1.

Introduction:
The scope of the project is to do widening of existing four lane to six lane configuration and
improvement proposals where the existing crossroads meeting the project highway.
Scope:
Improvement proposal at the Proposed junction at Chainage 307+750
2. Location of the survey:
Traffic count was conducted to know the existing traffic volume. The survey was conducted
at location with Chainage 307+750. This point is a T-junction with a village road on the RHS
of the MCW. The survey was conducted at this location on the crossroad. The existing
median opening was closed and so there are only 3 possible movements. The traffic coming
into the crossroad from NH and traffic coming onto the NH from crossroad is taken. The
through traffic count is not taken.
3. Passenger Car Units (PCU)
The various vehicle types having different sizes and characteristics were converted into a
standard unit called Passenger Car Unit (PCU). Passenger Car equivalents for various
vehicles were adopted based on recommendations of Indian Road Congress prescribed in
“Guidelines for Capacity of Roads in Rural areas”, IRC:64-1990. The Passenger Car Unit
values (PCU), which were adopted are presented in Table-1. The information derived from
the surveys was utilized to obtain hourly variation and peak hour characteristics.
Table-1: Passenger Car Unit (PCU) Factors for Various Vehicle Types*
Equivalent PCU Equivalent PCU
Vehicle Type Vehicle Type
factors factors
Two Wheelers 0.5 Two Axle 3.0
Three Wheelers 1.0 Three Axle 3.0
Car / Jeep / Van 1.0 Multi Axle 4.5
Car (Yellow Board) 1.0 Heavy Earth Moving 4.5
Tata Magic 1.0 LCV/ LGV 1.5
RTC Bus 3.0 Mini LCV 1.0
Private Bus 3.0 Tractor 1.5
School Bus 3.0 Tractor with trailer 4.5
College Bus 3.0 Cycle 0.5
Non
Mini Bus 1.5 Cycle Rickshaw 2.0
Motorised
Three Wheeler (Goods) 1.0 Animal Drawn 8.0
*Source: IRC:64-1990

The Turning Movement Count (TMC) is performed to determine the characteristics of traffic
movement and to establish traffic demand on the existing road. The data collected from
primary source was recorded in worksheets, compiled, checked and corrected before further
proceeding for analysis. Traffic data analysis was carried out, to understand the traffic
characteristics and travel pattern in the study area and to provide basic input for choosing
the proposal near Chainage 307+750. Traffic flow details are presented in the following
tables.
Table 2: Traffic count near Chainage 307+750 (MCW to Cross Road)

From To 2W 3W Car/Jeep Multi Axles Others

6:00 7:00 1 0 0 0 0

7:00 8:00 4 0 1 0 0

8:00 9:00 5 0 1 0 1

9:00 10:00 16 0 2 0 1

10:00 11:00 6 0 1 0 0

11:00 12:00 6 0 0 0 1

12:00 13:00 12 1 3 0 0

13:00 14:00 13 1 2 0 0

14:00 15:00 14 0 3 0 0

15:00 16:00 18 0 1 0 0

16:00 17:00 15 1 0 0 0

17:00 18:00 18 0 1 0 0

18:00 19:00 20 0 1 0 0

19:00 20:00 3 1 1 0 1

Total 151 4 17 0 4

*-Based on the site conditions, Other vehicles are considered as LCVs

Table 2: Traffic count near Chainage 307+750 (Cross Road to MCW)

From To 2W 3W Car/Jeep Multi Axles Others

6:00 7:00 1 0 0 0 0

7:00 8:00 7 0 0 0 0

8:00 9:00 10 1 1 0 0

9:00 10:00 16 0 2 0 0
 From To 2W 3W Car/Jeep Multi Axles Others

10:00 11:00 9 0 1 0 1

11:00 12:00 10 0 2 0 0

12:00 13:00 5 1 1 0 0

13:00 14:00 11 1 2 0 0

14:00 15:00 13 0 1 0 0

15:00 16:00 12 0 3 0 0

16:00 17:00 10 1 1 0 0

17:00 18:00 17 0 2 0 0

18:00 19:00 7 0 0 0 0

19:00 20:00 4 1 2 0 0

Total 132 5 18 0 1

4. Analysis of the traffic survey

Traffic analysis for the data collected from site is conducted and presented in the present
section. Traffic volume in both directions is combined and presented in the following Table-
4.

Table 4: Combined Traffic volume

Multi Total Total

6:00 7:00 2 0 0 0 0 2 1

7:00 8:00 11 0 1 0 0 12 7

8:00 9:00 15 1 2 0 1 19 12

9:00 10:00 32 0 4 0 1 37 22

10:00 11:00 15 0 2 0 1 18 11

11:00 12:00 16 0 2 0 1 19 12

12:00 13:00 17 2 4 0 0 23 15

13:00 14:00 24 2 4 0 0 30 18
 Multi Total Total
From To 2W 3W Car/Jeep Others
Axles Vehicles PCU

14:00 15:00 27 0 4 0 0 31 18

15:00 16:00 30 0 4 0 0 34 19

16:00 17:00 25 2 1 0 0 28 16

17:00 18:00 35 0 3 0 0 38 21

18:00 19:00 27 0 1 0 0 28 15

19:00 20:00 7 2 3 0 1 13 10

Total 283 9 35 0 5 332 193

Table 5: Junction-Peak Hour

Peak hour Factor

From To Hourly PCU

6:00 7:00 1

7:00 8:00 7

8:00 9:00 12

9:00 10:00 22

10:00 11:00 11

11:00 12:00 12

12:00 13:00 15

13:00 14:00 18

14:00 15:00 18

15:00 16:00 19

16:00 17:00 16

17:00 18:00 21

18:00 19:00 15

19:00 20:00 10
 Peak hour Factor

Total 193

Peak 22

As the data is available with a time interval is 1hr, Peak hour factor is to be taken as “1”

Based on the above table, peak traffic can be observed between 9:00 am and
10:00 am.

* Note : As the through(straight) traffic on the highway is not given, the hourly
PCUs correspond to only the vehicles coming IN and OUT of the cross road

Table 6: Traffic movement on Legs

Village Road to MCW

2W 151 132

3W 4 5

Cars 17 No data 18

Multi axle 0 0

Others 4 1

There is no existing median opening and so the traffic flow is considered as in the following
line diagram

Figure 1: Line diagram of Junction (In vehicles)

20

15

10
PCU/hr

Hourly PCU
5

0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7:0 8:0 9:0 0:0 1:0 2:0 3:0 4:0 5:0 6:0 7:0 8:0 9:0 0:0
0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2
0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0-
6:0 7:0 8:0 9:0 0:0 1:0 2:0 3:0 4:0 5:0 6:0 7:0 8:0 9:0
0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Time

Figure 2: Graph indicating variation in Hourly PCUs

To provide at-grade or grade separated intersection, the following specifications can be

Specifications of various codal provisions

As per IRC SP 87-2010, underpass can be proposed when the cross road traffic is more
than 5000 PCUs/day.

As per IRC SP 90-2010 (As per clause 5.10.4), an interchange is justifiable when traffic
flow from all the arms at the intersection exceeds 10,000 PCU per hour.

As per IRC SP 87-2019, There should be no at-grade intersection of any road with
carriageway, but only with service road. Distance between Service road connectivity and
median opening should not be less than 150m

Even though the traffic flow on the cross road does not meet the above codal requirements,
in considering the other aspects, proposal of LVUP can be examined.