狠狠撸

狠狠撸Share a Scribd company logo

Speed Limit in Barcelona

?
?
ignasi vargas surroca
ignasi vargas surroca

This document evaluates dynamic speed control measures implemented in the metropolitan area of Barcelona. It finds that the measures have led to: 1) A reduction in road accidents and casualties of 22-45% from 2007-2009. However, numbers slightly increased in 2010. 2) A reduction in fuel consumption, NOx, and PM10 emissions of 10-13% from 2007-2008. Reductions were smaller from 2008-2009 when traffic volumes decreased slightly. 3) Smaller differences between maximum and minimum travel times, indicating improved traffic flow with dynamic speed control compared to previous fixed limits. 4) A 47% reduction in congestion factor from 2007-2008 despite a 4.2% decrease

1 of 15
Download to read offline
Speed Limit in Barcelona
Dynamic speed control in the metropolitan area of Barcelona: evaluation and next steps Luís Serrano Sadurní Head of traffic management at the Servei Català de Trànsit, Generalitat de Catalunya Ignacio Sanchez Reig ITS Senior consultant, LISITT, University of Valencia
Evolution of speed The present situation limits in the MA of BCN: 2007: 2008: red blue area area On-going schemes Planned schemes From 2009 Schemes under onwards: study ADTF The ADTF (Average Daily Traffic flow) in the MABCN red and blue area On-going and planned projects
The evaluation: A) Road safety Here we have de comparison of: accidents and casualties + seriously injured, for the January-December period of 2007-2008-2009, in the 80 Km/h zone and DSC roads (C-31 and C-32): 2007 2008 %08/07 2009 %09/07 accidents 658 512 -22,19 535 -18,99 Casualties+ seriously 67 40 -40,30 37 -44,78 injured people Accidents (C-31,C-32) 190 123 -35,26 131 -31,05 Casualties+ seriously 29 12 -58,62 9 -66,97 C31,C32 injured people (C-31,C-32) The reduction of road safety parameters has been more significant comparing 2008 (80 Km/h) vs 2007, and only a small reduction in 2009. In 2010 the number of accidents and the average speed are slightly increasing. We are still studying why.
The evaluation: B) Pollution (Emission) Ton/ %08/ %09/ 2007 2008 2009 day 07 07 Fuel 526, 471, 460, -10,4 -12,5 cs 9 6 4 NOx 11,1 9,8 9,6 -11,0 -13,2 PM10 0,8 0,7 0,7 -11,0 -13,0 CONCLUSION: the reduction in Fuel consumption, NOx and PM10 has been significant 2008 vs 2007, and not so significant 2009 vs 2008, specially if we take into account the reduction of 0,8% of the ADTF (09 vs 08)
Evaluation: C) Travel time (TT) Comparison every 15 minutes between the maximum and minimum travel time for peak-hours period 6:00-11:00 am : 2009 vs 2007, 2009 vs 2008 and 2010 vs 2008. (January-June) 2007 2009 Conclusion: With the DSC (2009), there is a smaller difference in travel time between the maximum and minimum values than in previous periods.
Evaluation: C) Congestion factor Comparison of Congestion factor (CF)=Average length of congestion x duration of congestion, labour days, entrance BCN, 2007-2008-2009-2010, on C-32 road: Gauss2008 Gauss (C32 Entrada) Gauss FR 2010 (C32 Entrada) FR 2008 Entrada) Entrada) CF – CF – 2009FR 2009 Entrada) (C32 (C32 (C32 Gauss FR 2007 (C32 Entrada) CF CF 30 30 30 30 25 25 25 25 N? de repeticions N? de repeticions 20 20 20 20 15 15 15 15 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 10 11 06 17 28 3 9 4 511 612 713 8 14 21 101623 120 1319 2027 428 29 3024 25 26 113428 29 30 16261739 33 34 21 22 31 37 38 26 27 2836 42 6 7 8 9 4 5 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 1522 111724 25 14 3 21 22 6237 19 9321021 2712 35 36 15 31 32 40 20 35 36 32 33 39 40 41 37 10 18 1 26 15 16 5 17 18 8 20 33 22 23 14 25 38 27 28 41 42 23 24 25 34 35 29 30 2 31 13 24 37 18 19 29 30 38 32 33 34 41 42 37 38 39 40 41 42 31 39 40 35 36 FR FR FR FR This is the repeated number of CF per year, and the average value. (We consider Congestion as a situation with a traffic level C,D,E or F)
Evaluation: C) Congestion factor and ADTF Here we have the evolution of the congestion factor (blue bar) and ADTF (red bar), at the BCN entrance, for 2007 (year of reference)-2008-2009 & 2010 on C-32 road. % CF and ADTF years 2008,2009,2010 vs 2007 (C32 towards Barcelona) 20 10 0 1,6 % % CF vs 2007 -10 -20 47 % -30 -40 8,7% -50 -60 2007 2008 2009 2010 ANYS % CF % ATDF A strong reduction of CF (47%) took place in 2008 (80 Km/h fix) with a 4.22% reduction of ADTF. With DSC measure (2010 vs 2009), the CF has still reduced another 8.7%, despite an increasing of 1.6% of the ADTF
Fluidity: THE SIMULATION Another way to evaluate the effectiveness of DSC measures, is to compare a certain parameter (TT, CF, pollutants..) using the SAME DEMAND in two scenarios. For example, on the C-32 road, we have compared: ? scenario 1: “do nothing”, to sustain the fixed speed at 80 Km/h ? scenario 2: operating with the DSC (Dynamic Speed Control) measures. 1st step: Calibration of Intensity Intensity Intensity Define a “pattern” of Maximum and minim of The calibration (blue intensity curves this curves curve) between M and m
Fluidity: THE SIMULATION 2on step: calibration of Speed Speed Speed Define a “Pattern” of speed c. Maximum and minim… Calibration (blue curve) 3th step: calibration of Travel time (loops, LPR and floating car data) loops LPR Floating car data “Pattern” of TT curbs Calibration (blue curve)
Fluidity: THE SIMULATION. The results Video showing a presentation of the simulation on C-32 road Results of simulation: 1)Travel time (peak hour) Travel time ALL THE AREA ALL THE AREA 18 14 17 80 80 Km/h 13 16 15 Variable 8.7% 12 4.1% 14 DSC 11 13 12 10 11 9 10 9 8 80 DSC 8 7 7 6 6 10:45 10:00 10:15 10:30 11:00 6:15 6:30 6:45 7:00 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00 9:15 9:30 9:45 Demand 1: “high demand” demand 2: “low demand” Depending on the demand situation, the travel time could be reduced or increased. This fact should be taken into account for management strategies
Fluidity: THE SIMULATION. The results Number of “stops and goes” Time elapsed during the “stops and goes” 80 DSC Time elapsed (seg) DSC 80 41% 62% Speed distribution (homogenization) Dynamic speed control 80 Km/h Time (peak hour) Attenuation Space: loop detector Space: loop detector
The future 1.Congestion algorithm: on some specific stretches with a big difference between the lane speeds, the calculations are made per LANE and not per SECTION. Then, we will use different speed signals on the same gantry. Probably no more than 20 Km/h of difference between the lanes, as confirmed during our visit to Italy.
The future 2. Dynamic assignment of sections inside stretches: The sections that are on the border of two stretches, could belong to one of them depending on the traffic situation. 3. The use of additional measures as hard shoulder running,…as used in England, Germany, The Netherlands…
Thank you for your attention

More Related Content

Speed Limit in Barcelona

  • 2. Dynamic speed control in the metropolitan area of Barcelona: evaluation and next steps Luís Serrano Sadurní Head of traffic management at the Servei Català de Trànsit, Generalitat de Catalunya Ignacio Sanchez Reig ITS Senior consultant, LISITT, University of Valencia
  • 3. Evolution of speed The present situation limits in the MA of BCN: 2007: 2008: red blue area area On-going schemes Planned schemes From 2009 Schemes under onwards: study ADTF The ADTF (Average Daily Traffic flow) in the MABCN red and blue area On-going and planned projects
  • 4. The evaluation: A) Road safety Here we have de comparison of: accidents and casualties + seriously injured, for the January-December period of 2007-2008-2009, in the 80 Km/h zone and DSC roads (C-31 and C-32): 2007 2008 %08/07 2009 %09/07 accidents 658 512 -22,19 535 -18,99 Casualties+ seriously 67 40 -40,30 37 -44,78 injured people Accidents (C-31,C-32) 190 123 -35,26 131 -31,05 Casualties+ seriously 29 12 -58,62 9 -66,97 C31,C32 injured people (C-31,C-32) The reduction of road safety parameters has been more significant comparing 2008 (80 Km/h) vs 2007, and only a small reduction in 2009. In 2010 the number of accidents and the average speed are slightly increasing. We are still studying why.
  • 5. The evaluation: B) Pollution (Emission) Ton/ %08/ %09/ 2007 2008 2009 day 07 07 Fuel 526, 471, 460, -10,4 -12,5 cs 9 6 4 NOx 11,1 9,8 9,6 -11,0 -13,2 PM10 0,8 0,7 0,7 -11,0 -13,0 CONCLUSION: the reduction in Fuel consumption, NOx and PM10 has been significant 2008 vs 2007, and not so significant 2009 vs 2008, specially if we take into account the reduction of 0,8% of the ADTF (09 vs 08)
  • 6. Evaluation: C) Travel time (TT) Comparison every 15 minutes between the maximum and minimum travel time for peak-hours period 6:00-11:00 am : 2009 vs 2007, 2009 vs 2008 and 2010 vs 2008. (January-June) 2007 2009 Conclusion: With the DSC (2009), there is a smaller difference in travel time between the maximum and minimum values than in previous periods.
  • 7. Evaluation: C) Congestion factor Comparison of Congestion factor (CF)=Average length of congestion x duration of congestion, labour days, entrance BCN, 2007-2008-2009-2010, on C-32 road: Gauss2008 Gauss (C32 Entrada) Gauss FR 2010 (C32 Entrada) FR 2008 Entrada) Entrada) CF – CF – 2009FR 2009 Entrada) (C32 (C32 (C32 Gauss FR 2007 (C32 Entrada) CF CF 30 30 30 30 25 25 25 25 N? de repeticions N? de repeticions 20 20 20 20 15 15 15 15 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 10 11 06 17 28 3 9 4 511 612 713 8 14 21 101623 120 1319 2027 428 29 3024 25 26 113428 29 30 16261739 33 34 21 22 31 37 38 26 27 2836 42 6 7 8 9 4 5 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 9 1522 111724 25 14 3 21 22 6237 19 9321021 2712 35 36 15 31 32 40 20 35 36 32 33 39 40 41 37 10 18 1 26 15 16 5 17 18 8 20 33 22 23 14 25 38 27 28 41 42 23 24 25 34 35 29 30 2 31 13 24 37 18 19 29 30 38 32 33 34 41 42 37 38 39 40 41 42 31 39 40 35 36 FR FR FR FR This is the repeated number of CF per year, and the average value. (We consider Congestion as a situation with a traffic level C,D,E or F)
  • 8. Evaluation: C) Congestion factor and ADTF Here we have the evolution of the congestion factor (blue bar) and ADTF (red bar), at the BCN entrance, for 2007 (year of reference)-2008-2009 & 2010 on C-32 road. % CF and ADTF years 2008,2009,2010 vs 2007 (C32 towards Barcelona) 20 10 0 1,6 % % CF vs 2007 -10 -20 47 % -30 -40 8,7% -50 -60 2007 2008 2009 2010 ANYS % CF % ATDF A strong reduction of CF (47%) took place in 2008 (80 Km/h fix) with a 4.22% reduction of ADTF. With DSC measure (2010 vs 2009), the CF has still reduced another 8.7%, despite an increasing of 1.6% of the ADTF
  • 9. Fluidity: THE SIMULATION Another way to evaluate the effectiveness of DSC measures, is to compare a certain parameter (TT, CF, pollutants..) using the SAME DEMAND in two scenarios. For example, on the C-32 road, we have compared: ? scenario 1: “do nothing”, to sustain the fixed speed at 80 Km/h ? scenario 2: operating with the DSC (Dynamic Speed Control) measures. 1st step: Calibration of Intensity Intensity Intensity Define a “pattern” of Maximum and minim of The calibration (blue intensity curves this curves curve) between M and m
  • 10. Fluidity: THE SIMULATION 2on step: calibration of Speed Speed Speed Define a “Pattern” of speed c. Maximum and minim… Calibration (blue curve) 3th step: calibration of Travel time (loops, LPR and floating car data) loops LPR Floating car data “Pattern” of TT curbs Calibration (blue curve)
  • 11. Fluidity: THE SIMULATION. The results Video showing a presentation of the simulation on C-32 road Results of simulation: 1)Travel time (peak hour) Travel time ALL THE AREA ALL THE AREA 18 14 17 80 80 Km/h 13 16 15 Variable 8.7% 12 4.1% 14 DSC 11 13 12 10 11 9 10 9 8 80 DSC 8 7 7 6 6 10:45 10:00 10:15 10:30 11:00 6:15 6:30 6:45 7:00 7:15 7:30 7:45 8:00 8:15 8:30 8:45 9:00 9:15 9:30 9:45 Demand 1: “high demand” demand 2: “low demand” Depending on the demand situation, the travel time could be reduced or increased. This fact should be taken into account for management strategies
  • 12. Fluidity: THE SIMULATION. The results Number of “stops and goes” Time elapsed during the “stops and goes” 80 DSC Time elapsed (seg) DSC 80 41% 62% Speed distribution (homogenization) Dynamic speed control 80 Km/h Time (peak hour) Attenuation Space: loop detector Space: loop detector
  • 13. The future 1.Congestion algorithm: on some specific stretches with a big difference between the lane speeds, the calculations are made per LANE and not per SECTION. Then, we will use different speed signals on the same gantry. Probably no more than 20 Km/h of difference between the lanes, as confirmed during our visit to Italy.
  • 14. The future 2. Dynamic assignment of sections inside stretches: The sections that are on the border of two stretches, could belong to one of them depending on the traffic situation. 3. The use of additional measures as hard shoulder running,…as used in England, Germany, The Netherlands…
  • 15. Thank you for your attention