Modeling and simulation of dynamic lane reversal using a cell transmission model

Figures & data

Figure 1. Shift of Lane Directions in DLR. (a) Initial lane configuration. (b). Lane configuration in the next time interval.

Figure 2. Traffic flow in the CTM.

Table 1. Correction coefficients.

Parameters	Value
Number of Lanes	1	2	3	4
Correction Coefficient	1.000	0.982	0.965	0.947

Figure 3. Proxy model of DLR in VISSIM.

Table 2. Default and recommended values of sensitive parameters.

	Parameter	Meaning	Default	Calibrated
Car following model	CC0	Average standstill distance (m)	1.5	2.1
	CC1	Headway time (s)	0.9	1.7
	CC2	Following variation (m)	4	3.2
	CC4&CC5	Negative and positive “following” threshold	−0.35	−0.35
Lane-changing model	MinD	Accepted deceleration of trailing vehicle(m/${\mathrm{s}}^2$)	−0.5	−1
	S_Fact	Safety distance reduction factor	0.6	0.35
	MaxCD	Maximum deceleration for cooperative breaking (m/${\mathrm{s}}^2$)	−3	−4.2
	MaxSD	Maximum speed difference (km/h)	10.8	16
	LC_Dist	Distance of lane-change attempt (m)	200	200

Table 3. Parameters in the NSGA-II algorithm.

Number of Lanes	3	4	5	6	7	8
Parameters
Population Size	50	50	100	100	150	150
Evolutionary Algebra	200	200	300	300	400	400
Distribution Index for Crossover	20	20	20	20	20	20
Distribution Index for Mutation	20	20	20	20	20	20
Mutation Probability	0.05	0.05	0.05	0.05	0.05	0.05
Upper Bound of Lanes	2	3	4	5	6	7
Lower Bound of Lanes	1	1	1	1	1	1

Figure 4. Pareto-optimal solutions in various cases.

Table 4. Direction inflow rate for different lane conditions.

Parameters	Value
Number of Lanes	3	4	5	6	7	8
Directional Inflow Rate (pcu/h)	4500-4500	6000-6000	7500-7500	9000-9000	10500-10500	12000-12000

Figure 5. Comparison of delays obtained in VISSIM and CTM.

Table 5. Result of regression parameter estimates.

Parameters	B	St.D. Error	P-Value	VIF
Nalne	24.927	.574	<.001	1.838
Tq	0.124	.001	<.001	1.897
Proportion	-.055	.072	<.001	1.054
(Constant)	−72.842	2.615
Model Fit	R Squared	Adjusted R Squared	St. Error of the Estimate	Durbin-Watson
	.523	.700	21.1613	.713

Figure 6. Average vehicle delay reduction (s) vs. directional flow (pcu/h).

Figure 7. Average vehicle delay reduction (s) vs. directional flow (pcu/h) in a situation with four lanes.

Figure 8. Driving safety hazard index vs. directional flow (pcu/h).