Ramp metering can be defined as a method by which traffic seeking to gain access to a busy highway is controlled at the access point via traffic signals. This control aims at maximize the capacity of the highway and prevent traffic flow breakdown and the onset of congestion. Ramp metering is the use of traffic signals to control the flow of traffic entering a freeway facility. Ramp metering, when properly applied, is a valuable tool for efficient traffic management on freeways and freeway networks.
The objectives of ramp metering includes:
Figure 1 given below is a typical example of ramp metering. The signal placed at the ramp, controls the traffic flow which can enter the freeway through merge lane. Vehicle detectors are also shown at the downstream end of the freeway.
Ramp metering has many positive benefits in freeway management with in measurable parameters such as reduced delay, reduced travel time, reduced accident risk and increased operating speed. The typical advantages are:
Metering strategies can be defined as the approach used to control the traffic the flow on the ramps. Three Ramp metering strategies are available to control the flow on the ramps which can enter the busy freeway. Capacity of an uncontrolled single-lane freeway entrance ramp is 1800 to 2200 vehicles per hour (VPH). Since Ramp metering is a traffic flow controlling approach it decreases the capacity of the ramps. Three ramp-metering strategies are as follows:
Single-lane one car per green ramp metering strategy allows only one car to enter the freeway during each signal cycle. The salient features of this strategy are:
Single-Lane Multiple Cars per Green is also known as Platoon metering, or bulk metering. This approach allows two or more vehicles to enter the freeway during each green indication. The most common form of this strategy is to allow two cars per green. The salient features of this type of ramp metering are:
In dual lane metering two lanes are required to be provided on the ramp in the vicinity of the meter which necks down to one lane at the merge. The salient features of this type of ramp metering are:
The quality of ramp metering essentially implies the efficiency of handling the flow and reducing unnecessary delays through metering strategies. For a ramp meter to produce the desired benefits, the engineer should select a metering strategy appropriate for the current or projected ramp demand. The ramp width will depend on this selection. The following fig. 2 shows the metering availability (percent of time the signal is metering) of the three metering strategies for a range of ramp demand volumes.
In Figure 2, if the flow on a single lane ramp which has Single-Lane One Car per Green approach is 1000 vph, then the metering availability is only 80 percent since the metering approach installed has the capacity of 800 vph. Therefore metering availability decreases as the traffic flow increases. If the flow is around 1600 vph then Dual-Lane Metering gives 100 percent metering availability. Thus it is imperative to select the metering strategy based on the flow and accordingly select the required ramp width.
There are some considerations to be taken into account before designing and installing a ramp meter. Installation of a ramp meter to achieve the desired objectives requires sufficient room at the entrance ramp. The determination of minimum ramp length to provide safe, efficient, and desirable operation requires careful consideration of several elements described below:
Provision for the distances mentioned is an integral part of ramp design. Figure 3 illustrates the requirements for the different types of distances explained above.
Sufficient stopping distance is required to be provided prior to entry to the ramp. Motorists leaving an upstream signalized interchange will likely encounter the rear end of a queue as they proceed toward the meter. Adequate maneuvering and stopping distances should be provided for both turning and frontage road traffic. This stopping distance calculated similar to the stopping sight distance which is a combination of the brake distance and lag distance travelled by a vehicle before stopping. The equation to calculate the minimum stopping distance is given below:
![]() | (1) |
where, X is the stopping distance in meters, v is the velocity of the vehicle in m/sec, t is the time in seconds, g is the gravity coefficient in m∕sec2, f is the friction coefficient. This is the minimum distance to be provided from the back of the queue for safe stopping of vehicles approaching the ramp.
Figure 3 shows Safe stopping distance, storage distance and acceleration distance which are respective three criteria for ramp design.
The storage distance is required to store the vehicles in queue to a ramp meter. The queue detector controls the maximum queue length in real-time. Thus, the distance between the meter and the queue detector defines the storage space. The following generalized spacing model can be used to determine the single-lane storage distance:
![]() | (2) |
In this equation, L (in meters) is the required single-lane storage distance on the ramp when the expected peak-hour ramp demand volume is V vph and a, b are constants. This figure shows the requirements for three metering strategies:
In the Figure 4 the curve is shown for the variation of storage distance i.e. distance to meter with ramp demand volume for different strategy used for Ramp metering.
The distance from meter to merge is provided so that vehicles can attain a suitable merging speed after being discharged from the ramp meter. AASHTO provides speed-distance profiles for various classes of vehicles as they accelerate from a stop to speed for various ramp grades. Figure 5, given below provides similar acceleration distances needed to attain various freeway merging speeds based on AASHTO design criteria.
Table 1 provides the acceleration length for different merge speed and with ramps of different grade. The desired distances to merge increases with increasing freeway merge speed and the same ramp grade.
Merge speed | Ramp Grade (%)
| ||
(kmph) | -3 | 0 | +3 |
60 | 90 | 112 | 150 |
70 | 127 | 158 | 208 |
80 | 180 | 228 | 313 |
90 | 248 | 323 | 466 |
100 | 331 | 442 | 665 |
To model the ramp influence area, a length of 450 m just upstream (for off ramp) and downstream (for on ramp) is considered to be affected. The input data required is the geometric data of the freeway and the ramp and the demand flow. The three steps of design are:
From design point of view analysis of merge area and diverge area are treated separately but follows the same basic principle already explained.
The Merging influence area is the area where increase in local density, congestion, and reduced speeds is generally observed due to merging traffic from ramps. The ramp contributing traffic to the freeway is called an ON ramp. The analysis of the merging influence area is done to find out the level of service of the ON ramp (Figure 6). The analysis of merge area is done in following three primary steps:
The first step of the merge area analysis is to predict the flow entering lanes 1and 2 of the freeway (V 12). The terms used in above figure are explained below. V 12 is influenced by the following factors:
HCM 2000 provides model for predicting V 12 at on-ramps as given below:
![]() | (3) |
where V 12 is the flow rate in lane 1 and 2 of freeway entering ramp influence area (pc/h), V F is the total freeway flow approaching merge area, and PFM is the Proportion of approaching freeway flow remaining in lanes 1 and 2 immediately upstream of merge. For four lanes freeway (2 lanes in each direction) PFM = 1.00
Determining the capacity of the merge area is the second step of the analysis. The capacity of a merge area is determined by the capacity of the downstream freeway segment. Thus, the total flow arriving on the upstream freeway and the on-ramp cannot exceed the basic freeway capacity of the departing downstream freeway segment.
![]() | (4) |
Two conditions may occur in a given analysis:
Determining the level of service (LOS) of the merge area is the third step in merge area analysis. LOS depends on the density in the influencing area. HCM 2000 provides the equation to estimate the density in the merge influence area.
![]() | (5) |
where, DR is the density of merge influence area (pc/km/ln), V R is the on-ramp peak 15-min flow rate (pc/h), LA is the length of acceleration lane (m), V 12 is the flow rate entering ramp influence area (pc/h), and a, b, c, and d are constants.
LOS | Density (pc/km/lane) |
A | ≥ 6 |
B | 6 - 12 |
C | 12 - 17 |
D | 17 - 22 |
E | > 22 |
F | Demands exceeds capacity |
Consider a single lane on-ramp to a six-lane freeway. The length of the acceleration lane is 150 m. What is the LOS during the peak hour for the first on-ramp? Given that the peak hour factor is 0.95, the heavy vehicle adjustment factor is 0.976, the driver adjustment factor is 1.0 and proportion of approaching freeway flow remaining is 55.5%? The freeway volume is 3000 veh/hr and the on-ramp volume is 1800 veh/hr.
![]() |
where, vi is the flow rate in pc/hr for direction i, Vi is the hourly volume in veh/hr for direction i, PHF is the peak hour factor, and Fhv is the adjustment factor for heavy vehicles, and Fp is the adjustment factor for driver population.
The Diverging influence area is the area where increase in local density, congestion, and reduced speeds is generally observed due to diverging traffic to ramps. The ramp which diverge traffic to the ramp is called an OFF ramp. The analysis of the diverging influence area is done to find out the level of service of the OFF ramp. The analysis of diverge area is done in following three primary steps:
The first step is same as that of merge area analysis. The flow in lanes 1 and 2 of the freeway is first predicted. However, there are two major differences in the analysis of diverge area.
The general model given by HCM 2000 treats V 12 as the sum of the off-ramp flow plus a proportion of the through freeway flow.
![]() | (6) |
where, V 12 is the flow rate in lanes 1 and 2 of freeway upstream of diverge area in (pc/hr), V F is the freeway demand flow rate immediately upstream of diverge in (pc/h), and PFD is the proportion of through freeway flow remaining in lanes 1 and 2 immediately upstream of diverge. For four lanes freeway (2 lanes in each direction) PFD is 1.00.
As in the merge area analysis, determining the capacity is the second step of the diverge area analysis. Three limiting values should be checked:
Determine the level of service (LOS) of the diverge area is the third step of the diverge area analysis. LOS criteria for diverge area are based on density in the diverge influence area. HCM 2000 provides the equation to estimate the density in the merge influence area.
![]() | (7) |
where, DR is the density of diverge influence area (pc/km/ln), V 12 is the flow rate entering ramp influence area (pc/h), LD is the length of deceleration lane(m), and a, b & c are constants. This equation is applicable only for under saturated conditions of flow. The density calculation is not done when either of the three capacities mentioned earlier are exceeded. In such cases, the LOS is assigned as F.
Consider an off-ramp (Single-lane) pair, 225 meters apart, from a six lane freeway. The length of the first deceleration lane is 150m and that of the second deceleration lane is 90 m. What is the LOS during the peak hour for the first off-ramp given that the peak hour factor is 0.95, the heavy vehicle adjustment factor is 0.93, the driver adjustment factor is 1.0 and the proportion of through freeway flow remaining is 61.7%? The freeway volume is 4500 veh/hr and the first off-ramp volume is 300 veh/hr.
There are two different metering approaches available. First is Pre-timed metering, which use fixed signal cycles. Second is Traffic responsive, which uses real time traffic data to calculate signal cycle lengths. Traffic responsive systems can be local or system-wide.
In the pre-timed ramp metering systems, the ramp signal operates with a constant cycle in accordance with a metering rate prescribed for the particular control period.. the salient features of this type of ramp metering are:
In contrast to the pre-timed metering control, traffic-responsive metering is directly influenced by the mainline and ramp traffic conditions during the metering period. Metering rates are selected on the basis of real-time measurements of traffic variables indicating the current relation between upstream and downstream capacity. The salient features of this type of ramp metering system are:
Local ramp metering is employed when only the conditions local to the ramp (as compared with other ramps) are used to provide the metering rates. The salient features are:
In most cases, it is preferable to meter a series of ramps in a freeway section in a coordinated fashion based on criteria that consider the entire freeway section. The strategy may also consider the freeway corridor consisting of the freeway section as well as the surface streets that will be affected by metered traffic. The salient features are:
In this chapter we discussed ramp metering, different strategies of ramp metering, procedure to find out the level of service of on and off ramps, different kind of metering systems. From the analysis that we have done in this chapter we can say that the Ramp metering can result into increased freeway speed, decreased travel time, increase in freeway capacity, reduction in accidents and congestion, improved fuel economy and efficient use of capacity.
I wish to thank several of my students and staff of NPTEL for their contribution in this lecture. I wish to thank specially my student Mr. Abhimanyu Jain for his assistance in developing the lecture note, and my staff Mr. Rayan in typesetting the materials. I also appreciate your constructive feedback which may be sent to tvm@civil.iitb.ac.in
Prof. Tom V. Mathew
Department of Civil Engineering
Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India
_________________________________________________________________________
Wednesday 27 September 2023 10:44:47 PM IST