环岛容量模型评价:实证研究

Liang Ren, X. Qu, H. Guan, S. Easa, E. Oh
{"title":"环岛容量模型评价:实证研究","authors":"Liang Ren, X. Qu, H. Guan, S. Easa, E. Oh","doi":"10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000878","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractBased on field data collected at nine roundabouts in Gold Coast, Australia, this paper evaluates the performance of the capacity estimation for single-lane roundabouts using analytical models [including the highway capacity manual (HCM) 2000 model, the German Highway Capacity Manual (GHCM) model, the signalized and unsignalized intersection design and research aid (SIDRA) model and a new roundabout capacity (NRC) model] and an empirical model (the HCM 2010 model). First, this study calibrates critical gaps, follow-up times, and conflicting flows. Compared with the capacities measured in the field, the authors carry out a study to analyze the accuracy of the HCM, GHCM, SIDRA, and NRC models. The results show that the five models underestimate capacity but the NRC model produces a smaller range of relative error (−1.07 to −5.74%) and root-mean-square deviation (47.68) than the HCM 2010 (−4.62 to −16.14% and 105.00, respectively), HCM 2000 (−5.76 to −17.21% and 115.29, respectively), GHCM (−8.95 to −...","PeriodicalId":305908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"18","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of Roundabout Capacity Models: An Empirical Case Study\",\"authors\":\"Liang Ren, X. Qu, H. Guan, S. Easa, E. Oh\",\"doi\":\"10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000878\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"AbstractBased on field data collected at nine roundabouts in Gold Coast, Australia, this paper evaluates the performance of the capacity estimation for single-lane roundabouts using analytical models [including the highway capacity manual (HCM) 2000 model, the German Highway Capacity Manual (GHCM) model, the signalized and unsignalized intersection design and research aid (SIDRA) model and a new roundabout capacity (NRC) model] and an empirical model (the HCM 2010 model). First, this study calibrates critical gaps, follow-up times, and conflicting flows. Compared with the capacities measured in the field, the authors carry out a study to analyze the accuracy of the HCM, GHCM, SIDRA, and NRC models. The results show that the five models underestimate capacity but the NRC model produces a smaller range of relative error (−1.07 to −5.74%) and root-mean-square deviation (47.68) than the HCM 2010 (−4.62 to −16.14% and 105.00, respectively), HCM 2000 (−5.76 to −17.21% and 115.29, respectively), GHCM (−8.95 to −...\",\"PeriodicalId\":305908,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"18\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000878\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Transportation Engineering-asce","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000878","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 18

摘要

摘要基于澳大利亚黄金海岸9个环形交叉路口的现场数据,采用分析模型(包括公路通行能力手册(HCM) 2000模型、德国公路通行能力手册(GHCM)模型、信号化与非信号化交叉口设计与研究辅助(SIDRA)模型和新型环形交叉路口通行能力模型)和经验模型(HCM 2010模型)对单车道环形交叉路口通行能力估算的性能进行了评价。首先,本研究校准了关键缺口、后续时间和冲突流。将HCM、GHCM、SIDRA和NRC模型的精度与野外实测能力进行对比分析。结果表明,5个模型均低估了植被容量,但NRC模型的相对误差范围(- 1.07 ~ - 5.74%)和均方根偏差(47.68)均小于HCM 2010(- 4.62 ~ - 16.14%和105.00)、HCM 2000(- 5.76 ~ - 17.21%和115.29)和GHCM(- 8.95 ~ - 5.29)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of Roundabout Capacity Models: An Empirical Case Study
AbstractBased on field data collected at nine roundabouts in Gold Coast, Australia, this paper evaluates the performance of the capacity estimation for single-lane roundabouts using analytical models [including the highway capacity manual (HCM) 2000 model, the German Highway Capacity Manual (GHCM) model, the signalized and unsignalized intersection design and research aid (SIDRA) model and a new roundabout capacity (NRC) model] and an empirical model (the HCM 2010 model). First, this study calibrates critical gaps, follow-up times, and conflicting flows. Compared with the capacities measured in the field, the authors carry out a study to analyze the accuracy of the HCM, GHCM, SIDRA, and NRC models. The results show that the five models underestimate capacity but the NRC model produces a smaller range of relative error (−1.07 to −5.74%) and root-mean-square deviation (47.68) than the HCM 2010 (−4.62 to −16.14% and 105.00, respectively), HCM 2000 (−5.76 to −17.21% and 115.29, respectively), GHCM (−8.95 to −...
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信