Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
18 ArcPerformanceModels (TRB2003)

18 ArcPerformanceModels (TRB2003)

Ratings: (0)|Views: 37 |Likes:
Published by guido gentile

More info:

Published by: guido gentile on Mar 05, 2009
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

01/29/2013

pdf

text

original

 
Guido Gentile, Lorenzo Meschini, Natale Papola1
Macroscopic Arc Performance Models For Within-Day Dynamic Traffic Assignment
Guido GentileDipartimento di Idraulica, Trasporti e StradeUniversity of Rome “La Sapienza”Rome, Italyguido.gentile@uniroma1.it+39 06 44585737Lorenzo MeschiniDipartimento di Idraulica, Trasporti e StradeUniversity of Rome “La Sapienza”Rome, Italylorenzo.meschini@uniroma1.it+39 06 44585737 Natale PapolaDipartimento di Idraulica, Trasporti e StradeUniversity of Rome “La Sapienza”Rome, Italynatale.papola@uniroma1.it+39 06 44585129Submission date: 15/11/2002Word count: 5200
 
Guido Gentile, Lorenzo Meschini, Natale Papola2 
ABSTRACT
The network travel time pattern plays a double role in within-day dynamic traffic assignment: on one side, itconstitutes the main attribute in the context of users’ path choice; on the other side, it determines the arc flow pattern for given path choices. Then, it is important that in the supply model realistic arc performances areyielded for given arc inflows. On the other hand, the arc performance model has to be efficient in order to beemployed in within-day dynamic traffic assignment, which is a complex problem of its own. In this paper, we present a new link-based macroscopic arc performance model with capacity constraints capable of takingimplicitly into account the variability of the flow state along the arc accordingly to any fundamental diagram.Then we compare it, in terms of realism and efficiency, with three existing models, which have been to this endsuitably modified and enhanced.
 
Guido Gentile, Lorenzo Meschini, Natale Papola3 
1
 
INTRODUCTION
Within-Day Dynamic Traffic Assignment (WDDTA), regarded as a dynamic user equilibrium, can be formalizedand solved as a fixed point problem in terms of arc inflow temporal profiles, accordingly with the model presented in (
1
) and depicted synthetically in FIGURE 1.[FIGURE 1 here]The network travel time pattern plays a double role in WDDTA: on one side, it constitutes the mainattribute in the context of users’ path choice; on the other side, it determines the arc flow pattern for given pathchoices (dashed arrow in FIGURE 1). Then, it is important that in the supply model realistic arc performancesare yielded for given arc inflows. On the other hand, the arc performance model has to be efficient in order to beemployed in within-day dynamic traffic assignment, which is a complex problem of its own.This work focuses on those non-stationary macroscopic arc performance models which are based on themono-dimensional fluid approximation (
2
). These models, usually expressed through differential equations andsolved through finite difference methods, can be classified into two major groups.The models belonging to the first group, referred to as
 space continuous
(e.g. METANET, (
3
); CellTransmission Model, (
4
) and (
5
)), rely on a thick discretization in time and space; that is, they are
 point-based 
.Such models yield accurate results and allow any fundamental diagram to be used, but require considerablecomputing resources.The models belonging to the second group, referred to as
 space discrete
, rely on time discretizationonly; that is, they are
link-based 
. Such models can be, in turn, subdivided in
whole link 
models and
wave
models.Whole link models (e.g. (
) and (
)), do not take into account the propagation of flow states along the arc, since performances are assumed dependent on a space-average state variable, such as density (
8
). This yields a poor representation of travel times, which gets worse as the arc length increases (
9
). Despite this major deficiency,these models allow any fundamental diagram to be adopted, and are widely used in WDDTA because of their simplicity (e.g. (
10
) and (
11
)). Wave models, based on the
kinematic wave theory
(see, for example, (
12
)),implicitly take into account the propagation of flow states along the arc, yielding arc performances as a functionof the traffic conditions encountered while travelling throughout the link. So far, however, these models have been developed only for 
bottlenecks
; that is when the fundamental diagram has a triangular shape and a capacityconstraint is defined at the final section of the arc. In this case, only two speeds are admitted: the free-flowspeed, when the inflow is lower than the capacity, and the queue speed, otherwise. Among them are the
 simplified kinematic wave
model presented in (
13
), the
deterministic queuing 
models
 
((
14
) and (
15
)), and the
link-node
model presented in (
1
). These models require minimal computing resources, but yield realistic resultsonly in urban contexts.In this paper, we present a new wave model, named Average Kinematic Wave (AKW) model, as ageneralization of the link-node model presented in (
1
) allowing any fundamental diagram to be used. We thenanalyse it together with three existing macroscopic arc performance models, namely one Space Continuous (SC),one Whole Link (WL) and the Simplified Kinematic Wave (SKW), in order to compare their computationalefficiency and the realism of their output. To meet this objective, these three models have been suitably modifiedand enhanced in order to deal with general fundamental diagrams and with capacity constraints, thus obtainingfour homogeneous models.
2
 
THE MATHEMATICAL FRAMEWORK 
In this section we recall some significant results of traffic flow theory and introduce the mathematical framework underlying the four models discussed in this work.The following notation will be used throughout the paper:
 L
arc length
 x
[0,
 L
] generic section of the arc
 
δ 
 
infinitesimal distance
τ 
 
0
initial instant of the period of analysis
Θ
final instant of the period of analysis
τ 
[
τ 
 
0
,
Θ
] generic instant of the period of analysis
 q
(
 x
,
τ 
) flow on arc section
 x
at time
τ 
 
(
 x
,
τ 
) density on arc section
 x
at time
τ 
 v
(
 x
,
τ 
) speed on arc section
 x
at time
τ 
 
Φ 
(
 x
,
τ 
) = [
q
(
 x
,
τ 
),
(
 x
,
τ 
),
v
(
 x
,
τ 
)] flow state on the arc section
 x
at time
τ 
 w
(
 x
,
τ 
) speed of the kinematic wave on arc section
 x
at time
τ 
 

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->