HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT

Theoretical Considerations. For balance in highway design all geometric

elements should, as far as economically practical, be designed to provide safe,
continuous operation at a speed likely to be observed under the normal
conditions for that roadway. For the most part, this can be achieved through the
use of design speed as an overall design control. The design of roadway curves
should be based on an appropriate relationship between design speed and
curvature and on their joint relationships with superelevation and side friction.
Although these relationships stem from the laws of mechanics, the actual values
for use in design depend on practical limits and factors determined more or less
empirically over the range of variables involved. These limits and factors are
explained in the following discussion, as they relate to the determination of
logical controls for roadway curve design.
When a vehicle moves in a circular path, it undergoes a centripetal
acceleration that acts toward the center of curvature. This acceleration is
sustained by a component of the vehicles weight related to the roadway
superelevation, by the side friction developed between the vehicles tires and the
pavement surface, or by a combination of the two. As a matter of conceptual
convenience, centripetal acceleration is sometimes equated to centrifugal force.
However, this is an imaginary force that motorists believe is pushing them
outward while cornering when, in fact, they are truly feeling the vehicle being
accelerated in an inward direction. The term centripetal acceleration and its
equivalent in horizontal curve design, lateral acceleration, are used in this
policy as they are fundamentally correct.
From the laws of mechanics, the basic formula that governs vehicle operation
on a curve is:
***
Equation (3-8), which models the moving vehicle as a point mass, is often
referred to as the basic curve formula.
When a vehicle travels at constant speed on a curve superelevated so that
the f value is zero, the centripetal acceleration is sustained by a component of
the vehicles weight and, theoretically, no steering force is needed. A vehicle
traveling faster or slower than the balance speed develops tire friction as
steering effort is applied to prevent movement to the outside or to the inside of
the curve. On nonsuperelevated curves, travel at different speeds is also possible
by utilizing appropriate amounts of side friction to sustain the varying centripetal
acceleration.
General Considerations. From accumulated research and experience,
limiting values for superelevation rate (emax) and side friction demand (fmax)
have been established for curve design. Using these established limiting values
in the basic curve formula permits determination of a minimum curve radius for
various design speeds. Use of curves with radii larger than this minimum allows
superelevation, side friction, or both to have values below their respective limits.
The amount by which each factor is below its respective limit is chosen to
provide an equitable contribution of each factor toward sustaining the resultant
centripetal acceleration. The methods used to achieve this equity for different
design situations are discussed below.
Design Considerations. Superelevation rates that are applicable over the
range of curvature for each design speed have been determined for use in

highway design. One extreme of this range is the maximum superelevation rate
established by practical considerations and used to determine the maximum
curvature for each design speed. The maximum superelevation may be different
for different highway conditions. At the other extreme, no superelevation is
needed for tangent highways or highways with extremely long-radius curves. For
curvature between these extremes and for a given design speed, the
superelevation should be chosen in such manner that there is a logical relation
between the side friction factor and the applied superelevation rate.
General Controls for Horizontal Alignment. In addition to the specific
design elements for horizontal alignment discussed under previous headings, a
number of general controls are recognized in practice. These controls are not
subject to theoretical derivation, but they are important for efficient and smoothflowing highways. Excessive curvature or poor combinations of curvature limit
capacity, cause economic losses because of increased travel time and operating
costs, and detract from a pleasing appearance. To avoid such poor design
practices, the general controls that follow should be used where practical:
Alignment should be as directional as practical, but should be consistent
with the topography and with preserving developed properties and community
values. A flowing line that conforms generally to the natural contours is
preferable to one with long tangents that slashes through the terrain. With
curvilinear alignment, construction scars can be kept to a minimum and natural
slopes and growth can be preserved. Such design is desirable from a
construction and maintenance standpoint. In general, the number of short curves
should be kept to a minimum. Winding alignment composed of short curves
should be avoided because it usually leads to erratic operation. Although the
aesthetic qualities of curving alignment are important, long tangents are needed
on two-lane highways so that sufficient passing sight distance is available on as
great a percentage of the highway length as practical.
In alignment developed for a given design speed, the minimum radius of
curvature for that speed should be avoided wherever practical. The designer
should attempt to use generally flat curves, saving the minimum radius for the
most critical conditions. In general, the central angle of each curve should be as
small as the physical conditions permit, so that the highway will be as directional
as practical. This central angle should be absorbed in the longest practical curve,
but on two-lane highways the exception noted in the preceding paragraph
applies.
Consistent alignment should always be sought. Sharp curves should not be
introduced at the ends of long tangents. Sudden changes from areas of flat
curvature to areas of sharp curvature should be avoided. Where sharp curvature
is introduced, it should be approached, where practical, by a series of
successively sharper curves.
For small deflection angles, curves should be sufficiently long to avoid the
appearance of a kink. Curves should be at least 150 m [500 ft] long for a central
angle of 5 degrees, and the minimum length should be increased 30 m [100 ft]
for each 1-degree decrease in the central angle. The minimum length for
horizontal curves on main highways, Lc min, should be about three times the
design speed expressed in km/h [15 times the design speed expressed in mph],
or Lc min=3V [15V]. On high speed controlled-access facilities that use flat
curvature, for aesthetic reasons, the desirable minimum length for curves should
be about double the minimum length described above, or Lc des= 6V [30V].
Sharp curvature should be avoided on long, high fills. In the absence of cut
slopes, shrubs, and trees that extend above the level of the roadway, it is

difficult for drivers to perceive the extent of curvature and adjust their operation
accordingly.
Caution should be exercised in the use of compound circular curves. While
the use of compound curves affords flexibility in fitting the highway to the terrain
and other ground controls, the ease with which such curves can be used may
tempt the designer to use them without restraint. Preferably their use should be
avoided where curves are sharp. Compound curves with large differences in
radius introduce the same problems that arise at tangent approaches to circular
curves. Where topography or right-of-way restrictions make their use
appropriate, the radius of the flatter circular arc, R1, should not be more than 50
percent greater than the radius of the sharper circular arc, R2 (i.e., R1 should not
exceed 1.5 R2). A multiple compound curve (i.e., several curves in sequence)
may be suitable as a transition to sharp curves as discussed in the previous
section on Compound Circular Curves. A spiral transition between flat curves
and sharp curves may be desirable. On one-way roads, such as ramps, the
difference in radii of compound curves is not so important if the second curve is
flatter than the first. However, the use of compound curves on ramps, with a flat
curve between two sharper curves, is not good practice.
Abrupt reversals in alignment should be avoided. Such changes in alignment
make it difficult for drivers to keep within their own lane. It is also difficult to
superelevate both curves adequately, and erratic operation may result. The
distance between reverse curves should be the sum of the superelevation runoff
lengths and the tangent runout lengths or, preferably , an equivalent length with
spiral curves, as defined in the section on Transition Design Controls in this
chapter. If sufficient distance (i.e., more than 100 m [300 ft]) is not available to
permit the tangent runout lengths or preferably an equivalent length with spiral
to return to a normal crown section, there may be a long length where the
centerline and the edges of roadway are at the same elevation and poor
transverse drainage can be expected. In this case, the superelevation runoff
lengths should be increased until they adjoin, thus providing one instantaneous
level section. For traveled ways with straight cross slopes, there is less difficulty
in returning the edges of roadway to a normal section and the 100-m [300-ft]
guideline discussed above may be decreased.
The broken-back or flat-back arrangement of curves (with a short
tangent between two curves in the same direction) should be avoided except
where very unusual topographical or right-of-way conditions make other
alternatives impractical. Except on circumferential highways, most drivers do not
expect successive curves to be in the same direction; the preponderance of
successive curves in opposite directions may develop a subconscious
expectation among drivers that makes successive curves in the same direction
unexpected. Broken-back alignments are also not pleasing in appearance. Use of
spiral transitions or compound curve alignments, in which there is some degree
of continuous superelevation, is preferable for such situations. The term brokenback usually is not applied when the connecting tangent is of considerable
length. Even in this case, the alignment may be unpleasant in appearance when
both curves are clearly visible for some distance ahead.
To avoid the appearance of inconsistent distortion, the horizontal alignment
should be coordinated carefully with the profile design.