Figure 1.
Diagram of TECS, in which complete signs typically cannot be set.
Figure 1.
Diagram of TECS, in which complete signs typically cannot be set.
Figure 2.
TEAS on an expressway under construction in a mountainous area, taken with an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) by the author, in which the town is built on the mountain.
Figure 2.
TEAS on an expressway under construction in a mountainous area, taken with an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) by the author, in which the town is built on the mountain.
Figure 3.
The location of Expressway A and data collection points.
Figure 3.
The location of Expressway A and data collection points.
Figure 4.
Trend of traffic volume on Expressway A, where X denotes the hour and Y denotes traffic volume on the two-lane TECS. For example, the data of “Hour 8” indicate traffic volume of both lanes on the section between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.
Figure 4.
Trend of traffic volume on Expressway A, where X denotes the hour and Y denotes traffic volume on the two-lane TECS. For example, the data of “Hour 8” indicate traffic volume of both lanes on the section between 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.
Figure 5.
The process of data collection at the site.
Figure 5.
The process of data collection at the site.
Figure 6.
The detailed position of the data collection point on TECS. Radar 1 is set at the tunnel exit to collect vehicle speed after the tunnel, and Radar 2 is set at the start of the taper to collect vehicle speed before the taper, while the roadside radar is set 100 to 200 m before the taper to collect the time headway.
Figure 6.
The detailed position of the data collection point on TECS. Radar 1 is set at the tunnel exit to collect vehicle speed after the tunnel, and Radar 2 is set at the start of the taper to collect vehicle speed before the taper, while the roadside radar is set 100 to 200 m before the taper to collect the time headway.
Figure 7.
Vehicle speed after the tunnel on TECS, where X denotes the type of vehicle and distance from the tunnel exit and Y denotes vehicle speed. (a) Fast lane; (b) Curb lane.
Figure 7.
Vehicle speed after the tunnel on TECS, where X denotes the type of vehicle and distance from the tunnel exit and Y denotes vehicle speed. (a) Fast lane; (b) Curb lane.
Figure 8.
Vehicle speed before the taper on TECS, where X denotes the type of vehicle and distance from the tunnel exit and Y denotes vehicles speed. (a) Fast lane; (b) Curb lane.
Figure 8.
Vehicle speed before the taper on TECS, where X denotes the type of vehicle and distance from the tunnel exit and Y denotes vehicles speed. (a) Fast lane; (b) Curb lane.
Figure 9.
Time headway distribution in the curb lane on the TECS. Sections A to D of the X axis represent the data collection points on the four TECS in
Figure 6, respectively, in the order from south to north, and Y denotes time headway on the curb lane.
Figure 9.
Time headway distribution in the curb lane on the TECS. Sections A to D of the X axis represent the data collection points on the four TECS in
Figure 6, respectively, in the order from south to north, and Y denotes time headway on the curb lane.
Figure 10.
Vehicle trajectory after Kalman filter processing; the black shows the original data while the red shows the processed. (a) Horizontal position, where X denotes time series of lane changing and Y denotes horizontal position of the vehicle with 0 marked as the vehicle centerline coinciding with the boundary of fast and curb lane; (b) Lateral speed, where X denotes time series of lane changing and Y denotes the vehicle’s lateral speed, with positive values indicating the vehicle moves to the right.
Figure 10.
Vehicle trajectory after Kalman filter processing; the black shows the original data while the red shows the processed. (a) Horizontal position, where X denotes time series of lane changing and Y denotes horizontal position of the vehicle with 0 marked as the vehicle centerline coinciding with the boundary of fast and curb lane; (b) Lateral speed, where X denotes time series of lane changing and Y denotes the vehicle’s lateral speed, with positive values indicating the vehicle moves to the right.
Figure 11.
Distribution of diverging vehicle trajectory for rightward lane change. X denotes time series of lane changing with 0 marked as the moment when vehicle centerline coincides with the boundary of fast and curb lane, and Y denotes width of lane changing with 0 marked as the same means. Each line denotes a trajectory of a lane-changing vehicle.
Figure 11.
Distribution of diverging vehicle trajectory for rightward lane change. X denotes time series of lane changing with 0 marked as the moment when vehicle centerline coincides with the boundary of fast and curb lane, and Y denotes width of lane changing with 0 marked as the same means. Each line denotes a trajectory of a lane-changing vehicle.
Figure 12.
The length and width distribution of lane changing, where X denotes the width and distance of lane changing, respectively, and Y denotes the number of samples within the corresponding group. (a) Width of lane changing; (b) Distance of lane changing.
Figure 12.
The length and width distribution of lane changing, where X denotes the width and distance of lane changing, respectively, and Y denotes the number of samples within the corresponding group. (a) Width of lane changing; (b) Distance of lane changing.
Figure 13.
Correlation between lane-changing distance and speed. X and Y denote average speed and travel distance of the vehicle during lane changing, respectively. Each point denotes the data of a lane-changing vehicle.
Figure 13.
Correlation between lane-changing distance and speed. X and Y denote average speed and travel distance of the vehicle during lane changing, respectively. Each point denotes the data of a lane-changing vehicle.
Figure 14.
Driving experiments on the section with drivers wearing SMI ETGTM.
Figure 14.
Driving experiments on the section with drivers wearing SMI ETGTM.
Figure 15.
Normal and abnormal data of driver pupil diameter., where X denotes the distance from a point to tunnel exit, and Y denotes driver’s pupil diameter at this position.
Figure 15.
Normal and abnormal data of driver pupil diameter., where X denotes the distance from a point to tunnel exit, and Y denotes driver’s pupil diameter at this position.
Figure 16.
The distribution of the time of light adaptation. (a) Light adaptation results distribution, where X denotes speed of the vehicle at tunnel exit, and Y denotes light adaptation time for the driver, each point denotes the data of a driver; (b) Correlation of vehicle speed with light adaptation time, where the value denotes the correlation between factors corresponding to X and Y.
Figure 16.
The distribution of the time of light adaptation. (a) Light adaptation results distribution, where X denotes speed of the vehicle at tunnel exit, and Y denotes light adaptation time for the driver, each point denotes the data of a driver; (b) Correlation of vehicle speed with light adaptation time, where the value denotes the correlation between factors corresponding to X and Y.
Figure 17.
Drivers’ gaze position to identify the exit ramps in the simulation driving test.
Figure 17.
Drivers’ gaze position to identify the exit ramps in the simulation driving test.
Figure 18.
Components of the connection section. (a). Case A and Case B; (b). Case C.
Figure 18.
Components of the connection section. (a). Case A and Case B; (b). Case C.
Figure 19.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 2 (L = 290 m) compared with Scheme 1 (L = 250 m). (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 2 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 19.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 2 (L = 290 m) compared with Scheme 1 (L = 250 m). (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 2 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 20.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 3 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 3 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 20.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 3 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 3 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 21.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 4 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 4 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 21.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 4 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 4 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 22.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 5 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 5 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 22.
Improvement ratio of Scheme 5 compared with Scheme 1. (a) Capacity; (b) Travel time; (c) Delay; (d) CO emissions. X and Y denote the total traffic volume and diverging ratio on the two-lane TECS, respectively, while Z shows the improvement ratio of Scheme 5 compared with Scheme 1 based on simulation results for the two schemes in each case. The label on the right side shows the values represented by each color to help with reading.
Figure 23.
Design schemes score for a two-lane TECS at 3000 veh/h traffic volume. X denotes traffic cases with different diverging ratios and Y denotes the comprehensive score of the scheme in the corresponding case. Scheme 3 performs the best with a diverging ratio less than 20%, while Scheme 4 becomes the optimal scheme with that above 30%.
Figure 23.
Design schemes score for a two-lane TECS at 3000 veh/h traffic volume. X denotes traffic cases with different diverging ratios and Y denotes the comprehensive score of the scheme in the corresponding case. Scheme 3 performs the best with a diverging ratio less than 20%, while Scheme 4 becomes the optimal scheme with that above 30%.
Figure 24.
The optimal design scheme based on the results of EBMADM. X denotes traffic volume on the two-lane TECS and Y denotes diverging ratio. The optimal scheme for each of the 28 traffic cases has been shown.
Figure 24.
The optimal design scheme based on the results of EBMADM. X denotes traffic volume on the two-lane TECS and Y denotes diverging ratio. The optimal scheme for each of the 28 traffic cases has been shown.
Table 1.
Statistics on the length of TECS on Expressway A.
Table 1.
Statistics on the length of TECS on Expressway A.
Group | Interchange (Exit) | Tunnel | Length of TECS |
---|
1 | Z | L | 670 m |
2 | J | L | 450 m |
3 | S | Q | 320 m |
4 | S | H | 290 m |
5 | T | T | 400 m |
6 | L | V | 360 m |
Table 2.
The three significant traffic parameters on the TECS.
Table 2.
The three significant traffic parameters on the TECS.
Lane | Speed (km/h) | Volume (veh/h) | Intensity (veh/km) |
---|
Fast lane | 82.31 | 910 | 11.06 |
Curb lane | 75.19 | 884 | 11.75 |
Table 3.
Statistics on the lane-changing distance.
Table 3.
Statistics on the lane-changing distance.
Lane-Changing Speed (km/h) | 60 to 80 | 80 to 100 |
---|
Lane-changing Distance (m) | 65 to 166 | 68 to 175 |
Average (m) | 108 | 113 |
Table 4.
The schemes designed for simulation.
Table 4.
The schemes designed for simulation.
Scheme | Light Adaptation | Reading Signs | Making Decision | Queuing and Lane-Changing | Length of TECS |
---|
1 | 32 m | 42 m | 34 m | 142 m | 250 m |
2 | 182 m | 290 m |
3 | 212 m | 320 m |
4 | 252 m | 360 m |
5 | 292 m | 400 m |
Table 5.
The further detailed traffic cases for simulation.
Table 5.
The further detailed traffic cases for simulation.
Case | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
---|
Total Volume (veh/h) | 1800 | 2100 | 2400 | 2700 | 3000 | 3300 | 3600 |
Volume on the fast lane (veh/h) | 913 | 1065 | 1217 | 1370 | 1522 | 1674 | 1826 |
Volume on the curb lane (veh/h) | 887 | 1035 | 1183 | 1330 | 1478 | 1626 | 1774 |
Case | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | | | |
Diverging Ratio (%) | 10% | 20% | 30% | 40% | | | |
Table 6.
MAPE index calculation results.
Table 6.
MAPE index calculation results.
Flow | Through Traffic | Diverging Traffic |
---|
Investigated Capacity (veh/h) | 1417 | 377 |
Simulated capacity (veh/h) | 1385 | 364 |
Individual MAPE (%) | −2.26 | −3.45 |
MAPE (%) | −2.51 |
Table 7.
Description of weight calculation results for each traffic case.
Table 7.
Description of weight calculation results for each traffic case.
Index | Average Weight for 28 Cases | Weight Range |
---|
Traffic Volume | 0.3086 | [0.2479, 0.3691] |
Travel Time | 0.2409 | [0.1901, 0.3193] |
Delay | 0.2129 | [0.1675, 0.2623] |
CO emissions | 0.2376 | [0.1902, 0.3036] |