English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 49287/83828 (59%)
Visitors : 7156053      Online Users : 66
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/74351


    Title: 號誌化路口行人早開時相與控制策略之研究
    Other Titles: A study on pedestrian leading phase interval and control strategies of the traffic signal at intersections
    Authors: 符人懿;Fu, Ren-yi
    Contributors: 淡江大學運輸管理學系碩士班
    范俊海;Fan, Chun-Hai
    Keywords: 行人早開時相;行人擴散;人車衝突;延滯成本;leading pedestrian interval;pedestrian diffusion;zone of conflict;delay cost
    Date: 2011
    Issue Date: 2011-12-28 18:24:22 (UTC+8)
    Abstract:   行人路權近年備受重視,而行人在路口常因為人車衝突而造成傷亡,故有多種行人號誌控制方式,如行人專用時相與行人早開時相。行人專用時相以時間將車流與行人流完全區隔,不會產生人車衝突,但行人專用時相造成車流與行人流延滯均大幅增加,影響路口效率。
      本研究以行人早開時相為切入點,嘗試讓部分行人流能夠安全地通過路口之人車衝突區域,以兼顧安全與效率。為了充分了解人車特性,本研究針對行人步行速率、行人起動延滯與車輛右轉與行人衝突之特性進行研究調查。另外為了瞭解在實施行人早開時相之過程中,不同早開長度影響衝突行人數多寡,故以行人在行人穿越道之擴散模式為基礎,推估綠燈時間行人穿越道衝突區衝突行人數之預測模式,以充分掌握行人可能受車輛衝突之狀況。
      在個案研究中,本研究以成本之概念將延滯與衝突統一單位進行比較,發現行人早開時相在行人流每小時1000人以下之情境下,較行人專用時相之成本低。而在車流量接近道路容量的情形下,不適合使用長度較長之行人早開時相或行人專用時相,建議採用較短(4秒)之行人早開時相。
      右轉轉向比小於0.3時,行人早開時相運作成本較低。當右轉比大於0.3時,由於右轉車輛將嚴重與行人流衝突,使得人車衝突成本增高,行人專用時相因無人車衝突成本,故適用於此情境。而在多車道環境下需採用行人早開控制,且右轉比小於0.4時,建議可以採用獨立之右轉專用車道與右轉專用號誌時相,以減少直行車無謂之延滯。
    關鍵字:行人早開時相、行人擴散、人車衝突、延滯成本
    Nowadays, we focus on the safety of pedestrians that often caused casualties by conflicts between pedestrians and cars in intersections. There are many different ways to separate cars and pedestrians in intersections by the traffic signal. For instance, Exclusive Pedestrian Phase is a way to separate cars and pedestrians, but it often caused more delay in intersections.
    In this study, Leading pedestrian interval (LPI) as the starting point. We try to make part of the pedestrian flow safely through the conflict zone and take vehicles into account for the efficiency of vehicles.
    We also use pedestrian diffusion methodology to estimate how many pedestrians on the conflict zone in every seconds of the signal phase, so we could know the number of conflicted pedestrians.
    In the case studies, the cost of LPI is lower than Exclusive Pedestrian Phase when there were less than 1000 pedestrians per hour on the crosswalk. If the traffic is close to the road capacity, it’s not suitable for long length LPI or Exclusive Pedestrian Phase. We recommended a shorter LPI length for pedestrian safety.
    When right turning ratio is less than 0.3, the LPI operating costs will be lower than Exclusive Pedestrian Phase. When the right turning ratio greater than 0.3, the right turn vehicles will be a serious conflict with the pedestrian flow, making the higher costs of conflict and vehicles, pedestrian phase due to down the cost of vehicle conflict, it is applicable to this situation.
    In the multi-lane environment, if the right turning ratio less than 0.4, we suggested to use exclusive right turning lanes and the exclusive right turning signal phase for LPI control to reduce unnecessary travel delay of vehicles that go straight.
    Appears in Collections:[運輸管理學系暨研究所] 學位論文

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML251View/Open

    All items in 機構典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - Feedback