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