Advertisement

Online Micro Modelling Using Proprietary Controllers and SUMO

  • Robbin BlokpoelEmail author
  • Jaap Vreeswijk
Conference paper
  • 1.1k Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Mobility book series (LNMOB)

Abstract

Over the past years the open source traffic simulator SUMO has been significantly improved and extended. One of the most important elements of urban traffic simulation is the proper handling of traffic light control. Currently available are elementary control methods like embedded fixed time and actuated control, but also controllers external to SUMO that use SUMO’s extensive TraCI interface that enables reading and changing of many simulation parameters. This interface, however, has as yet not been used to link to proprietary controllers, which would enable the use of SUMO for accurate studies in a multivendor environment. Moreover, the TraCI interface accepts the injection of vehicles from external sources during the simulation. This opens up possibilities for using real-world sensor data directly in the simulation environment. This paper describes how state-of-the-art Imtech controllers are linked to SUMO. The paper covers topics like architecture, vehicle detection, signal group control, simulation speed optimization and contains a comparison of the SUMO simulation to the commercial Vissim simulator for an identical scenario. The last section of this paper introduces embedded real-time micro simulation as part of the control environment, which was able to approach.

Keywords

Signal Group Traffic Demand Average Absolute Error Inductive Loop Traffic Count 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Bera S, Krishna Rao KV (2011) Estimation of origin-destination matrix from traffic counts: the state of the art. Europ Transp 49:3–23Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blokpoel RJ (2014) Network conversion for SUMO integration. In: 2nd SUMO conference, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hoogendoorn SP, Bovy PHL (2001) State-of-the-art of vehicular traffic flow modelling. J Syst Control Eng 215:283–303 (1 June 2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koenders E, in‘t Velt R (2011) Cooperative technology deployed. ITS Europe, Lyon, FranceGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Krajzewicz D et al (2013) COLOMBO: investigating the potential of V2X for traffic management purposes assuming low penetration rates. In: ITS Europe congress, Dublin, Ireland, 4 June 2013 Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu H et al (2009) A neurak network model for travel time prediction. In: IEEE conference on intelligent computing and intelligent systemGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    ns-3 (2014). ns-3 project web-pages.http://www.nsnam.org/. Accessed 11 Feb 2014
  8. 8.
    Seungkiri B, Hyunmyung K, Yongteak L, Gangwon L (2001) Multi-vehicle OD trip matrix estimation from traffic counts. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 4(2)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Van Vliet K, Turksma S (2013) ImFlow: policy-based adaptive urban traffic control first field experience. ITS Europe, Dublin, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xiao H et al (2005) Methodology for selecting microscopic simulators: comparative evaluation of AIMSUN and VISSIM. Research report, University of MinnesotaGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Imtech Traffic & InfraAmersfoortThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations