CICTP 2020 4018

Effect of Tunnel Environment on Driver Acceleration and Deceleration

Behavior

Yan Mao1; Shengde Di2; Weihan Zhang3; Meng Wang4; and Da Guo5

1
Key Laboratory of Highway Traffic Safety Technology Transportation Industry,
Road Safety Research Center, Research Institute of Highway, Ministry of Transport,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Beijing 100088, China. Email: yan.mao@rioh.cn

2
Key Laboratory of Highway Traffic Safety Technology Transportation Industry,
Road Safety Research Center, Research Institute of Highway, Ministry of Transport,
Beijing 100088, China. Email: 13141318384@126.com
3
Key Laboratory of Highway Traffic Safety Technology Transportation Industry,
Road Safety Research Center, Research Institute of Highway, Ministry of Transport,
Beijing 100088, China. Email: w.zhang@rioh.cn
4
Key Laboratory of Highway Traffic Safety Technology Transportation Industry,
Road Safety Research Center, Research Institute of Highway, Ministry of Transport,
Beijing 100088, China. Email: m.wang@rioh.cn
5
Key Laboratory of Highway Traffic Safety Technology Transportation Industry,
Road Safety Research Center, Research Institute of Highway, Ministry of Transport,
Beijing 100088, China. Email: 81772152@qq.com

Abstract
Speed-change lanes including the acceleration lane and the deceleration lane
provide drivers with a smooth transition between high-speed lanes and low-speed
lanes. Because light levels change dramatically between the open tunnel section and
the dark buried tunnel section, driver visual behavior will also change. Due to land
planning limitations, these two complex road infrastructures are sometimes integrated
in the same section of some road designs. Therefore, a driving simulator study was
conducted in order to validate the safety of such a design. The results show that: (1)
drivers prefer to change lanes in the open tunnel section rather than the dark buried
tunnel section when entering or exiting the high-speed lane; (2) driver acceleration
behavior is affected by the tunnel when entering the high-speed lane; and (3) driver
deceleration behavior seems to be unaffected by the tunnel when exiting the high-
speed lane.

1 INTRODUCTION
Speed-change lanes including acceleration lanes and deceleration lanes
provide drivers an opportunity to speed up and move into the high-speed lanes or
slow down and change into the low-speed lanes. Generally, the drivers need to

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4019

complete a series of acceleration, deceleration and lane-change behaviors when using

the speed-change lanes. The brightness changes caused by the boundary of the open
tunnel section and the buried tunnel section might be one of the most threat for
drivers. Drivers need longer reaction time to perceive the surroundings and make the
execution. Due to the limitation of land planning, these two complex road
infrastructures integrated in the same section of the road designing manuscripts.
Compared with the naturalistic driving study (Neal et al, 2002; Dingus et al,
2006), driving simulator makes it possible to collect driving data from different
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

drivers in the same driving situation, especially in some dangerous situations. Driving
simulator has been validated to be a safe, efficient and economical tool to achieve in-
depth investigations of human factors (Krause et al, 2014). Upchurch et al. (2002)
used the driving simulator to evaluate the developed signing alternatives and improve
guide signing for the Central Artery-Tunnel. Calvi et al. (2012) described the results
of a driving simulator study that focused on driving performance while approaching a
divergence area and decelerating during the exiting maneuver. Guo et al. (2013)
provide a valuable technical reference for speed-change lane geometry configuration,
the length design of speed –change lane, the operation safety evaluation of multi-lane
freeway diverging and merging areas, also the operation and management of multi-
lane freeway by a driving simulation study.
The main work of this paper is to explore the effect of tunnel environment on
driver’s acceleration and deceleration behavior. Based on the design documents of a
real road engineering project, the virtual reality environment and driving scenarios
were implemented. Then, the testing drivers were recruited and the simulating driving
tests were conducted. At the end of the paper, the effect of tunnel environment on the
driver behavior, such as driving trajectory, lane crossing point, speed, speed of the
key locations, were studied in this paper.

2 METHODOLOGY
2.1 Equipment
The 8 degrees of freedom driving simulator from the Research Institute of
Highway (RIOH), Ministry of Transport, China was used to collect the driving data,
as shown in Figure 1. The RIOH driving simulator consists of a motion platform,
interactive virtual reality system, vehicle dynamics simulation system, and data
acquisition system, which allows the users to be immersed in an extremely realistic
environment.
The motion platform is based on a 6 degrees of freedom motion platform, a
Yaw-Table, an X-Table and the vibration system. The interactive virtual reality
system contains a 360-degree view projection system in the dome, a sound system
supporting the sound of the driving vehicle and the surrounding environment, and the

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4020

VR environment modelling software (UC-winRoad). The vehicle dynamics

simulation system concludes a real passenger car cabin and a truck cabin, which can
be replaced into the dome by needs, and the vehicle dynamics simulator (CarSim and
TruckSim). The data acquisition system can record the driver’s accelerating,
decelerating and steering behaviors, the vehicle’s dynamic parameters and the
indicators which describe the relationship between the vehicle and other moving
objects or the traffic models in real time.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 1. 8 degrees of freedom driving simulator from RIOH, MOT, China

Huadu
Direction

South Interchange

North Interchange

Guangzhou
Direction

Figure 2. Location of the North Interchange and the South Interchange

2.2 Scenarios
As shown in Figure 2, the North Interchange and the South Interchange were
selected to be implemented in the virtual reality environment. Figure 3 and Figure 4
show more details about the two interchanges, such as the layout of the
acceleration/deceleration lane, auxiliary lane and transition section, and the location
of the dark buried tunnel section and the open tunnel section. The two virtual reality
environments were achieved by UC-win Road (see in Figure 5 and Figure 6). Four
different driving scenarios were designed to explore possible effect on the driver
behavior. All the scenarios were set a 4s/veh time headway traffic flow in every lane
of the main road.

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4021

North Interchange
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 3. Layout of the North Interchange

Huadu
Direction
From Ramp M to main road
Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section
Transition Section Acceleration Lane

Transition Section Deceleration Lane

From main road to Ramp I

South Interchange

Figure 4. Layout of the South Interchange

Figure 5. Virtual reality environment of the North Interchange

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4022

Figure 6. Virtual reality environment of the South Interchange

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2.2.1 Scenario 1: Driving from Ramp C to main road in the North Interchange
The testing drivers were asked to drive from the start of the Ramp C of the
North Interchange, and then move into the main road. The testing drivers were told to
stop when finished the lane change behavior or passed the transition section. As
shown in Figure 3, there is a 360.50 m long acceleration lane, a 350.00 m long
auxiliary lane and a 160.00 m long transition section in the driving route. The start of
the dark buried tunnel section is in the middle of the auxiliary lane.

2.2.2 Scenario 2: Driving from main road to Ramp B in the North Interchange
The starting point is in the innermost lane of the main road and is about 3.0
km away from the Ramp B. The testing drivers were told to drive from the main road
to the Ramp B and should make four lane change behaviors to change into the Ramp
B. As shown in Figure 3, there is an 80.00 m long transition section, a 250.00 m long
auxiliary lane and a 200.22 m long deceleration lane in the driving route. The start of
the open tunnel section is in the middle of the transition section. Moreover, the exit
signs for Ramp B are placed where there is 2.0 km, 1.5 km, and 0.5 km away from
the Ramp B. The Scenario 2 would end when the testing driver completed the driving
task of moving into Ramp B.

2.2.3 Scenario 3: Driving from Ramp M to main road in the South Interchange
In the Scenario 3, the testing drivers were asked to drive from the start of the
Ramp M of the South Interchange, and then change into the main road. The Scenario
3 finished when the testing drivers completed the lane change behavior or passing the
transition section. As shown in Figure 4, there is a 204.36 m long acceleration lane
and an 80.00 m long transition section. There is no auxiliary lane in the driving route
and the start of the dark buried tunnel section is in the middle of the transition
section.

2.2.4 Scenario 4: Driving from main road to Ramp I in the South Interchange
Like Scenario 2, the origin of the Scenario 4 is in the main road which is
about 3.0 km away from the Ramp I. The simulating vehicle with the testing drivers

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4023

were set in the innermost lane of the main road, where the testing drivers should also
make four lane change behaviors to move into the Ramp I. As shown in Figure 4,
there is a 90.00 m long transition section and a 131.95 m long deceleration lane in the
testing route. The transition section and the deceleration lane are all in the dark buried
tunnel section. The exit signs for Ramp I are set in the site which is 2.0 km, 1.5 km,
and 0.5 km away from the Ramp I. The testing drivers could stop when moved into
the Ramp I completely.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

2.3 Tests
In order to avoid biased results due to the testing drivers’ genders, ages, and
driving experiences, ten testing drivers with different genders (7 males and 3
females), ages (Mean = 28.9 years, range from 22 to 48 years) and driving
experiences (Mean = 6.0 years, range from 1 to 21 years) were recruited. Before the
formal tests, a pre-test was conducted for every testing drivers to familiar with the
driving simulator. During the formal tests, the same standard protocol was executed
and the testing drivers were only informed about the driving route in the beginning of
each scenario. The four scenarios were conducted in random order and a brief break
was available between each scenario for each testing drivers.

3 RESULTS
According to the description of the four scenarios (see section 2.2), the
simulating driving data in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 were used to analyse the tunnel
environment effect on driver’s acceleration behavior, and the simulating driving data
in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4 were used to analyse the tunnel environment effect on
driver’s deceleration behavior.

3.1 Driving from ramp to main road

3.1.1 Trajectory
The Figure 7 shows the testing drivers’ driving trajectories in Scenario 1 and
Scenario 3. The Figure 8 demonstrates the lane crossing point where testing drivers
drove from the ramp to the main road. In Scenario 1, the average location where
drivers moved into the main road is 48 m away before the end of the acceleration lane
and 191 m away before the start of the dark buried tunnel section. In Scenario 3, the
average lane crossing point is 35 m away before the end of the acceleration lane and
70 m away before the start of the dark buried tunnel section. The only difference
between Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 is there is no auxiliary lane in Scenario 3.
However, the results illustrate that the acceleration lane, auxiliary lane and transition
section were not sufficiently used by the testing drivers.

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4024

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Guangzhou
Transition Direction
Acceleration Lane Auxiliary Lane Section

(a) Scenario 1

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Transition Huadu
Acceleration Lane Section Direction

(b) Scenario 3

Figure 7. Driving trajectories in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Guangzhou
Direction
Transition
Acceleration Lane Auxiliary Lane Section

(a) Scenario 1
Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Huadu
Transition Direction
Acceleration Lane Section

(b) Scenario 3

Figure 8. Lane crossing point in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3

3.1.2 Speed
The testing drivers’ driving speed in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 when moving
into the main road are shown in Figure 9. The speed of the key locations, such as the
start and the end of the acceleration lane, the end of the auxiliary lane and the end of
the transition section, and the average lane crossing speed, are shown in Figure 10.
The average speed of the lane crossing point in Scenario 1 is 79.1±8.61 km/h, and
the average speed of the lane crossing point in Scenario 3 is 76.0±12.28 km/h. The
design speed of the main road in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 is 100 km/h. Hence, the
speed difference between traffic in the main road and the traffic moving from the
ramp in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3 is above 20 km/h. The significant speed difference
might seriously impact traffic operation in the main road.

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4025
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 9. Testing drivers’ speed in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3

Average lane crossing sp eed

Speed, km/h

Op en Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tu nnel Section

Average lane crossing point

Acceleration Lane Auxiliary Lane Transition Section

(a) Scenario 1

Average lan e crossing speed

Speed, km/h

Dark Buried Tunnel

Open Tunnel Section
Average lane crossing point Section

Acceleration Lane Transition Section

(b) Scenario 3

Figure 10. Speed of the key locations in Scenario 1 and Scenario 3

3.2 Driving from main road to ramp

3.2.1 Trajectory
As is shown in Figure 11, the testing drivers need to complete four lane
change behaviors to change into the ramp. The Figure 12 shows the crossing points
where the testing drivers move from the inside lane to the ramp in Scenario 2 and
Scenario 4. In Scenario 2, the average locations where drivers drove from Lane 4 to
Lane 3, from Lane 3 to Lane 2 and from Lane 2 to Lane 1 are 2984 m, 1790 m and

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4026

952 m before the start of the transition section respectively, and the average location
where the drivers moved from the Lane 1 to the diverging lane is 80 m after the start
of the transition section. In Scenario 4, the average lane crossing points from Lane 4
to Lane 3, from Lane 3 to Lane 2 and from Lane 2 to Lane 1 are 2500 m, 1471 m and
922 m before the start of the transition section respectively, while the average lane
crossing point from Lane 1 to diverging lane is 56 m after the start of the transition
section.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section

Huadu
Direction

(a) Scenario 2
Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Guangzhou
Direction

(b) Scenario 4

Figure 11. Driving trajectories in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Huadu Guangzhou
Direction Direction

(a) Lane crossing point in Scenario 2 (b) Lane crossing point in Scenario 4
Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section

Transition Section Auxiliary Lane Deceleration Lane Transition Section Deceleration Lane

(c) Lane crossing point in Scenario 2, Lane 1 to Ramp B (d) Lane crossing point in Scenario 4, Lane1 to Ramp I

Figure 12. Lane crossing point in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4

The distances between the origin of the simulating driving and the start of the
transition section in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4 are almost the same. The differences
of the driving situation in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4 are the position of the dark

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4027

buried tunnel section and the existence of the auxiliary lane (see in Figure 12).
Compared the lane crossing points the testing drivers moved from Lane 4 to Lane 3
in Scenario 2 and those lane crossing points in Scenario 4, the testing drivers were
more likely to change lanes before the start of the dark buried tunnel section.
Moreover, the same situation happened when drivers need to change lanes from Lane
2 to Lane 1 in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4.

3.2.2 Speed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

The Figure 13 shows the testing drivers’ speed in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4
when changing from the innermost lane to the ramp. The Figure 14 shows the driving
speed at the key locations, such as the start and the end of the transition section, the
end of the auxiliary lane and the end of the deceleration lane, the average speed of the
drivers’ four lane changes, and the speed of the locations which are 2 km, 1 km and
0.5 km away from the start of the transition section.
Speed, km/h

Transition Section, Auxiliary

Lane, and Deceleration Lane

(a) Scenario 2
Speed, km/h

Transition Section and

Deceleration Lane

(b) Scenario 4

Figure 13. Testing drivers’ speed in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4

The average speed when drivers change from Lane 4 to Lane 3, from Lane 3
to Lane 2, from Lane 2 to Lane 1 and from Lane 1 to the diverging lane in Scenario 2
is 60.5±24.25 km/h, 87.9 ± 17.64 km/h, 86.3±11.66 km/h and 72.3 ± 9.23 km/h
respectively. Similarly, the average speed when drivers change from Lane 4 to Lane
3, from Lane 3 to Lane 2, from Lane 2 to Lane 1 and from Lane 1 to the diverging
lane in Scenario 4 is 77.9±28.56 km/h, 96.7±13.36 km/h, 92.2±14.59 km/h and
74.3±21.08 km/h respectively.

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4028

Compare the lane crossing speed in the two scenarios, it seems that the
drivers’ first lane change behavior in Scenario 2 was affected significantly by the
dark buried tunnel section. However, all the testing drivers decelerated before moving
into the ramp in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4. The deceleration matched the purpose of
the layout of the transition section, auxiliary lane and deceleration lane.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Speed, km/h

L4toL3 L3toL2 L4toL3 MaintoRamp

Dark Buried Tunnel Section Open Tunnel Section

Transition Section Auxiliary Lane Deceleration Lane

(a) Scenario 2
Speed, km/h

L4toL3 L3toL2 L4toL3 MaintoRamp

Open Tunnel Section Dark Buried Tunnel Section

Transition Section Deceleration Lane

(b) Scenario 4

Figure 14. Speed of the key locations in Scenario 2 and Scenario 4

4 CONCLUSION
In this research, the effect of tunnel environment on driver’s acceleration and
deceleration behavior is analyzed in detail. As a result, it seems that the acceleration
lane, the auxiliary lane and the transition section were not sufficiently used by the
testing drivers, because of the effect of the dark buried tunnel section. Moreover,
there was a significant speed difference between the main road traffic and the
vehicles moving from the ramp, which might impact the traffic operation in the main
road. In comparison to the simulating driving data when moving into the ramp, the
testing drivers were more likely to change lanes before entering the dark buried
tunnel section. However, when approaching the diverging lane, the brightness

© ASCE

CICTP 2020
 CICTP 2020 4029

changes by the dark buried tunnel section seem not to affect drivers’ deceleration and
lane-change behaviors. Therefore, the results showed that: (1) drivers prefer to
change lanes in the open tunnel section rather than the dark buried tunnel section
when entering or exiting the high-speed lane; (2) driver’s acceleration behavior is
affected by the tunnel when entering the high-speed lane; (3) driver’s deceleration
behavior seems to be not affected by the tunnel when exiting the high-speed lane.

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tongji University on 02/13/23. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

This research was supported in part by the National Key R&D Program of
China 2017YFC0804800 (2017YFC0804802), the Application Foundation of the
Ministry of Transport, China under Grant 2014319223170 and the Natural Science
Foundation of Tibet, China under Grant 2016XZ01G31.

REFERENES
Calvi, A., Benedetto, A., & De Blasiis, M. R. (2012). A Driving Simulator Study of
Driver Performance on Deceleration Lanes. Accident Analysis and
Prevention, 45(1), 195-203.
Dingus, T. A., Klauer, S.G., Neale, V. L., Petersen, A., Lee, S. E., Sudweeks, J.,
Perez, M. A., Hankey, J., Ramsey, D., Gupta, S., Bucher, C., Doerzaph, Z. R.,
Jermeland, J., and Knipling, R.R. (2006). The 100 Car Naturalistic Driving
Study, Phase II – Results of the 100-Car Field Experiment, Report No. DOT-
HS-810-593. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington,
D.C.
Guo, Z., Wan, H., Zhao, Y., Wang, H., & Li, Z. (2013). Driving Simulation Study on
Speed-Change Lanes of the Multi-Lane Freeway Interchange. Procedia -
Social and Behavioral Sciences, 96, 60-69.
Krause, M., Yilmaz, L., & Bengler, K. (2014). Comparison of Real and Simulated
Driving for a Static Driving Simulator, Proceedings of the 5th International
Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics AHFE 2014,
Kraków, Poland, 19-23.
Neal, V.L., Klauer, S.G., Knipling, R.R., Dingus, T.A., Holbrook, G.T., & Petersen,
A. (2002). The 100 Car Naturalistic Driving Study, Phase I – Experimental
Design, Report No. DOT-HS-809-536. National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Washington, D.C.
Upchurch, J., Fisher, D., Carpenter, R., & Dutta, A. (2002). Freeway Guide Sign
Design with Driving Simulator for Central Artery-Tunnel: Boston,
Massachusetts, Transportation Research Record Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, 1801(1), 9-17.

© ASCE

CICTP 2020