Commuting - Roundabouts?

How do you negotiate roundabouts?

I've only been commuting for about a week, and there's three roundabouts on my route. My route also has a bike lane that ends at the roundabouts, so I've been taking the lane and going through like I was a car. Is this what I should be doing? I haven't had any trouble except for today where I had a car honk, and try to pass on the right as I was exiting the roundabout.... :twitchy:

I should also add that I'm in the U.S, where roundabouts aren't very popular, and I'm not sure most motorists know how to use them.

Use them just as you would if you were driving a vehicle. The arse that honked is an idiot.

Sounds like you're doing it right.

I generally take the lane in roundabouts. The ones where I live generally have a small enough radius that cars can't go much above bicycle speed in the roundabout anyway.

Anytime a driver honks, it means (s)he saw you. As for the pass on the right... well, they're still working on the cure for stupid.

You did it right, you are a vehicle, all the same rules and apply. Which sadly means most drivers have no clue as to their proper use.

Use them just as you would if you were driving a vehicle. The arse that honked is an idiot.

Yup.


Anytime a driver honks, it means (s)he saw you. As for the pass on the right... well, they're still working on the cure for stupid.

Double-Yup.

I should also add that I'm in the U.S, where roundabouts aren't very popular, and I'm not sure most motorists know how to use them.

I definitely know how to use them better than most, and I just go right through in traffic even though the bike lane does end at a ramp to the sidewalk. Not required to use bike lanes just because they're available.

Use them just as you would if you were driving a vehicle. The arse that honked is an idiot.

The rule here is "The driver who tries to make eye contact, loses." :D

Not required to use bike lanes just because they're available.

That is definitely not true in some municipalities. Double-check local code.

I have one on my homeward commute. Mine has 2 traffic lanes and the bike lane all merging into one lane right at the entrance (really bad design) so I take #2 lane early and pace traffic so I can easily merge to #1 when appropriate.

In my experience roundabouts work if people know what they are doing and lanes and directions are clearly marked. It took my city to long to figure that out. It sounds like you did what was right and did so safely.

Depends on the traffic, if there are very few cars at the roundabout, I'll ride through it, if I left late and theres a little bit of traffic, I take the pedestrian walks just to be safe (5 more minutes on my commute is worth my life)

I agree with the general sentiment here, but would add, get a mirror.

I have a small one on my commute. I move toward the center of the lane as I approach it to hold off the cars, look to the left and enter if no one's coming (I also take a quick look to the right in case the cars at the next entrance try to run me over). I tend to hug more toward the center of the circle in case a car tries to enter and cut me off. I always point toward the exit I'm taking to signal to the incoming cars which way I'm leaving. (This has saved my @ss more than once :))

It's amazing how many cars in the US don't know how to use a roundabout, and come to a complete stop before they enter, even tho no one's coming.

Direct from AZDOT (http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/Users_Guide.asp): (spelling too, but not exactly the formatting ;) )

YOU NEVER MERGE . . . ALL TRAFFIC APPROOACHING A ROUNDABOUT MUST YIELD.
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpgEnter into a traffic lane before bike lane ends.
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpgRide close to the lane’s middle to prevent vehicles from passing and cutting the bicyclist off.
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpg Enter the roundabout after yielding to vehicles already circulating.
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpgCirculate being careful to watch for vehicles waiting to enter.
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpgExit the roundabout as a car does.

Of course, if a bicyclist just wants to cross to the other side, they can “walk” their bike and use the crossroads as a pedestrian.

Like this: [click me] (http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/L202_8.asp)

...and finally the pdf: here (http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/PDF/060308RoundaboutBicycle&PedestrianCrossings.pdf)

Carefully... quite a few poorly designed small roundabouts have been installed in the Seattle area recently. Drivers who were use to a straight shot down the road - just ignore them, build up speed and blow thru them.

I agree with everything said already. I just wanted to add a couple things to watch out for. We have a ton of them on designated bike routes here in Vancouver. I think they're a great way to keep traffic down, but there's also some potential for colisions.
-Some drivers, when turning left, will go the opposite direction through a roundabout. Usually a driver stupid enough to do this, is also stupid enough to not pay attention for cyclists.
-On a flat or downhill route, it's easy to merge with the cars because a cyclist can usually navigate the roundabout much faster than a car. But when you have to ride through one uphill, that's often where I hear the honking and see cars trying to pass dangerously.
-Watch out for OTHER CYCLISTS. Especially at night, cyclists aren't always looking for other cyclists, and they're much harder to see than an approaching car. Especially here where the hipsters don't use lights.

I agree with the general sentiment here, but would add, get a mirror.

For a time I used to wear left and right eyeglass-mounted mirrors and I found them particularly useful in rotaries (as roundabouts are known here in Boston.)

My general understanding of the traffic rules is that vehicles in the rotary have the right of way, though lbb's rule might take precedence:


The rule here is "The driver who tries to make eye contact, loses." :D

How do you negotiate roundabouts? ....
Very carefully, especially if they are two lane, first intersection after motor vehicles come off a high-speed road, or not well designed.

What is well or not well designed? Several studies suggest that some roundabout types can increase injury and fatality rates for bicyclists. The riskier roundabouts tended to be ones in built-up areas that replaced intersections and ones with multiple lanes.

Smaller diameter single lane mini-roundabouts may be safer for cyclists. One study in the UK found that signalized roundabouts were probably better. Some features that may increase cyclist safety at roundabouts are:
arms that are perpendicular, rather than tangential to the roundabout
single lane entries and exits (widths 4-5m).
minimal flare on entry
inscribed circle diameter 25-35m
circulatory carriageway 5-7mA well illustrated presentation on cycling through roundabouts is Bicyclists at Roundabouts: State of the Practice LINK (http://www.teachamerica.com/roundabouts/RA055A_ppt_Moule.pdf). This may be helpful as the last paper below comments "... Underestimation of risk and lack of knowledge about relevant traffic rules may contribute to car–bicycle collisions in roundabouts. Cyclists prefer road designs with a clear regulation of road user behaviour. A need to increase knowledge about traffic rules regulating road user behaviour in roundabouts is identified."

Some studies for those who want to read more:

Bicycle and Pedestrian Considerations at Roundabouts, Florida Department of Transportation
Summary of Final Report, WPI# 0510824 September 2000 (http://www.dot.state.fl.us/Research-Center/Completed_Proj/Summary_SF/FDOT_824.pdf)

Safety effects of roundabouts in Flanders: signal type, speed limits and vulnerable road users.
Accid Anal Prev. 2007 May;39(3):591-9. Epub 2006 Nov 21.
Abstract LINK (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17118323?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum)

The effect of roundabout design features on cyclist accident rate
Accident Analysis & Prevention, Volume 39, Issue 2, March 2007, Pages 300-307
Abstract LINK (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16997267?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum)

The effects of roundabouts on traffic safety for bicyclists: An observational study
Accident Analysis & Prevention, In Press, Corrected Proof,
Abstract (in press) LINK (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V5S-4PNF025-1&_user=10&_coverDate=09%2F14%2F2007&_alid=669354236&_rdoc=2&_fmt=summary&_orig=search&_cdi=5794&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=11&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=45d2788ad7f92c4535ec16493fffb565)

Car Drivers' Adjustments to Cyclists at Roundabouts. (http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a787471757) "The most frequent bicycle accident type at roundabouts has been shown to be between the entering driver and the circulating cyclist. ..."

Cyclists’ perception of risk in roundabouts. "Converting an intersection into a roundabout improves motor vehicle safety, but a similar safety effect is not found for car–bicycle collisions"
Accident Analysis & Prevention Volume 40, Issue 3, May 2008, Pages 1055-1062. LINK (http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V5S-4RFCB50-2&_user=10&_coverDate=12%2F26%2F2007&_alid=669369742&_rdoc=1&_fmt=summary&_orig=search&_cdi=5794&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_ct=1&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=3261527c6743523f3026df9e95e5f2a9)

Please bear in mind that the CTC (UK) found that roundabouts were about 100 times more dangerous for cyclists than signalled intersections.

We've had them for years and still a pretty high percentage of drivers can't use them properly, if there is more than one lane and especially if there are 3 lanes - even when there are on-road and gantry signs stating lane destinations.

I use them like I am driving a car but I worry about some of the larger ones they are going to build here. In order to get to work or just ride head across the arterial road nearby I will have to pass through a three lane roundabout that will be built in the next year or so. I am not looking forward to it. (The city is also ripping out one of my favourite quick routes out of the city to suit the needs of a developer throwing up another stupid subdivision). I have badgered city and regional council about it but they seem to think roundabouts are for nearly every situation. Neither level of government seem all that concerned about cyclists or pedestrians which is strange considering the newly built high school in the area.

Carefully... quite a few poorly designed small roundabouts have been installed in the Seattle area recently. Drivers who were use to a straight shot down the road - just ignore them, build up speed and blow thru them.

like this
http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/L202_11.asp

Also:
"
“WHAT’S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN "OLD" TRAFFIC CIRCLE AND A MODERN ROUNDABOUT?”
Modern roundabouts are quite different from those big, old, high speed traffic circles built years ago in Washington, DC and other eastern cities as well as Paris and London. Designed for high speed entry and multi-lane weaving, these traffic circles generally suffered high crash rates and operational problems causing many to fall out of favor in the USA during the 1950s and 1960s.

Though roundabouts had been used in Great Britain since the beginning of the 20th century, there were problems such as stalled traffic. The engineers decided to make a good idea even better. And by 1966, British engineers came up with the yield at entry rule. This ended the “locking” problem, improved capacity, and reduced crashes.

In the mid-70s, another variable was added -- the curved vehicle path or deflection. This helped decrease speed while “speeding” circulating time.

Many traffic circles require circulating vehicles to grant the right of way to entering vehicles.

Traffic Circles can be very large or very small. The sizes of traffic circles are determined by land availability and/or road distance needed for high speed weaving movements. They can operate at higher speeds and often require motorists to move from one lane to another.

The term Modern Roundabout became popular by 1984 because of improvements such as yielding to as opposed to merging with circulating traffic, deflection at entry, and low design speed.

In addition to slower speeds and curved entries, advantages of Modern Roundabouts also include the fact they are designed using rigorous standards based on specific turning volumes."

Call it a Roundabout or Traffic Circle if you must; it's still a Rotary to me!

Please bear in mind that the CTC (UK) found that roundabouts were about 100 times more dangerous for cyclists than signalled intersections.

We've had them for years and still a pretty high percentage of drivers can't use them properly, if there is more than one lane and especially if there are 3 lanes - even when there are on-road and gantry signs stating lane destinations.

Close call for me today in the valley by the casino. Canal Street. It's by far the best way to bicycle from downtown or the east side (that's the northeast side) to the west side. Light traffic. Few lights. One roundabout. Woman stops at the entering road (25th St) for way too long - traffic stacks up behind her as she waits at the empty circle - horns honking behind her - after she's been waiting some while, I enter from the road on her left (Canal Street E) and proceed around intending to cross in front the woman and exit at the next road (Canal Street W) - I am watching her closely - she guns it just as I am about to cross her path - I dive right, in front of the pickup waiting behind her - which driver fortunately has the presence to wait.

I'm running double-digit percent for close calls like this at roundabouts when there are other cars present.

Modern roundabouts are quite different from those big, old, high speed traffic circles built years ago in Washington, DC...

High speed? Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.... :roflmao2: :lol: :roflmao2: Oh wow, whoever wrote that hasn't been to DC in a long, long, LONG time... :roflmao2: again...

+1 - Take the lane, ride through as you would a motor vehicle (well, like a motor vehicle is supposed to go).

I'm also taking this thread as an excuse to post a picture of "The Peanut". If you look closely, you'll see all the curbs that, unless you're driving a Jeep, make it impossible to go clockwise and not damage your car.

Oh, hang on a sec -- who the hell wrote this?


Many traffic circles require circulating vehicles to grant the right of way to entering vehicles.

That's completely the opposite of how they're supposed to work.

Oh, hang on a sec -- who the hell wrote this?
That's completely the opposite of how they're supposed to work.

I can only guess they are referring to some sort of arrangement where there are traffic signals installed rather than a generic signal-free roundabout. And even then I'd hardly use the word "many" about them.

I find it hard to yield to cars. They zoom around the bout so fast, I can't ever enter. Highway bout.

The bike lane cuts through utilizing the sidewalk can't remember the signs say. .
I ride on the road. I just wait until no cars come.

I use and like them if they can get them to reduce their speed.
Adot roundabouts page http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/index.asp.

Even on a single-lane roundabout, you'll want to employ destination positioning. If you don't intend to exit at the upcoming opportunity, but will continue around, use the center or left half of the lane. If you will exit at the next leg, merge to the right. Avoid leaving passing space between you and your intended destination/direction.

There's more in N.E. than other parts of the country. Called: "rotaries" here. Often are used as double lane circles. Natives use them with a different set of rules than visitors. Watch for the lane split on the entry roads, ideally the left lane is for going beyond the first exit but this is how natives cheat and slide past the line of cars waiting in the longer queue. Bicycles should get through them as fast as possible as they are extremely hazardous to be in.

In the city of Gloucester they have a pedestrian crossing (crossing a major highway) right at an exit/entrance and just to spice things up they have dozens of sign holders waving signs for politicians or causes they support along the edge of the rotary, nice!

And remember, in N.E. using turn signals is commonly referred to as: passing secrets to the enemy.

Go to france to practice roundabout riding, they're everywhere :D

I usually try to cycle fast through roundabouts and signal my intentions (right or left arm stretched out) as much as possible... (I actually enjoy roundabouts... go figure ;)

Oh, hang on a sec -- who the hell wrote this?



That's completely the opposite of how they're supposed to work.


Isn't the idea to get as many vehicles in the circle at one time as possible?

There's more in N.E. than other parts of the country. Called: "rotaries" here. Often are used as double lane circles. Natives use them with a different set of rules than visitors. Watch for the lane split on the entry roads, ideally the left lane is for going beyond the first exit but this is how natives cheat and slide past the line of cars waiting in the longer queue. Bicycles should get through them as fast as possible as they are extremely hazardous to be in.

In the city of Gloucester they have a pedestrian crossing (crossing a major highway) right at an exit/entrance and just to spice things up they have dozens of sign holders waving signs for politicians or causes they support along the edge of the rotary, nice!

And remember, in N.E. using turn signals is commonly referred to as: passing secrets to the enemy.

:lol: So true. The most dangerous one on my commute is the one at Canton and East Streets and I-95 in Dedham, but that one in Gloucester is a monster.

J Safety Res. 2009;40(2):141-8. Epub 2009 Apr 8.

Injury crashes with bicyclists at roundabouts: influence of some location characteristics and the design of cycle facilities.
Daniels S, Brijs T, Nuyts E, Wets G.
Hasselt University, Transportation Research Institute, Wetenschapspark 5 bus 6, 3590 Diepenbeek, Belgium. stijn.daniels@uhasselt.be

PROBLEM: Previous research indicated that conversions of intersections into roundabouts appear to increase the number of injury crashes with bicyclists. However, it was assumed that the effectiveness of roundabouts could vary according to some differences in design types of cycle, facilities and other geometrical factors. METHOD: Regression analyses on effectiveness-indices resulting from a before-and-after study of injury crashes with bicyclists at 90 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium. RESULTS: Regarding all injury crashes with bicyclists, roundabouts with cycle lanes appear to perform significantly worse compared to three other design types (mixed traffic, separate cycle paths, and grade-separated cycle paths). Nevertheless, an increase of the severest crashes was noticed, regardless of the design type of the cycle facilities. Roundabouts that are replacing signal-controlled intersections seem to have had a worse evolution compared to roundabouts on other types of intersections. IMPACT ON INDUSTRY: The results might affect design guidelines for roundabouts.

Rather concerning that all of the designs increased serious cyclist accidients. Watch out for the ones with separtate cycle lanes around the perimeter in particular.

High speed? Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha.... Oh wow, whoever wrote that hasn't been to DC in a long, long, LONG time... again...

Read and note the context. That is what they were designed for and how the operated until traffic load inevitably became higher. Also high vs. low sped is is relative to the new design.


Oh, hang on a sec -- who the hell wrote this?

That's completely the opposite of how they're supposed to work.
Again you are taking these quote out of context. That is how they were originally designed.

Although I understand why you did (its is easy) I don't appreciate you attributing these quotes to me. Clearly they are cut and paste by me from the web page I referenced. If you spent a moment to read the few paragraphs you wouldn't be making these remarks. Go back and read again.

Direct from AZDOT (http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/Users_Guide.asp): (spelling too, but not exactly the formatting ;) )
http://www.azdot.gov/Images/Dot_Blue_sm.jpg Enter the roundabout after yielding to vehicles already circulating.

Yield? Clearly you don't live in Massachusetts :thumb: I had this identical question a year ago about a rotary I could pass through on a commuting route. It's a small one (Beaver & Lyman streets in Waltham for locals) which I would navigate by taking the lane and sprinting to keep up with traffic speed. Heading south into the rotary meant building up speed on a nice downhill...sprinting through at 24 mph pedaling madly thru the turn (recumbent - no pedal strike) was my biggest commuting thrill.

^^^again someone else is not taking the info I cut and pasted in context.

I should also add that I'm in the U.S, where roundabouts aren't very popular, and I'm not sure most motorists know how to use them.

You got that right! Americans can't read I guess is the problem. Things like yield and stop, the hard stuff ya know.

The term Modern Roundabout became popular by 1984 because of improvements such as yielding to as opposed to merging with circulating traffic, deflection at entry, and low design speed.

How long did it take them to figure out that entering traffic having the right of way = gridlock? (a bicycle frame pump into the spokes of traffic flow) 'Modern' is quaint terminology. I sort them into 'major league' (Massachusetts) and 'minor league' (everywhere else...)

I get to ride the Taunton Green rotary every day. They are differerent. I am almost always sitting sideways on my saddle looking to the left while in the circle. When a driver gives me the ok or honks menacingly, that's my cue to take the lane and go left before they go straight to exit.

It's much easier in the evening when the rotary is crowded and backed up. Allowes for weaving in and out of traffic to get through the thing.

I have one small roundabout on my route. No one knows how to use it and 90 percent of vehicles approach it with the same "rolling stop" they use at 4 way stop signs. Then they get confused when more experienced users blow right through it without the "rolling stop". I take the center of my lane and go through it slowly looking to make eye contact with the the driver about to enter it from my right with the typical unsure and wary expression on their face. So far I've only had one close call. All I can say is my spidey sense is tingling every time I roll through it.

Read and note the context. That is what they were designed for and how the operated until traffic load inevitably became higher. Also high vs. low sped is is relative to the new design.


Again you are taking these quote out of context. That is how they were originally designed.

Although I understand why you did (its is easy) I don't appreciate you attributing these quotes to me. Clearly they are cut and paste by me from the web page I referenced. If you spent a moment to read the few paragraphs you wouldn't be making these remarks. Go back and read again.

I wasn't attributing the quotes to you -- I recognized that you copied them from another source. My posts only said "quote=noisebeam" because that was the quickest way to do it.

I'll stand by my remarks that whoever wrote to yield to traffic entering a circle doesn't have a damned clue about how they should work.


Isn't the idea to get as many vehicles in the circle at one time as possible?

No, because then the circle will be jammed like a clot in an artery, and nobody will get anywhere at all. For there to be room for traffic to enter, the vehicles already in the circle must get out, and with as little hassle as possible.

The idea, then, isn't to get as many vehicles "in" the circle, but "through" the circle, and as smoothly as possible.

Many traffic circles require circulating vehicles to grant the right of way to entering vehicles.


I can only guess they are referring to some sort of arrangement where there are traffic signals installed rather than a generic signal-free roundabout. And even then I'd hardly use the word "many" about them.

Nah, I wouldn't use it at signaled circles, either. Traffic signals dictate right-of-way to road users, so the question of whether the inside or outside traffic has right of way is rendered moot. They're supposed to stop on red and go on green, and not think about it any further.

There are quite a few signaled traffic circles here (and none of them are "high speed", which is why I laughed earlier). I'd even say that a bunch of them aren't even circles—the rectangular parks where many of the named streets meet are signaled in much the same way as the circles are.

Some are just ridiculous, like Dupont Circle (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source=s_q&hl=en&geocode=&q=Dupont+Circle&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=44.744674,79.541016&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Dupont+Circle,+Washington,+District+of+Columbia&ll=38.909669,-77.043536&spn=0.002697,0.004855&t=h&z=18). It's got five streets (ten spokes), Connecticut Avenue thru traffic passing underneath, inner and outer rings separated by curbs, and pedestrian crossings that lead through the park in the center. The best way to use it is to follow your signal, don't try to predict what the other signals will do, and just hope that everyone else does the same.

I'll stand by my remarks that whoever wrote to yield to traffic entering a circle doesn't have a damned clue about how they should work..

What the author of the article was explaining was not how they should work, but how many had been designed to work. They supported high speed movement (large circle, smooth non-angular entrances) and that the traffic in them was supposed to yield to the entering high speed traffic.

They didn't work and because of this they developed a bad reputation.

What the author of the article was explaining was not how they should work, but how many had been designed to work. They supported high speed movement (large circle, smooth non-angular entrances) and that the traffic in them was supposed to yield to the entering high speed traffic.

They didn't work and because of this they developed a bad reputation.

Friggin' five minutes with some Hotwheels cars would've taught them it wouldn't work...

I have to compliment our DOT. It is trying to educate people on roundabouts. A condensed version of this ( http://www.dot.wisconsin.gov/safety/motorist/roaddesign/roundabouts/docs/rab-brochure.pdf ) was in my tag renewal packet -- it contained a pointer to ( http://www.wisconsinroundabouts.gov ).

All include this: Bicycles ... Bicyclists may continue through the roundabout taking the travel lane
:thumb: