IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i8p4098-d531475.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Binghong Pan

    (Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China
    Current address: Room504, JiaoTong Building, Highway Academy, Chang’an University, 2nd South Ring Road, Xi’an 710064, Shaanxi, China.)

  • Shangru Liu

    (Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Zhenjiang Xie

    (Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Yang Shao

    (Institute of Posts, School of Modern Posts (Logistics School), Xi’an University of Posts & Telecommunications, Xi’an 710061, China)

  • Xiang Li

    (Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

  • Ruicheng Ge

    (Highway Academy, Chang’an University, Xi’an 710064, China)

Abstract

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

Suggested Citation

  • Binghong Pan & Shangru Liu & Zhenjiang Xie & Yang Shao & Xiang Li & Ruicheng Ge, 2021. "Evaluating Operational Features of Three Unconventional Intersections under Heavy Traffic Based on CRITIC Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-30, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4098-:d:531475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4098/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/8/4098/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zhang, Linling & Long, Ruyin & Chen, Hong, 2019. "Do car restriction policies effectively promote the development of public transport?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 100-110.
    2. Kumar, Abhishek & Sah, Bikash & Singh, Arvind R. & Deng, Yan & He, Xiangning & Kumar, Praveen & Bansal, R.C., 2017. "A review of multi criteria decision making (MCDM) towards sustainable renewable energy development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 596-609.
    3. Vittorio Astarita & Ciro Caliendo & Vincenzo Pasquale Giofrè & Isidoro Russo, 2020. "Surrogate Safety Measures from Traffic Simulation: Validation of Safety Indicators with Intersection Traffic Crash Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-21, August.
    4. Minghui Ma & Qingfang Yang & Shidong Liang & Yashi Wang, 2016. "A New Coordinated Control Method on the Intersection of Traffic Region," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2016, pages 1-10, May.
    5. Xu Sun & Kun Lin & Pengpeng Jiao & Huapu Lu, 2020. "The Dynamical Decision Model of Intersection Congestion Based on Risk Identification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-16, July.
    6. Xing Gao & Jing Zhao & Meng Wang, 2020. "Modelling the saturation flow rate for continuous flow intersections based on field collected data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-18, August.
    7. Wu, Yunna & Xu, Chuanbo & Zhang, Ting, 2018. "Evaluation of renewable power sources using a fuzzy MCDM based on cumulative prospect theory: A case in China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 1227-1239.
    8. Andalib Shams & Milan Zlatkovic, 2020. "Effects of capacity and transit improvements on traffic and transit operations," Transportation Planning and Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(6), pages 602-619, August.
    9. Jingyuan Wang & Yu Mao & Jing Li & Zhang Xiong & Wen-Xu Wang, 2015. "Predictability of Road Traffic and Congestion in Urban Areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-12, April.
    10. Yang, Qiaoli & Shi, Zhongke, 2018. "Effects of the design of waiting areas on the dynamic behavior of queues at signalized intersections," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 509(C), pages 181-195.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mengmeng Shi & Xin Tian & Xiaowen Li & Binghong Pan, 2023. "The Impact of Parallel U-Turns on Urban Intersection: Evidence from Chinese Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-23, September.
    2. Kübra Akyol Özcan, 2023. "Sustainability Ranking of Turkish Universities with Different Weighting Approaches and the TOPSIS Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Adnan Veysel Ertemel & Akin Menekse & Hatice Camgoz Akdag, 2023. "Smartphone Addiction Assessment Using Pythagorean Fuzzy CRITIC-TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Aro, Joerabell Lourdes & Selerio, Egberto & Evangelista, Samantha Shane & Maturan, Fatima & Atibing, Nadine May & Ocampo, Lanndon, 2022. "Fermatean fuzzy CRITIC-CODAS-SORT for characterizing the challenges of circular public sector supply chains," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 9(C).
    5. Yan Bai & Zhuo Wei, 2023. "A Combinatorial Optimization Strategy for Performance Improvement of Stratum Ventilation Considering Outdoor Weather Changes and Metabolic Rate Differences: Energy Consumption and Sensitivity Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-22, February.
    6. Yulong Pei & Xiaoxi Cai & Jie Li & Keke Song & Rui Liu, 2021. "Method for Identifying the Traffic Congestion Situation of the Main Road in Cold-Climate Cities Based on the Clustering Analysis Algorithm," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-31, August.
    7. Yang, YiBiao & Sun, Huanwu & Dai, Zhen & Wu, Min & Fu, Simei, 2023. "Comprehensive evaluation of majors offered by universities based on combination weighting," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    8. R. Krishankumar & P. P. Amritha & K. S. Ravichandran, 2022. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: An integrated fuzzy decision model for prioritization of barriers affecting sustainability adoption within supply chains under unknown weight context," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 1010-1027, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Binghong Pan & Shasha Luo & Jinfeng Ying & Yang Shao & Shangru Liu & Xiang Li & Jiaqi Lei, 2021. "Evaluation and Analysis of CFI Schemes with Different Length of Displaced Left-Turn Lanes with Entropy Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-27, June.
    2. Bartłomiej Kizielewicz & Jarosław Wątróbski & Wojciech Sałabun, 2020. "Identification of Relevant Criteria Set in the MCDA Process—Wind Farm Location Case Study," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-40, December.
    3. Abdel-Basset, Mohamed & Gamal, Abduallah & Chakrabortty, Ripon K. & Ryan, Michael J., 2021. "Evaluation approach for sustainable renewable energy systems under uncertain environment: A case study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 168(C), pages 1073-1095.
    4. Rekha Guchhait & Biswajit Sarkar, 2023. "Increasing Growth of Renewable Energy: A State of Art," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(6), pages 1-29, March.
    5. Abteen Ijadi Maghsoodi & Arta Ijadi Maghsoodi & Amir Mosavi & Timon Rabczuk & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2018. "Renewable Energy Technology Selection Problem Using Integrated H-SWARA-MULTIMOORA Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, November.
    6. Alizadeh, Reza & Soltanisehat, Leili & Lund, Peter D. & Zamanisabzi, Hamed, 2020. "Improving renewable energy policy planning and decision-making through a hybrid MCDM method," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    7. Zehba Raizah & Udaya Kumara Kodipalya Nanjappa & Harshitha Urs Ajjipura Shankar & Umair Khan & Sayed M. Eldin & Rajesh Kumar & Ahmed M. Galal, 2022. "Windmill Global Sourcing in an Initiative Using a Spherical Fuzzy Multiple-Criteria Decision Prototype," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-13, October.
    8. Qian, Xiaohu & Fang, Shu-Cherng & Huang, Min & Wang, Xingwei, 2019. "Winner determination of loss-averse buyers with incomplete information in multiattribute reverse auctions for clean energy device procurement," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 276-292.
    9. Paula Donaduzzi Rigo & Graciele Rediske & Carmen Brum Rosa & Natália Gava Gastaldo & Leandro Michels & Alvaro Luiz Neuenfeldt Júnior & Julio Cezar Mairesse Siluk, 2020. "Renewable Energy Problems: Exploring the Methods to Support the Decision-Making Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-27, December.
    10. He, Mingwei & He, Chengfeng & Shi, Zhuangbin & He, Min, 2022. "Spatiotemporal heterogeneous effects of socio-demographic and built environment on private car usage: An empirical study of Kunming, China," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Tan, R.R. & Aviso, K.B. & Ng, D.K.S., 2019. "Optimization models for financing innovations in green energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Li, Tianshu & Song, Shunfeng & Yang, Yanmin, 2022. "Driving restrictions, traffic speeds and carbon emissions: Evidence from high-frequency data," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    13. Behroozeh, Samira & Hayati, Dariush & Karami, Ezatollah, 2022. "Determining and validating criteria to measure energy consumption sustainability in agricultural greenhouses," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    14. Zhao, Meng & Xu, Chang & Zhao, Wenxian & Lin, Mingwei, 2023. "New energy vehicle online selection method considering attribute compensation relationship and aspiration strength," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    15. Dorokhov, V.V. & Kuznetsov, G.V. & Vershinina, K.Yu. & Strizhak, P.A., 2021. "Relative energy efficiency indicators calculated for high-moisture waste-based fuel blends using multiple-criteria decision-making," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 234(C).
    16. Chuanwei Zhang & Xibo Xue & Peilin Qin & Lingling Dong, 2023. "Research on a Speed Guidance Strategy for Mine Vehicles in Three-Fork Roadways Based on Vehicle–Road Coordination," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-17, October.
    17. Leanda C. Garvie & David J. Lee & Biljana Kulišić, 2024. "Towards a Bioeconomy: Supplying Forest Residues for the Australian Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    18. Yang, Hongtai & Zhai, Guocong & Liu, Xiaohan & Yang, Linchuan & Liu, Yugang & Yuan, Quan, 2022. "Determinants of city-level private car ownership: Effect of vehicle regulation policies and the relative price," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 40-48.
    19. Li, Jingjing & Nian, Victor & Jiao, Jianling, 2022. "Diffusion and benefits evaluation of electric vehicles under policy interventions based on a multiagent system dynamics model," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    20. Ju He & Yunxiao Dang & Wenzhong Zhang & Li Chen, 2020. "Perception of Urban Public Safety of Floating Population with Higher Education Background: Evidence from Urban China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-16, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:8:p:4098-:d:531475. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.