Since their introduction in the late 1990s, basic turbo roundabouts have made a great success in several European countries. Researchers, however, have been unable to reach a general consensus on the operational performance advantages and benefits derived from such a novel design of multi-lane roundabouts, as compared with conventional double-lane roundabouts. Those contradictory results could be mostly attributed to wide variations in driver behavior among different traffic environments. This study aims to analyze and evaluate the operational performance of an existing, congested double-lane roundabout in the State of Florida and a proposed, simulated basic turbo roundabout. Local field data was used to accurately calibrate and validate the microsimulation models and to precisely capture local driving behavior. Three scenarios were created for evaluation. Results indicated that basic turbo roundabouts with regulatory entry speed as per Dutch standards, that is, 25 mph, were the most suitable alternative to reduce average delay and provide comparable capacity to double-lane conventional roundabouts for traffic flow ranging between 4,350 and 6,050 vehicles per hour. However, double-lane conventional roundabouts, including their major and minor approaches, always managed to process significantly more vehicles.

自从1990年代末推出以来，基本的涡轮环形交叉路口在几个欧洲国家都取得了巨大的成功。然而，与传统的双车道环形交叉路口相比，研究人员未能就这种多车道环形交叉路口的新颖设计所带来的运营性能优势和收益达成共识。这些矛盾的结果可能主要归因于不同交通环境中驾驶员行为的巨大差异。这项研究旨在分析和评估佛罗里达州现有的拥挤双车道环形交叉路口以及拟议的模拟基本涡轮环形交叉路口的运营性能。本地现场数据用于精确校准和验证微仿真模型，并精确捕获本地驾驶行为。创建了三种方案进行评估。结果表明，具有荷兰标准规定的进入速度的基本涡轮回旋处，即每小时25英里/小时，是减少平均延迟并提供与传统双回旋处相当的通行能力的最佳替代方案，其交通流量范围为每辆4,350至6,050辆小时。但是，双车道常规回旋处，包括其主要和次要进场，总是设法处理更多的车辆。