71.1 70.11
10 W2(Stadium Approach) F 70.86 70.11
11 W2(Stadium Approach) F 70.69 70.11
12 W2(Stadium Approach) F 70.51 69.88
13 W2(Stadium Approach) F 70.31 69.57
14 W2(Stadium Approach) E 70.08 69.26
15 W2(Stadium Approach) E 68.51 68.97

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Sarbet Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.82 10.7
6 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.57 10.29
7 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.22 10.21
8 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.18 9.82
9 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 22.08 9.79
10 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.81 9.78
11 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.54 9.76
12 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.49 9.72
13 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 21.42 9.71
14 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 20.97 9.7
15 E1(Sarbet Approach) C 20.74 9.68

108
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Kore Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N1(Kore Approach) A 4.27 0
6 N1(Kore Approach) A 4.14 0
7 N1(Kore Approach) A 4.02 0
8 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.89 0
9 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.76 0
10 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.64 0
11 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.51 0
12 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.4 0
13 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.27 0
14 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.16 0
15 N1(Kore Approach) A 3.04 0

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(German Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(German Approach) A 3.48 0
6 W2(German Approach) A 3.35 0
7 W2(German Approach) A 3.21 0
8 W2(German Approach) A 3.06 0
9 W2(German Approach) A 2.93 0
10 W2(German Approach) A 2.77 0
11 W2(German Approach) A 2.64 0
12 W2(German Approach) A 2.52 0
13 W2(German Approach) A 2.38 0
14 W2(German Approach) A 2.21 0
15 W2(German Approach) A 2.07 0

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Bulbula Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 80.7 119.24
6 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 79.04 118.75
7 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.77 118.74
8 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.73 118.51
9 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.5 118.44
10 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.47 118.43
11 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 78.18 118.41
12 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.9 118.36
13 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.68 114.72

109
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

14 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.65 113.64

15 E1(Bulbula Approach) F 77.42 113.28

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Maseltegna Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 103.33 239.11
6 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 103.13 238.03
7 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.86 237.76
8 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.76 237.35
9 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.55 237.12
10 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.48 236.82
11 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.45 236.65
12 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 102.4 236.51
13 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 101.85 236.44
14 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 101.62 236.4
15 N2(Maseltegna Approach) F 75.46 231.55

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Saris Abo Intersection) Los Delay Queue
5 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 92.1 336.29
6 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.82 315.01
7 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.76 313.55
8 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.46 310.95
9 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.44 308.92
10 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.33 308.9
11 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.2 306.26
12 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 91.12 302.46
13 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 90.79 300.31
14 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 90.47 299.94
15 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) F 87.45 299.65

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Gumuruk Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 85.51 43.64
6 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 85.18 43.64
7 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 84.79 43.6
8 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 84.64 43.59
9 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 84.24 43.59
10 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 83.95 43.58
11 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 83.64 43.54

110
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

12 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 83.32 43.54

13 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 83.05 43.53
14 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 82.78 43.51
15 W2(Gumuruk Approach) F 82.51 39.42

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Shola Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 E1(Shola Approach) F 103.69 188.06
6 E1(Shola Approach) F 103.19 187.88
7 E1(Shola Approach) F 102.59 187.68
8 E1(Shola Approach) F 102.56 185.02
9 E1(Shola Approach) F 101.87 182.26
10 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.96 182.23
11 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.39 182.09
12 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.14 181.95
13 E1(Shola Approach) F 100.08 181.81
14 E1(Shola Approach) F 98.97 181.65
15 E1(Shola Approach) F 97.98 181.46

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Adwa Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 N1(Adwa Approach) F 101.87 278.46
6 N1(Adwa Approach) F 101.48 272.07
7 N1(Adwa Approach) F 101.18 271.87
8 N1(Adwa Approach) F 101.17 270.92
9 N1(Adwa Approach) F 100.73 270.62
10 N1(Adwa Approach) F 100.62 270.17
11 N1(Adwa Approach) F 100.33 269.66
12 N1(Adwa Approach) F 100.26 269.56
13 N1(Adwa Approach) F 99.7 267.93
14 N1(Adwa Approach) F 99.52 267.87
15 N1(Adwa Approach) F 99.45 267.7

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Megenagna Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 S2(Megenagna Approach) F 120.73 283.17
6 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 119.68 283.05
7 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 119.28 279.22
8 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 118.79 278.12
9 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 118.51 277.85

111
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

10 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 118.01 277.85

11 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 117.79 272.3
12 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 117.65 272.16
13 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 117.47 271.97
14 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 115.07 271.71
15 S2( Megenagna Approach) F 114.78 271.59

Turn Maximum
Radius Entry(Lem Hotel Approach) Los Delay Queue
5 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 125.16 322.42
6 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 123.93 322.37
7 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 123.72 322.36
8 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 122.39 322.24
9 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 122.25 321.86
10 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 121.31 321.61
11 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 121.16 321.57
12 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 121.05 321.37
13 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 120.69 321.26
14 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 120.56 321.24
15 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) F 119.11 321.09

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
E1(Goma Kuteba
5 613.9 4.5 22
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
6 621.9 4.6 21.8
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
7 623.9 4.6 21.7
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
8 625.9 4.7 21.5
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
9 627.9 4.8 21.5
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
10 629.9 4.8 21.3
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
11 629.9 4.8 21.3
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
12 629.9 4.9 21.3
Approach)

112
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
E1(Goma Kuteba
13 637.9 4.9 21.1
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
14 639.9 5 21
Approach)
E1(Goma Kuteba
15 643.9 5.1 20.9
Approach)

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 448 27 1.9
6 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 448 27.1 1.9
7 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.1 1.8
8 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.1 1.8
9 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.1 1.8
10 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.2 1.8
11 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.2 1.8
12 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.2 1.8
13 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.2 1.8
14 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.6 1.7
15 E2(Berbere Tera Approach) 450 27.7 1.7

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 26.9 1.8
6 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27 1.8
7 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27 1.7
8 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27 1.7
9 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27 1.7
10 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27.1 1.7
11 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27.1 1.7
12 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27.7 1.7
13 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 27.8 1.6
14 N1(Mexico Approach) 483.9 28.4 1.6
15 N1(Mexico Approach) 485.9 39.8 1.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 637.9 4.5 27.1
6 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 637.9 4.5 27.1
7 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 639.9 4.6 26.8

113
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
8 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 639.9 4.7 26.7
9 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 639.9 4.7 26.5
10 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 643.9 4.7 26.4
11 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 643.9 4.7 26.4
12 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 645.9 4.7 26.3
13 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 649.9 4.9 26.2
14 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 649.9 4.9 26.2
15 N2(Geja Sefer Approach) 653.9 4.9 26.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Mexico Approach) 376 4.8 12
6 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 4.8 12
7 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 4.9 11.9
8 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 4.9 11.9
9 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 4.9 11.9
10 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 5 11.9
11 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 5 11.9
12 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 5 11.8
13 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 5 11.8
14 S1(Mexico Approach) 378 5.1 11.8
15 S1(Mexico Approach) 380 5.2 11.8

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 777.9 28.1 3.6
6 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 787.9 28.2 3.5
7 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 787.9 28.2 3.5
8 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 789.9 28.2 3.4
9 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 791.9 28.2 3.4
10 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 793.9 28.2 3.4
11 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 793.9 28.3 3.4
12 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 793.9 28.3 3.4
13 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 801.9 28.4 3.3
14 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 803.9 29.1 3.3
15 S2(Geja Sefer Approach) 809.9 29.2 3.3

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
W1(Goma Kuteba
5 515.9 26.8 2.5
Approach)

114
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
W1(Goma Kuteba
6 515.9 26.8 2.4
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
7 517.9 26.9 2.4
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
8 517.9 26.9 2.4
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
9 519.9 27 2.4
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
10 521.9 27 2.3
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
11 521.9 27 2.3
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
12 523.9 27.1 2.3
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
13 527.9 27.1 2.3
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
14 527.9 28 2.3
Approach)
W1(Goma Kuteba
15 531.9 28.1 2.2
Approach)

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
W2(Berbere Tera
5 605.9 4.9 18.1
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
6 605.9 5 18.1
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
7 605.9 5 18.1
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
8 605.9 5 18
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
9 605.9 5.1 17.9
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
10 605.9 5.1 17.9
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
11 605.9 5.2 17.9
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
12 605.9 5.2 17.8
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
13 605.9 5.2 17.7
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
14 605.9 5.3 17.5
Approach)
W2(Berbere Tera
15 605.9 5.5 16.7
Approach)

115
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Turn Mean Mean Mean
Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 178 4.1 4.4
6 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 178 4.2 4.4
7 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.2 4.4
8 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
9 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
10 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.3 4.3
11 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.4 4.3
12 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.5 4.3
13 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.5 4.3
14 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.6 4.3
15 E1(Mola Maru Approach) 180 4.6 4.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29 0.7
6 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.2 0.6
7 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.3 0.6
8 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.4 0.6
9 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.5 0.6
10 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.6 0.6
11 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.6 0.6
12 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.7 0.6
13 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.8 0.6
14 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.8 0.6
15 E2(T.Haymanot Approach) 166 29.9 0.6

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 28.6 0.2
6 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 28.7 0.2
7 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 28.8 0.2
8 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 28.9 0.2
9 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 28.9 0.2
10 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.1 0.2
11 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.2 0.2
12 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.2 0.2
13 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.3 0.2
14 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.3 0.2
15 N1(Bomb tera Approach) 110 29.4 0.1

116
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 4.8 4.5
6 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 4.9 4.5
7 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 4.9 4.5
8 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 4.9 4.5
9 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5 4.5
10 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5 4.5
11 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5 4.5
12 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5.1 4.5
13 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5.1 4.4
14 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5.1 4.4
15 N2(Amestegna Approach) 160 5.2 4.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.1 3.7
6 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.2 3.7
7 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.2 3.7
8 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.3 3.7
9 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.4 3.7
10 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.4 3.7
11 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.5 3.7
12 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.5 3.7
13 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.6 3.7
14 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.7 3.6
15 S1(Bomb tera Approach) 168 4.7 3.6

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2(Amestegna Approach) 146 28.2 0.5
6 S2(Amestegna Approach) 146 28.6 0.5
7 S2(Amestegna Approach) 146 28.6 0.5
8 S2(Amestegna Approach) 146 28.7 0.5
9 S2(Amestegna Approach) 148 28.8 0.5
10 S2(Amestegna Approach) 150 28.9 0.5
11 S2(Amestegna Approach) 150 28.9 0.5
12 S2(Amestegna Approach) 150 28.9 0.5

117
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
13 S2(Amestegna Approach) 152 28.9 0.5
14 S2(Amestegna Approach) 152 29 0.5
15 S2(Amestegna Approach) 152 29 0.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29 0.4
6 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.1 0.4
7 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.3 0.4
8 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.5 0.3
9 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.7 0.3
10 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.7 0.3
11 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.7 0.3
12 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.8 0.3
13 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 29.8 0.3
14 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 30.1 0.3
15 W1(Mola Maru Approach) 148 30.2 0.3

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
W2(T.Haymanot
5 86 4.9 2.8
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
6 86 4.9 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
7 86 4.9 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
8 86 5 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
9 86 5 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
10 86 5 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
11 86 5.1 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
12 86 5.1 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
13 86 5.1 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
14 86 5.2 2.7
Approach)
W2(T.Haymanot
15 86 5.2 2.7
Approach)

118
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Turn Mean Mean Mean
Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
6 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
7 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
8 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31 5
9 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 5
10 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
11 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
12 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
13 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
14 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9
15 E1(4 kilo Approach) 841.9 31.1 4.9

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31 1.7
6 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31 1.7
7 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.1 1.7
8 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.1 1.7
9 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.1 1.6
10 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.1 1.6
11 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.2 1.6
12 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.3 1.5
13 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.3 1.5
14 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.4 1.5
15 E2(Shola Approach) 759.9 31.4 1.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Balderas Approach) 52 19.3 0.6
6 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 19.4 0.6
7 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 19.6 0.6
8 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 25 0.5
9 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 25.1 0.5
10 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 25.3 0.5
11 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 25.6 0.5
12 N1(Balderas Approach) 54 25.7 0.5
13 N1(Balderas Approach) 56 25.9 0.5
14 N1(Balderas Approach) 56 25.9 0.5
15 N1(Balderas Approach) 56 26.2 0.5

119
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Balderas Approach) 362 28.7 1.9
6 S1(Balderas Approach) 396 28.7 1.9
7 S1(Balderas Approach) 406 28.7 1.8
8 S1(Balderas Approach) 426 28.9 1.8
9 S1(Balderas Approach) 428 28.9 1.7
10 S1(Balderas Approach) 477.9 28.9 1.6
11 S1(Balderas Approach) 503.9 29 1.5
12 S1(Balderas Approach) 507.9 29.1 1.4
13 S1(Balderas Approach) 515.9 29.1 1.3
14 S1(Balderas Approach) 537.9 29.2 1.3
15 S1(Balderas Approach) 543.9 29.4 1.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(4 kilo Approach) 679.9 30.1 3.4
6 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.4
7 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.3
8 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.3
9 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.3
10 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.3
11 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.2
12 W1(4 kilo Approach) 681.9 30.1 3.2
13 W1(4 kilo Approach) 683.9 30.1 3.2
14 W1(4 kilo Approach) 683.9 30.1 3.2
15 W1(4 kilo Approach) 683.9 30.1 3.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Shola Approach) 921.9 8.2 13.4
6 W2(Shola Approach) 955.9 8.3 13.3
7 W2(Shola Approach) 965.9 8.4 13.3
8 W2(Shola Approach) 987.9 8.6 13.2
9 W2(Shola Approach) 987.9 8.7 13
10 W2(Shola Approach) 1037.9 9.2 12.9
11 W2(Shola Approach) 1063.9 9.5 12.5
12 W2(Shola Approach) 1067.9 9.6 12.5
13 W2(Shola Approach) 1079.9 9.6 12.3
14 W2(Shola Approach) 1097.9 9.8 12.2
15 W2(Shola Approach) 1103.9 10 12

120
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.5 53.5
6 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.5 53.3
7 E1(AU Approach) 1080 4.6 53.2
8 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.6 53.1
9 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.6 53.1
10 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.7 53.1
11 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.7 52.9
12 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.9
13 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.8
14 E1(AU Approach) 1086 4.8 52.6
15 E1(AU Approach) 1098 4.8 52.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Kirkos Approach) 642 29 3.3
6 E2(Kirkos Approach) 642 29 3.2
7 E2(Kirkos Approach) 642 29.1 3.1
8 E2(Kirkos Approach) 642 29.1 3.1
9 E2(Kirkos Approach) 648 29.1 3.1
10 E2(Kirkos Approach) 648 29.2 3.1
11 E2(Kirkos Approach) 648 29.3 3
12 E2(Kirkos Approach) 648 29.3 3
13 E2(Kirkos Approach) 648 29.3 3
14 E2(Kirkos Approach) 654 29.3 3
15 E2(Kirkos Approach) 660 29.6 3

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Mexico Approach) 960 28.5 5
6 N1(Mexico Approach) 966 28.6 5
7 N1(Mexico Approach) 972 28.7 5
8 N1(Mexico Approach) 972 28.8 4.9
9 N1(Mexico Approach) 978 28.8 4.9
10 N1(Mexico Approach) 978 28.9 4.7
11 N1(Mexico Approach) 978 28.9 4.7
12 N1(Mexico Approach) 978 28.9 4.6
13 N1(Mexico Approach) 978 28.9 4.6
14 N1(Mexico Approach) 984 29 4.5

121
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
15 N1(Mexico Approach) 984 29.4 4.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2(Kera Approach) 396 4.3 43.2
6 N2(Kera Approach) 402 4.4 42.6
7 N2(Kera Approach) 408 4.5 42.6
8 N2(Kera Approach) 408 4.5 42.5
9 N2(Kera Approach) 408 4.5 42.4
10 N2(Kera Approach) 414 4.5 42.3
11 N2(Kera Approach) 414 4.6 42.2
12 N2(Kera Approach) 414 4.6 42.2
13 N2(Kera Approach) 414 4.6 42.1
14 N2(Kera Approach) 414 4.6 42.1
15 N2(Kera Approach) 420 4.7 41.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Mexico Approach) 402 3.8 43.4
6 S1(Mexico Approach) 408 3.9 42.9
7 S1(Mexico Approach) 408 3.9 42.8
8 S1(Mexico Approach) 408 3.9 42.7
9 S1(Mexico Approach) 414 3.9 42.6
10 S1(Mexico Approach) 414 4 42.5
11 S1(Mexico Approach) 414 4.1 42.4
12 S1(Mexico Approach) 420 4.1 42
13 S1(Mexico Approach) 420 4.1 41.9
14 S1(Mexico Approach) 420 4.1 41.7
15 S1(Mexico Approach) 426 4.1 41.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2(Kera Approach) 450 28.1 2.9
6 S2(Kera Approach) 456 28.3 2.9
7 S2(Kera Approach) 462 28.4 2.9
8 S2(Kera Approach) 480 28.6 2.9
9 S2(Kera Approach) 480 28.6 2.9
10 S2(Kera Approach) 480 28.7 2.8
11 S2(Kera Approach) 486 28.8 2.8
12 S2(Kera Approach) 486 28.8 2.8
13 S2(Kera Approach) 486 28.9 2.7

122
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
14 S2(Kera Approach) 492 29 2.7
15 S2(Kera Approach) 492 29.5 2.6

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(AU Approach) 834 28.9 4.8
6 W1(AU Approach) 846 29 4.7
7 W1(AU Approach) 852 29 4.6
8 W1(AU Approach) 852 29 4.6
9 W1(AU Approach) 852 29 4.5
10 W1(AU Approach) 852 29.1 4.5
11 W1(AU Approach) 858 29.1 4.5
12 W1(AU Approach) 858 29.1 4.4
13 W1(AU Approach) 858 29.1 4.4
14 W1(AU Approach) 870 29.2 4.4
15 W1(AU Approach) 882 29.4 4.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1080 5.3 38.3
6 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.3 38.1
7 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.3 38.1
8 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.3 38.1
9 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.3 38
10 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.4 38
11 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.4 37.9
12 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1086 5.5 37.8
13 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1092 5.5 37.8
14 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1092 5.6 37.8
15 W2(Kirkos Approach) 1092 5.6 37.7

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.7 ∞
6 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.8 ∞
7 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.8 ∞
8 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.8 ∞
9 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.9 ∞
10 E1(24 Approach) 2 6.9 ∞
11 E1(24 Approach) 2 7 ∞
12 E1(24 Approach) 2 7 ∞

123
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
13 E1(24 Approach) 2 7 ∞
14 E1(24 Approach) 2 7.1 ∞
15 E1(24 Approach) 2 7.1 ∞

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 28.4 0.1
6 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 28.5 0.1
7 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 28.8 0.1
8 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 28.9 0.1
9 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 28.9 0.1
10 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29 0.1
11 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29.1 0.1
12 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29.1 0.1
13 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29.2 0.1
14 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29.3 0.1
15 E2(Stadium Approach) 34 29.5 0.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 268 3.2 8.6
6 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 268 3.2 8.6
7 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 270 3.3 8.6
8 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 270 3.3 8.6
9 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 270 3.4 8.6
10 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.4 8.6
11 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.4 8.5
12 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
13 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
14 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.5 8.5
15 N1(Lem Hotel Approach) 272 3.5 8.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 27.9 0.1
6 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 28 0.1
7 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 28.1 0.1
8 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 28.2 0.1
9 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 28.8 0.1
10 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29 0.1
11 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29 0.1

124
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
12 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29 0.1
13 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29.2 0.1
14 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29.5 0.1
15 N2(Megenagna Approach) 70 29.6 0.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.5 0.1
6 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.5 0.1
7 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.5 0.1
8 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.6 0.1
9 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.6 0.1
10 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.7 0.1
11 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.7 0.1
12 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.7 0.1
13 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.7 0.1
14 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.8 0.1
15 S1(Lem Hotel Approach) 34 29.9 0.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4 1.5
6 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.1 1.5
7 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.1 1.5
8 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.2 1.5
9 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.2 1.5
10 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.2 1.5
11 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.3 1.5
12 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.3 1.5
13 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.4 1.5
14 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.4 1.5
15 S2(Megenagna Approach) 68 4.4 1.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(24 Approach) 300 29.3 1.1
6 W1(24 Approach) 300 29.4 1.1
7 W1(24 Approach) 302 29.5 1
8 W1(24 Approach) 302 29.5 1
9 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.6 1
10 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.6 1

125
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
11 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.6 1
12 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.6 1
13 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.7 1
14 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.7 1
15 W1(24 Approach) 304 29.8 1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.4 2.5
6 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.4 2.5
7 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.5 2.5
8 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.5 2.5
9 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.6 2.5
10 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.6 2.5
11 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.6 2.5
12 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.7 2.5
13 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.7 2.5
14 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.7 2.5
15 W2(Stadium Approach) 104 4.9 2.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.2
6 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
7 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
8 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 25.9 1.1
9 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 26 1.1
10 E1(Sarbet Approach) 122 26.1 1.1
11 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.1 1.1
12 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.2 1.1
13 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.2 1.1
14 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.4 1.1
15 E1(Sarbet Approach) 124 26.4 1.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(German Approach) 156 29.2 0.5
6 E2(German Approach) 156 29.3 0.5
7 E2(German Approach) 156 29.3 0.5
8 E2(German Approach) 156 29.3 0.5
9 E2(German Approach) 156 29.3 0.5

126
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
10 E2(German Approach) 156 29.3 0.5
11 E2(German Approach) 156 29.4 0.5
12 E2(German Approach) 156 29.4 0.5
13 E2(German Approach) 156 29.4 0.5
14 E2(German Approach) 156 29.4 0.5
15 E2(German Approach) 156 29.5 0.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.9
6 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.9
7 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.9
8 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.9
9 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.9
10 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.8
11 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.8
12 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.6 0.8
13 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.7 0.8
14 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.7 0.8
15 N1(Kore Approach) 176 30.7 0.8

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Kore Approach) 152 29.6 0.6
6 S1(Kore Approach) 152 29.7 0.6
7 S1(Kore Approach) 152 29.7 0.6
8 S1(Kore Approach) 152 29.8 0.6
9 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30 0.5
10 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.1 0.5
11 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.1 0.5
12 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.2 0.5
13 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.2 0.5
14 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.2 0.5
15 S1(Kore Approach) 152 30.2 0.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(Sarbet Approach) 144 29.1 1.2
6 W1(Sarbet Approach) 146 29.1 1.2
7 W1(Sarbet Approach) 146 29.1 1.2
8 W1(Sarbet Approach) 148 29.1 1.2

127
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
9 W1(Sarbet Approach) 148 29.1 1.2
10 W1(Sarbet Approach) 150 29.1 1.1
11 W1(Sarbet Approach) 150 29.1 1.1
12 W1(Sarbet Approach) 150 29.1 1.1
13 W1(Sarbet Approach) 152 29.2 1.1
14 W1(Sarbet Approach) 152 29.2 1.1
15 W1(Sarbet Approach) 152 29.3 1.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(German Approach) 182 32 0.9
6 W2(German Approach) 182 32 0.9
7 W2(German Approach) 182 32 0.8
8 W2(German Approach) 182 32 0.8
9 W2(German Approach) 182 32 0.8
10 W2(German Approach) 182 32.1 0.8
11 W2(German Approach) 182 32.1 0.8
12 W2(German Approach) 182 32.1 0.8
13 W2(German Approach) 182 32.1 0.8
14 W2(German Approach) 182 32.2 0.8
15 W2(German Approach) 182 32.2 0.8

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.4 8.7
6 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.4 8.6
7 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.5 8.6
8 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.5 8.6
9 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.6 8.6
10 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.6 8.6
11 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.7 8.6
12 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.8 8.6
13 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 5.9 8.6
14 E1(Bulbula Approach) 346 6 8.6
15 E1(Bulbula Approach) 348 7.1 7.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.1 0.6
6 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.3 0.6
7 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.4 0.6

128
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
8 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.6 0.6
9 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.7 0.6
10 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.7 0.6
11 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.8 0.6
12 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.8 0.6
13 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.9 0.5
14 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.9 0.5
15 E2(Gumuruk Approach) 148 29.9 0.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 997.9 29.5 3.6
6 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1001.9 29.5 3.5
7 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1001.9 29.5 3.5
8 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1003.9 29.6 3.5
9 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1003.9 29.6 3.4
10 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1005.9 29.6 3.4
11 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1005.9 29.6 3.4
12 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1005.9 29.7 3.3
13 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1007.9 29.7 3.2
14 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1011.9 29.8 3.2
15 N1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1011.9 29.8 3.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 871.9 4.3 30.9
6 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 875.9 4.3 30.8
7 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 875.9 4.4 30.8
8 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 877.9 4.4 30.7
9 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 877.9 4.4 30.7
10 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 879.9 4.4 30.7
11 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 879.9 4.5 30.7
12 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 879.9 4.5 30.6
13 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 881.9 4.6 30.5
14 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 4.6 30.5
15 N2(Maseltegna Approach) 1001.9 7 22.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1107.9 4.7 34.8
6 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1107.9 4.8 34.8

129
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
7 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1109.9 4.8 34.8
8 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1109.9 4.9 34.7
9 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1113.9 4.9 34.6
10 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1113.9 5 34.4
11 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1113.9 5.1 34.4
12 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1113.9 5.1 34.3
13 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1115.9 5.2 34.3
14 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1115.9 5.3 34.1
15 S1(Saris Abo Intersection) 1153.9 6.4 28.4

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 881.9 29.3 3
6 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 883.9 29.4 2.9
7 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 883.9 29.6 2.9
8 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 883.9 29.6 2.8
9 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 883.9 29.6 2.8
10 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 29.7 2.7
11 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 29.7 2.7
12 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 29.7 2.7
13 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 29.8 2.6
14 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 30 2.5
15 S2(Maseltegna Approach) 885.9 30 2.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(Bulbula Approach) 414 27.5 1.7
6 W1(Bulbula Approach) 418 27.8 1.7
7 W1(Bulbula Approach) 418 28.1 1.6
8 W1(Bulbula Approach) 418 28.1 1.6
9 W1(Bulbula Approach) 420 28.4 1.6
10 W1(Bulbula Approach) 420 28.5 1.6
11 W1(Bulbula Approach) 422 28.6 1.5
12 W1(Bulbula Approach) 422 28.7 1.5
13 W1(Bulbula Approach) 422 28.7 1.5
14 W1(Bulbula Approach) 422 28.9 1.5
15 W1(Bulbula Approach) 422 28.9 1.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.6 3.3

130
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
6 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.7 3.2
7 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.7 3.2
8 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.7 3.2
9 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.7 3.2
10 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.8 3.2
11 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.8 3.2
12 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.8 3.2
13 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.9 3.2
14 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 5.9 3.2
15 W2(Gumuruk Approach) 120 7.2 2.6

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E1(Shola Approach) 541.9 4.9 20.1
6 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 4.9 20
7 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5 20
8 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.9
9 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.9
10 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.7
11 E1(Shola Approach) 545.9 5.1 19.7
12 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.6
13 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.6
14 E1(Shola Approach) 547.9 5.2 19.5
15 E1(Shola Approach) 549.9 5.2 19.3

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 771.9 29.1 4
6 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.3 3.9
7 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.3 3.9
8 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.4 3.9
9 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.4 3.8
10 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.5 3.8
11 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 775.9 29.5 3.8
12 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 777.9 29.5 3.7
13 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 777.9 29.5 3.7
14 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 777.9 29.5 3.7
15 E2(Lem Hotel Approach) 779.9 29.6 3.7

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density

131
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
5 N1(Adwa Approach) 931.9 4.9 33.1
6 N1(Adwa Approach) 933.9 4.9 32.9
7 N1(Adwa Approach) 933.9 4.9 32.9
8 N1(Adwa Approach) 933.9 5 32.8
9 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5 32.8
10 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5 32.7
11 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5 32.7
12 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5 32.7
13 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5 32.7
14 N1(Adwa Approach) 935.9 5.1 32.5
15 N1(Adwa Approach) 937.9 5.1 32.5

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 N2( Megenagna Approach) 599.9 29.1 4.1
6 N2( Megenagna Approach) 601.9 29.1 4.1
7 N2( Megenagna Approach) 601.9 29.1 4.1
8 N2( Megenagna Approach) 601.9 29.2 4
9 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 4
10 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 4
11 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 4
12 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 3.9
13 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 3.9
14 N2( Megenagna Approach) 603.9 29.3 3.9
15 N2( Megenagna Approach) 605.9 29.4 3.9

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S1(Adwa Approach) 887.9 29 4
6 S1(Adwa Approach) 887.9 29 4
7 S1(Adwa Approach) 889.9 29.1 3.9
8 S1(Adwa Approach) 891.9 29.1 3.9
9 S1(Adwa Approach) 895.9 29.2 3.8
10 S1(Adwa Approach) 895.9 29.2 3.8
11 S1(Adwa Approach) 895.9 29.2 3.8
12 S1(Adwa Approach) 895.9 29.2 3.7
13 S1(Adwa Approach) 899.9 29.2 3.7
14 S1(Adwa Approach) 899.9 29.3 3.6
15 S1(Adwa Approach) 901.9 29.4 3.6

132
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Turn Mean Mean Mean
Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 S2( Megenagna Approach) 735.9 6 28.4
6 S2( Megenagna Approach) 735.9 6 28.2
7 S2( Megenagna Approach) 735.9 6 28.1
8 S2( Megenagna Approach) 735.9 6 28
9 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.1 27.9
10 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.2 27.9
11 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.2 27.8
12 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.2 27.7
13 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.2 27.7
14 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.3 27.2
15 S2( Megenagna Approach) 737.9 6.3 27.2

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.3 3.4
6 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.3 3.4
7 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.4 3.4
8 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.4 3.3
9 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.5 3.3
10 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.5 3.3
11 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.5 3.2
12 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.6 3.2
13 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.6 3.2
14 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.7 3.1
15 W1(Shola Approach) 789.9 29.7 3.1

Turn Mean Mean Mean

Approach
Radius flow Speed Density
5 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 839.9 4.8 36.2
6 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 841.9 4.8 36.2
7 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 841.9 4.8 35.9
8 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 845.9 4.9 35.8
9 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 847.9 4.9 35.8
10 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 847.9 4.9 35.8
11 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 849.9 5 35.7
12 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 849.9 5 35.6
13 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 851.9 5 35.5
14 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 851.9 5 35.5
15 W2(Lem Hotel Approach) 853.9 5 35.4

133
Evaluation of the Effect of Commercial vehicle maneuverability at Selected
Intersections in Addis Ababa City
Appendix 3: Minitab 17 output data

Regression Equation
Turn Radius = 9.853 + 0.000203 Mean flow + 0.0040 Mean Speed - 0.0030 Mean Density

Coefficients
Term Coef SE Coef T-Value P-Value VIF
Constant 9.853 0.385 25.59 0.000
Mean flow 0.000203 0.000472 0.43 0.667 1.61
Mean Speed 0.0040 0.0153 0.26 0.792 2.15
Mean Density -0.0030 0.0160 -0.19 0.851 2.91

Model Summary
S R-sq R-sq(adj) R-sq(pred)
3.17087 0.08% 0.00% 0.00%

Analysis of Variance
Source DF Adj SS Adj MS F-Value P-Value
Regression 3 4.91 1.6356 0.16 0.921
Mean flow 1 1.86 1.8594 0.18 0.667
Mean Speed 1 0.70 0.6987 0.07 0.792
Mean Density 1 0.35 0.3541 0.04 0.851
Error 645 6485.09 10.0544
Lack-of-Fit 442 6223.84 14.0811 10.94 0.000
Pure Error 203 261.25 1.2869
Total 648 6490.00

Fits and Diagnostics for Unusual Observations

Turn
Obs Radius Fit Resid Std Resid
243 5.000 9.930 -4.930 -1.57 X
244 6.000 9.930 -3.930 -1.25 X
245 7.000 9.931 -2.931 -0.93 X
246 8.000 9.933 -1.933 -0.62 X
247 9.000 9.933 -0.933 -0.30 X
248 10.000 9.933 0.067 0.02 X
249 11.000 9.934 1.066 0.34 X
250 12.000 9.934 2.066 0.66 X
251 13.000 9.934 3.066 0.98 X
252 14.000 9.935 4.065 1.30 X
253 15.000 9.938 5.062 1.61 X
276 5.000 9.821 -4.821 -1.54 X
277 6.000 9.824 -3.824 -1.22 X
278 7.000 9.826 -2.826 -0.90 X
279 8.000 9.826 -1.826 -0.58 X
280 9.000 9.827 -0.827 -0.26 X
287 5.000 9.820 -4.820 -1.54 X
288 6.000 9.823 -3.823 -1.22 X
289 7.000 9.823 -2.823 -0.90 X
290 8.000 9.823 -1.823 -0.58 X
291 9.000 9.825 -0.825 -0.26 X

X Unusual X

134