Jam-Avoiding Adaptive Cruise Control (ACC) and its Impact on Traffic Dynamics

  • Arne Kesting
  • Martin Treiber
  • Martin Schönhof
  • Florian Kranke
  • Dirk Helbing

Summary

Adaptive-Cruise Control (ACC) automatically accelerates or decelerates a vehicle to maintain a selected time gap, to reach a desired velocity, or to prevent a rear-end collision. To this end, the ACC sensors detect and track the vehicle ahead for measuring the actual distance and speed difference. Together with the own velocity, these input variables are exactly the same as in car-following models. The focus of this contribution is: What will be the impact of a spreading of ACC systems on the traffic dynamics? Do automated driving strategies have the potential to improve the capacity and stability of traffic flow or will they necessarily increase the heterogeneity and instability? How does the result depend on the ACC equipment level?

We discuss microscopic modeling aspects for human and automated (ACC) driving. By means of microscopic traffic simulations, we study how a variable percentage of ACC-equipped vehicles influences the stability of traffic flow, the maximum flow under free traffic conditions until traffic breaks down, and the dynamic capacity of congested traffic. Furthermore, we compare different percentages of ACC with respect to travel times in a specific congestion scenario. Remarkably, we find that already a small amount of ACC equipped cars and, hence, a marginally increased free and dynamic capacity, leads to a drastic reduction of traffic congestion.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    “European Commission (Energy & Transport), White Paper European transport policy for 2010: time to decide,”, COM (2001) 370 final.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Minderhoud, Supported Driving: Impacts on Motorway Traffic Flow (Delft University Press, Delft, 1999).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Treiber and D. Helbing, “Microsimulations of freeway traffic including control measures”, Automatisierungstechnik 49, 478–484 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    L. Davis, “Effect of adaptive cruise control systems on traffic flow”, Phys. Rev. E 69, 066110 (2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    G. Marsden, M. McDonald, and M. Brackstone, “Towards an understanding of adaptive cruise control”, Transportation Research C 9, 33–51 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    B. S. Kerner, The Physics of Traffic (Springer, Heidelberg, 2004).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. Helbing, “Traffic and related self-driven many-particle systems”, Review of Modern Physics 73, 1067–1141 (2001).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    K. Nagel, P. Wagner, and R. Woesler, “Still flowing: old and new approaches for traffic flow modeling”, Operations Research 51, 681–710 (2003).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, and D. Helbing, “Derivation, properties, and simulation of a gas-kinetic-based, non-local traffic model”, Phys. Rev. E 59, 239–253 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    W. Knospe, L. Santen, A. Schadschneider, and M. Schreckenberg, “Single-vehicle data of highway traffic: Microscopic description of traffic phases”, Phys. Rev. E 65, 056133 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    B. Tilch and D. Helbing, “Evaluation of single vehicle data in dependence of the vehicle-type, lane, and site”, in Traffic and Granular Flow’ 99, D. Helbing, H. Herrmann, M. Schreckenberg, and D. Wolf, eds., (Springer, Berlin, 2000), pp. 333–338.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Treiber, A. Kesting, and D. Helbing, “Understanding widely scattered traffic flows, the capacity drop, and platoons as effects of variance-driven time gaps”, Phys. Rev. E 74, 016123 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Green, “‘How long does it take to stop?’ Methodological analysis of driver perception-brake Times”, Transportation Human Factors 2, 195–216 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M. Treiber, A. Kesting, and D. Helbing, “Delays, inaccuracies and anticipation in microscopic traffic models”, Physica A 359, 729–746 (2006).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Treiber, A. Hennecke, and D. Helbing, “Congested traffic states in empirical observations and microscopic simulations”, Physical Review E 62, 1805–1824 (2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Daganzo, M. Cassidy, and R. Bertini, “Possible explanations of phase transitions in highway traffic”, Transportation Research B 33, 365–379 (1999).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. Treiber, A. Kesting, and D. Helbing, “Variance-driven traffic dynamics and statistical aspects of single-vehicle data”, in this volume.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. Schönhof, A. Kesting, M. Treiber, and D. Helbing, “Inter-Vehicle Communication on highways: Statistical properties of information propagation”, in this volume.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Arne Kesting
    • 1
  • Martin Treiber
    • 1
  • Martin Schönhof
    • 1
  • Florian Kranke
    • 2
  • Dirk Helbing
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.Institute for Transport & EconomicsTechnische Universität DresdenDresdenGermany
  2. 2.Volkswagen AGWolfsburgGermany
  3. 3.Collegium Budapest — Institute for Advanced StudyBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations