Re: [sumo-user] Flow definition disrepancy

["ing. Massimiliano Petri" <m.petri@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Dear all,
does anyone know how it is possible to simulate the impact of variables 
message signs giving informations about road congestions in following 
streets?
Thanks,
Massimiliano

---
-------------------------------------------------
Eng.Massimiliano Petri

mobile:+39.3929169328
e-mail: m.petri@xxxxxxxxxxxx

University of Pisa
University Center 'Logistic Systems'
Via dei Pensieri, 60
57128-Livorno

Il 07-03-2020 00:10 Chedly Bourguiba ha scritto:
> Hi Jakob,
>
> Thank you for your quick response.
>
> We are currently defining the flows for one single time period, for
> one single intersection. We have specified the number of vehicles
> entering an approach (259). The approach has 5 lanes (2 for right
> turns, 2 for thru movements and 1 for the left turn). We have also
> defined the turning probabilities for left, thru and right.
>
> When we run the simulation, however, the output numbers are
> significantly higher for the thru movement lanes than expected (based
> on the number of total vehicles at the approach multiplied by the
> probability for the thru movement). In addition, the right turn
> movements and the left turn movements are close to what they should
> be. Consequently, the total number of vehicles at that approach is
> higher than the number we expect from the flow file. We're struggling
> to understand how this behaviour could be possible. We've checked that
> the flow number in the flow file and the turning probabilities in the
> turns file are correct.
>
> Do you know any possible reasons why this should be happening? Let me
> know if you need any further information to diagnose.
>
> Thanks,
> Chedly
>
> On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 10:52 PM Jakob Erdmann <namdre.sumo@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > The traffic demand given to SUMO typically does not specify the
> > exact lane sequence. This means individual lanes could see higher
> > flows and other lanes could see lower flow due to lane choice.
> > I would expect the simulated edge flow to be no higher than the
> > defined flow.
> > An exception might happen if vehicles cannot be inserted for some
> > time and then are released into the simulation at a later time,
> > thereby increasing the flow beyond the specified value.
> > Things to check for:
> > - edge flow vs expected flow at different time aggregations
> > - depart delay (trip info), delayed departures per lane (gui
> > coloring style)
> > - departLane definition for your flows
> >
> > regards,
> > Jakob
> >
> > Am Fr., 6. März 2020 um 01:52 Uhr schrieb Chedly Bourguiba
> > <chedly@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I have an intersection where I know the exact vehicle count per
> > > lane and movement per hour (a specific hour). When running sumo, I
> > > define the flow XML file using the vehicle per hour attribute and
> > > then I compare the count I had for the specific hour that I
> > > modeled and some lanes would have a count higher than the value I
> > > used to model the flow.
> > > Do you have any leads/idea where the discrepancy can come from?
> > > Thank you in advance for your help!
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Chedly
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > sumo-user mailing list
> > > sumo-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > > https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user
> > _______________________________________________
> > sumo-user mailing list
> > sumo-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
> > unsubscribe from this list, visit
> > https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user
> _______________________________________________
> sumo-user mailing list
> sumo-user@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://www.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/sumo-user