Session 74 Fredrik Johansson
-
Upload
fredrikjohansson -
Category
Documents
-
view
89 -
download
1
description
Transcript of Session 74 Fredrik Johansson
Mikrosimulering av fotgängare - effekter av attpersoner stannar upp eller står och väntar
Fredrik Johansson12 Anders Peterson1 Andreas Tapani12
1Linköping Universitet
2VTI
January 10, 2013
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Outline
1 BackgroundProjectMotivationMethod
2 Waiting PedestriansMotivation and GoalModels
3 Results and ConclusionsSimulation resultsConclusions
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 2/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Outline
1 BackgroundProjectMotivationMethod
2 Waiting PedestriansMotivation and GoalModels
3 Results and ConclusionsSimulation resultsConclusions
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 3/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Project: “Simulation of interchange stations”
Goal:Evaluate a proposed design of a multi modal public transportinterchange station using microscopic simulation.
Initiators: Peterson and Tapani (LiU and VTI).Financier: Trafikverket.Beneficiaries: Linköping municipality and Östgötatrafiken.Performed by: LiU and VTI.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 4/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Motivation
Why study interchange stations?Stations are important for system performance.An increasing number of people travel by public transport.For efficient transfers small stations are needed.
The ProblemSmall station + lots of people⇒ congestion.
Congestion causesDelayDiscomfort
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 5/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Motivation
Why study interchange stations?Stations are important for system performance.An increasing number of people travel by public transport.For efficient transfers small stations are needed.
The ProblemSmall station + lots of people⇒ congestion.
Congestion causesDelayDiscomfort
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 5/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Motivation
Why study interchange stations?Stations are important for system performance.An increasing number of people travel by public transport.For efficient transfers small stations are needed.
The ProblemSmall station + lots of people⇒ congestion.
Congestion causesDelayDiscomfort
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 5/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Method: Microscopic Simulation
What?Modeling of the individual microscopic entities.Macroscopic flow structures are not explicitly modeled, butemerges from the interaction.
Why?Congested pedestrian traffic is highly dynamic.The pedestrian traffic volumes in a station varies muchboth in space and time.Walkable areas can have almost arbitrary shape.The pedestrian population is diverse.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 6/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
Method: Microscopic Simulation
What?Modeling of the individual microscopic entities.Macroscopic flow structures are not explicitly modeled, butemerges from the interaction.
Why?Congested pedestrian traffic is highly dynamic.The pedestrian traffic volumes in a station varies muchboth in space and time.Walkable areas can have almost arbitrary shape.The pedestrian population is diverse.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 6/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
General model structure
Behavior Model
Strategical Activityplanning
Notmodeled
Tactical Route choiceShortest
path
Operational Evasivemaneuvers
Social forcemodel
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 7/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
General model structure
Behavior Model
Strategical Activityplanning
Notmodeled
Tactical Route choiceShortest
path
Operational Evasivemaneuvers
Social forcemodel
O-D
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 7/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
ProjectMotivationMethod
General model structure
Behavior Model
Strategical Activityplanning
Notmodeled
Tactical Route choiceShortest
path
Operational Evasivemaneuvers
Social forcemodel
vp(x)
O-D
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 7/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Outline
1 BackgroundProjectMotivationMethod
2 Waiting PedestriansMotivation and GoalModels
3 Results and ConclusionsSimulation resultsConclusions
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 8/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Modeling waiting pedestrians
Why?At interchange stations a significant fraction of thepopulation are waiting.The location of waiting areas can to some extent becontrolled.
GoalDevelop different extensions to the model to includewaiting pedestrians.Characterize and compare the predictions of the differentextensions.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 9/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Modeling waiting pedestrians
Why?At interchange stations a significant fraction of thepopulation are waiting.The location of waiting areas can to some extent becontrolled.
GoalDevelop different extensions to the model to includewaiting pedestrians.Characterize and compare the predictions of the differentextensions.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 9/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
A naive waiting model
Model 0: Stop and stay
vi = 0.
Problem: Only a few waiting pedestrians may cause almostcomplete stop.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 10/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
A naive waiting model
Model 0: Stop and stay
vi = 0.
Problem: Only a few waiting pedestrians may cause almostcomplete stop.
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 10/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
StructureAt what level should waiting be modeled?
Behavior Model
Activityplanning
Notmodeled
Route choiceShortest
path
Evasivemaneuvers
Social forcemodel
vp(x)
O-D
Waitingmodel
Waiting area
Placement inwaiting area
Interactionswhile waiting
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 11/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Three waiting models
Model A: Stop
vpi = 0.
Model B: Choose a spot
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Model C: Choose a spot, adjust it
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Maxpi=−Fp
i −Ffriction
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 12/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Three waiting models
Model A: Stop
vpi = 0.
Model B: Choose a spot
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Model C: Choose a spot, adjust it
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Maxpi=−Fp
i −Ffriction
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 12/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Motivation and GoalModels
Three waiting models
Model A: Stop
vpi = 0.
Model B: Choose a spot
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Model C: Choose a spot, adjust it
vpi = (xp
i −xi)/4τ, |xpi −xi |< 4τvp0
i .
Maxpi=−Fp
i −Ffriction
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 12/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Outline
1 BackgroundProjectMotivationMethod
2 Waiting PedestriansMotivation and GoalModels
3 Results and ConclusionsSimulation resultsConclusions
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 13/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Total delay distribution
−2 0 2 4 6 8 100
200
400
600
800
Model BModel AModel C
Mean total positive delays:Model A:1.4, Model B: 2.2, Model C:1.8
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 14/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Density, model A
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 15/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Density, model B
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 16/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Density, model C
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 17/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Delay rate density, model A
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 18/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Delay rate density, model B
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 19/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Delay rate density, model C
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 20/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Adjust SFM for waiters
Behavior Model
Activityplanning
Notmodeled
Route choiceShortest
path
Evasivemaneuvers
Social forcemodel
vp(x)
O-D
Waitingmodel
Waiting area
Placement inwaiting area
Interactionswhile waiting
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 21/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Conclusions
The models produce reasonable behavior.Probably necessary to interfere with the SFM.Significant differences in the traffic resulting from thedifferent models.
OutlookDataCalibration
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 22/ 22
BackgroundWaiting Pedestrians
Results and Conclusions
Simulation resultsConclusions
Conclusions
The models produce reasonable behavior.Probably necessary to interfere with the SFM.Significant differences in the traffic resulting from thedifferent models.
OutlookDataCalibration
Johansson et. al. Transportforum 2013 22/ 22